The Princeton Echo welcomes opinions from people who would like to express their views on issues of concern impacting the community. If you would like to have your opinion or views printed in Sounding Off, send an email to bsanservino@mercerspace.com. All commentary might be edited for clarity or space reasons.
Mandatory ordinance would protect the public
Two recent events demonstrate that in addition to doing what’s right for all our workers, there are very pragmatic reasons for the town to adopt an ordinance requiring that all Princeton employers grant earned sick days to their workers.
Over Thanksgiving, 40-50 diners at a local restaurant came down with a gastrointestinal illness, most likely norovirus. While it is impossible to definitively state the common cause of their illness, it is well known that most norovirus outbreaks are spread by infected food handlers. Flu is often spread the same way.
Meanwhile, when the school district outsourced food service to Nutri-Serve Food Management, it did not require the latter to retain the benefits that our school food service workers had enjoyed for many years – including earned sick days. This means that food handlers who are serving our kids are expected to go to work sick or not get paid.
On Dec. 11 they went on strike to protest these cuts in benefits.
Most food service employees, especially those who work in kitchens, earn little more than the minimum wage. Let’s assume $9 per hour x 2080 hours per year (if full time with paid vacation and holidays) = $18,720. That’s not even a living wage. If you get sick and do not receive earned sick days you are sorely tempted to come to work anyway so as not to lose any pay. Add to that the fear that if you are out for say a week, your job might not be waiting for you when you return.
Eight municipalities in New Jersey already have earned sick day ordinances. Some are large like Newark and Jersey City, while others are smaller like Irvington and Montclair. New York City just expanded the types and numbers of workers covered by its ordinance.
Let’s do what’s right for our workers, especially those earning very low wages, as well as help stop the spread of infectious diseases by passing an earned sick days ordinance.
John Heilner, Library Place
Mandatory sick leave law could hurt restaurants
New Jersey’s sick leave law seems to be gaining momentum after several New Jersey municipalities, passed paid sick leave laws in the last few months. In the November election, voters in Trenton and Montclair overwhelmingly passed ballot initiatives requiring the passage of paid sick leave ordinances.
Following their lead, New Jersey may soon mandate all employers provide their employees with paid sick leave. If the bill is passed and signed into law by Gov. Chris Christie it would make New Jersey the third state in the country, after Connecticut and California, to require employers to offer paid sick leave.
Interestingly, the proposed law may have some of the most significant impact on the food services industry. The reason for this is, in part, because of the commonly held belief that sick people should not be around food. This belief can lead patrons to become very vocal about the fact that sick people should not be working. These types of comments can lead employees to take more sick days, which from a public health standpoint may not be a bad thing, but from an employment standpoint may lead to coverage issues and increased operating costs.
The main reason why the proposed law may have more of an impact on the food service industry is how large and small employers are defined under the law. The bill presumes that a large employer is one with 10 or more employees. Large employers are required to provide up to nine days of paid leave per year. As with many other small businesses, it is not uncommon for restaurants, delis and other food service establishments to use a combination of part-time and full-time employees to serve their staffing needs.
This is especially true for smaller food service employers who have peak rush periods during meal times who may need to staff up only during those hours with part-time employees. It is not unusual for these part-time workers to be students, people with other full-time jobs, or parents who want to work during school hours. In short, these part-time workers are individuals with limited working hours and restricted schedules. As a result, a small restaurant may easily have upwards of 10 employees simply because certain employees may only be available a few hours per week or during limited windows of time.
In these same establishments, full-time employees may earn almost two weeks of sick leave. Accommodating nine days of sick leave per year is likely far easier for an employer with 10 full-time employees than an employer with five full-time employees and five part-time employees who can only work three or four hours per week.
Now that the Labor Committee has approved the bill, it is currently before the Assembly Budget Committee. It may take several months for the bill to come to full vote before the Legislature. In the meantime, employers should monitor the status of the bill to be ready if it is passed.
Christina Stoneburner, Fox Rothschild LLP
