DN Editorial: Taking leave of their senses

THIS WEEK, the Pennsylvania Senate passed a bill that would strip the city's ability to enact its own 2-month-old sick-leave law.

That law required any business with 10 or more employees to give workers an hour of paid sick leave for every 40 hours worked. About 200,000 workers - an estimated 35 to 40 percent of the city's workforce - work jobs, many at low wages, that don't include paid sick leave.

The last time such a privileged body exhibited such a stunning affront to working people, the guillotine was the weapon of choice, and not a few leaders lost their heads.

The Senate vote on SB 333, which would prohibit any municipality from adopting a sick-leave bill like Philadelphia's, is so outrageous it's almost delicious, considering the perks and privileges that both the state House and Senate enjoy.

Let's review: Ours are the biggest and most bloated full-time legislative bodies in the country, with some of the highest salaries. Members enjoy wonderful health-care coverage, for a minor contribution from members, plus per diem expenses up to $163 for food and lodging for any day they claim to do legislative business, whether in session or not, and requiring virtually no accounting. They get generous pensions and state-funded cars.

All this largesse on top of a work schedule so non-onerous that all the jokes about their schedule have been exhausted.

Case in point: Any time a holiday falls on a Monday, lawmakers usually take the whole week off.

Let's review the plight of those affected by the Senate's actions:

Hourly wages that are usually too low to support a family, with no health insurance, pension plan or paid sick leave. That means that when a child gets sick and the parent needs to stay home, the parent doesn't get paid. That also means that if that parent gets sick and can't afford to lose pay, he or she brings that into the workplace. (Want a side of flu with those fries?)

Granted, this bill took a long time to pass in the city: Councilman Bill Greenlee started to push it in 2008, and Mayor Nutter vetoed it twice. Many in the business community were understandably worried about the cost of such a policy. But after further study by a task force, the mayor came around.

The task force said that the cost to businesses that offer sick leave would be small, based on its comparison with the 16 cities and three states that already have paid-sick-leave laws. It also said that workers who come to work while sick cost employers twice as much as absenteeism that's due to illness.

This travesty is yet another example of Harrisburg undoing city-generated initiatives. Last year, the state Legislature passed a bill enabling the National Rifle Association to sue cities and towns over local gun ordinances - many, like Philadelphia's, aimed at straw buyers. In January, the NRA filed suit against Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Lancaster to overturn local gun laws.

But the sick-leave move is a slap in the face to hundreds of thousands of workers struggling to survive. We hope that their well-deserved outrage gets translated into action. Maybe workers can't afford to take a day off to get on a bus to Harrisburg to protest, but voting requires only a few minutes of time.

Meanwhile, state lawmakers should consider amending their mistake. Their legislative surplus budget now exceeds $150 million. That could easily bankroll a sick-leave fund that workers could draw on when they're too sick to work.