A new study is the latest shot in an ongoing battle over the effect of paid sick leave on the New York City economy.
The Institute for Women’s Policy Research says in their new report that paid sick leave legislation did not harm business profitability in San Francisco, where it was passed in 2007
According to IWPR, a majority of workers in San Francisco didn’t use all of their allotted sick leave, and, after four years, two thirds of employers in San Francisco supported the legislation.
New York’s Paid Sick Time Act would have forced employees of private companies to receive between five to nine sick days.
A previous study by the Partnership for New York City found that it would cost the state $789 million a year to provide sick time to employees. Yet the IWPR study said that seventy one percent of small business did not have any negative effects on their profitability.
“This suggests that previous cost estimates, which assumed workers would use all of their available days, are way higher than they would actually be,” said Petro.
The legislation has hit a standstill when it failed to garner support from City Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Quinn has said that the legislation would drive up employment and cost the city a hefty sum.
John Petro, a policy analyst at the Drum Major Institute begged to differ.
“When the vast majority of businesses in San Francisco say that the paid sick days hasn’t hurt their bottom line, it’s time for Speaker Quinn to take back her claim that it would kill small businesses in New York,” he said. “The evidence is decidedly against her stance.”
The Working Families Party and other progressive and labor groups in New York have made paid sick leave one of their main legislative priorities and a majority of the City Council has signed on to the bill.