Loading ...
Strickland Surprise
- Filed under: Ohio 2008, Strickland
- Date: Aug 22,2008
Governor Strickland announces he is opposed to Issue 4, aka "The Healthy Families Act." First saw this tonight at Glass City Jungle. PD has it as well.
Gov. Ted Strickland and Lt. Gov. Lee Fisher said they will not back the sick days mandate that has been pushed to the November ballot by one of their major union supporters, the SEIU.
“We cannot support the paid sick-day ballot initiative,” they said in a joint statement. “While we would hope that all Ohio businesses would make paid sick days available to their employees whenever possible, we believe that this initiative is unworkable, unwieldy and would be detrimental to Ohio's economy, and we will be opposing it and asking Ohioans to oppose it as a result.”
If Strickland and Fisher (Lt. Gov. / Director of Development / Future Statewide candidate, office unknown) cannot reach a compromise with their allies on this one, then that tells you a lot. Voters will be asked this November to approve Issue 4. Basically, the ballot issue will force companies with 25+ employees to give all their employees seven days of paid sick leave each year.
This is a big vote. By many accounts it would not be helpful to the already struggling Ohio economy. Common sense would tell you the same thing. Issue 4 is a ballot initiative also in part to drive up Democratic turnout. That is how the game is played, so I can't complain. We did the same thing in 2004 with the gay marriage stuff on the ballot.
The Governor's decision was a surprise, at least to me. Strickland seems to be putting the best interest of the state above politics, upsetting unions and many other of his supporters who want this passed - with his backing. Of course, he also agrees (based on his statement) with those who feel it would be a job killer and he wants to be able to say "I opposed Issue 4" if it passes and Ohioans turn against it. 2010 is not too far off. A required seven paid sick day policy for all of Ohio businesses with more than 25 employees is probably not helpful at this time and Governor Ted wants to be on what he feels will be the right side of the record.
Dale Butland, Communications Director for Ohioans for Healthy Families, issued the following statement: "But the Governor need not fear that our campaign will portray Ohio as unfriendly to business. Our goal is to make Ohio friendlier to working families." Dale. Ohio is currently on pace to have almost no working families, and your group's plan won't reverse the trend. No one will need sick days because no one will be working. I remember that Ohio ranked 47th in a ranking of states on how friendly the tax system is to business. This certainly would not help make up for that.
This is an issue I have neglected and kept putting off writing about, getting caught up in the presidential race the last couple of weeks. Thurber's Thoughts had a good summary (against Issue 4) that I read with some interest. (Update: RedState hits on this as well).
Either way, it is only one of the many issues and races that will be on a crowded fall ballot. Would have had this up way earlier tonight, but got caught up watching USA-Russia mens volleyball. USA wins the 5th set tiebreaker in a thriller and will play for the gold; first time since '88. Take that, Putin. Probably would have been the best live blog ever. So many funny things to point out that I know I am going to forget when I try to do a recap for my other site.
15 Responses for "Strickland Surprise"
good move by strickland. all requiring sick days typically does is drive down the number of paid vacation days an individual earns - i.e., if a person earned 15 vacation days a year before, he or she would likely now earn only 10 and have available 7 sick days. the net impact is a substantial decrease in vacation for the employee (since most won't take all of his/her sicks days, let alone try and use them as vacation) and an increase in expense for employers who would be required to accrue expense reserves for the vacation and sick leave
Concur this is a good decision by Strickland and a sign that he will listen to sound arguments about how government BS can hurt business. This is particularly surprising because there was nothing in his legislative record to indicate he was anything but a knee jerk liberal on every issue. Good for him.
I don't know exactly why Strickland came to the conclusion he did, but I am happy he did what he did.
Now the voters must be convinced.
Why is this good? Everywhere else I have worked had at least 7 sick days. I don't understand.
What surprise Keeler?
Although he is in the pockets of the unions, there is absolutely no way Strickland COULD be for the sick day amendment and have any credibility that he was working to "turn around Ohio's" economic plight.
Other than the idiots at the Beacon editorial board, the Plain Dealer has already opined along with the Dispatch and every other respectable editorial board that this issue is a total jobs killer. The last thing this horrendous state economy needs!
That being said, Strickland absolutely wants it on the ballot to help puil out the Democrat vote.
The last thing Strickland wanted was a compromise, he wants it on the ballot to help Democrats, and he can mildly campaign against it to save face with the RESPECTABLE editorial boards.
This is a clear win for Strickland and the Democrats.
Yeah that is pretty much what I said. Except that I was surprised that he came out against it, and i should have added "this much before the election". Of course, Democrats want it on the ballot.
I was going to commend Strickland for taking a postion that will be very unpopular among his supporters but after reading Clueless's post I will have to think about it for awhile.
Political decision this is, but it is right. We will see how much he stands up against it.
That is entirely my point! It is not surprising he came out against it. Nobody but the unions and the beacon editorial board are for it. Every other editorial board and every business development, business organization, and business owner, have loudly protested what impact this law would have on the state economy.
it would be impossible for strickland to say he was working to improve our economy while supporting such an anti-business development issue.
his attempts at a compromise were grossly half-hearted.
in addition, watch for the pro hillary factions to attempt a coup at the convention based on the latest poll results.
dems enjoy a 20 point advantage over repubs. and their candidate is either tied or down to McCain…any dem who says he is not concerned is lying.
And the polls do not reflect the 10 point evaporation that occurs.
McCain wins and it will not even be close, but dems are going to sweep everything else out there.
Evan Bayh? That is what unreliable sources tell me.
Hope this was not some political ploy by Strickland, because
this legislation was bad for the economy and especially small business.
JOE BIDEN
I have a question for all the brainy economists out there.
When employees receive pay raises…isn't that a "job killer" for business?
When employees receive any non-cash benefits from their employers….isn't that a "job killer" for business?
Wouldn't it be better for, you know, business….if employees worked for, say, a penny per hour?
And if employees worked for a penny an hour….would that help "turn Ohio business around"? Do you think Ohio businesses could do better and stay, you know, competitive, if all their employees worked for a penny an hour?
Rev - no, that clearly wouldn't be better because no talent would ever take those jobs. businesses build major offices in big expensive cities with high pay grades because they can attract top talent there.
requiring sick days like this would only inhibit ohio businesses from being able to offer the pay and vacation packages needed to try and retain talent in ohio. if you end up with more underutilized non-salary/pay expense (like required sick days), it makes it very difficult to offer appealing pay.
look at what one of the most successful businesses in ne ohio, progressive insurance, does. they offer great starting vacation packages and very competitive pay because they keep all vacation and sick days in one combined pool to be used at their employee's discretion. this allows them to offer better pay and better overall benefits. not to mention, it is better for corporate culture because there is no incentive to "fake" being sick because you are out of vacation leave but have 6 unused sick days sitting in your "bank".
in states like california where sick leave is mandated, there is a hurtful incentive to try and use one's sick days because if you don't use them you essentially lose them. it is much better to have 15 days off to use at the employee's discretion than 10 days off and 7 sick days.
Thanks for responding, mike. I don't have an ax that I'm grinding over this specific issue of sick days.
Your answer suggests business wants to give pay raises and if the state mandates benefits….they just won't be able to… leads me to the fact that in the last 30 years….there has been no increase in wages (adjusting for inflation).
Of course, that is not meant to belittle good companies, and there are many, who actually treat their employees well.
The biggest problem I have in the business/labor argument is the constant default mechanism used stating that business can't be competitive if the minimum wage is increased….if health care is provided, if sick days are mandated, etc.
If that argument is actually true….then my penny per hour exaggeration is not so exaggerated. It's that "race to the bottom" thing.
Leave a comment