What types of circumstances should paid sick leave cover?

by Doug Matthews, almost 2 years ago
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded. We are now reviewing all participant feedback and preparing our final report back to Council.

For instance, should paid time be allowed to cover only personal sick time, or should it also cover issues like family illness, domestic violence, criminal justice-related appointment like parole meetings, mental health, or other issues? Please be as specific as you can. 

Consultation has concluded

  • Laura R almost 2 years ago
    There should be a number of flexible uses for paid sick time. Workers should be able to use the time to seek needed or preventative care for themselves or a family member. It should also be used as SAFE time for victims of domestic violence, to visit incarcerated family members, and for parents to attend school meetings regarding their child's disability or health condition.
  • sanajaved7 almost 2 years ago
    People can have a variety of different situations and circumstances in their life and a modern city like Austin should allow people to take time off for these types of things that can happen. It shouldn't be limited only to medical sickness. The prompt above mentions situations with family illness, domestic violence, criminal justice-related appointment like parole meetings, mental health and all of those scenarios should be covered. Sometimes people also care for elderly parents or relatives and sometimes people have different family structures. Perhaps some of us live very privileged lives where everyone is healthy and happy all the time but even those privileged people need to take time off for emergencies. Other people with less privilege who sometimes are providing for other family or community members should be treated like adults and professionals as well and be able to take the same time off.
  • sclaytor almost 2 years ago
    Paid time should be given to workers to use as they see fit and necessary. Sometimes a worker needs to miss a day for legitimate reasons aside from sickness including a sick child and court appointments. I am an employee of a charter school district here in Austin and I get PTO for doctors appointments, private appointments, and being sick. Those situations and obligations would not disappear if I were a low wage worker in the food industry. We need policies that recognize and accomodate a variety of circumstances that might occasionally prevent someone from coming into work.
  • Susan Pantell almost 2 years ago
    An employer could provide "paid time off" and/or "sick leave". The former covers whatever the employee wants. The later covers mental or physical health issues, including when someone feels they are coming down with something and needs to rest to avoid that. I strongly oppose requiring a doctor's note because in many cases going to the doctor is a waste of time, and the sick person would be better off resting at home. It also wastes doctor's time. Regarding family members, judgement in each case is required. If a young child is sick or a child needs to go to the doctor, it should be allowed for that, but not if an older child stays home from school. A spouse's illness should not be covered unless they need to be taken to the doctor or cared for. If a person is the victim of any violence or a car crash etc. and is unable to work, that would of course be included. Parole meetings or other types of meetings are not covered unless they are taken under the broader category of paid time off or vacation time.
  • Wtaylor23 almost 2 years ago
    Please allow employees to include maternity, paternity, family, and sick leave.
  • kyleafh almost 2 years ago
    This should be decided by whatever mutual agreement the worker and employer come to.
    Hide Replies (8)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comment, Kyleafh. -Moderator
    • Ali Shu almost 2 years ago
      Yeah, when we have a level playing field, then this is realistic. For now, with systemic bias towards employer rights and away from employee rights, this is just ignorant.
      Hide Replies (6)
      • kyleafh almost 2 years ago
        In what way would individual rights ever change? Rights are objective derivations of the nature of man. If you think rights can change by any means, then you have no ability to protect those rights. If, lets say that you think rights are a majority vote, then when the majority votes away your rights you are left with nothing. No... I do not support such a barbaric system. I understand that all individuals, no matter their race/sex/sexuality/minority/majority group, have the same individual rights. And a right protects you from the actions of others. It doesn't give you a freedom to act upon others. When we discuss if an employee has the right to force their employer to give them something, you have to understand what a right is and how benefits a worker gets is not a right... Benefits are an agreement. A mutual agreement. To vote, as a majority, to use force against a corporation, in any capacity, is a barbaric and evil act.I hope you can look at this in a different light to see why demanding something from a corporation is evil.
        Hide Replies (5)
        • Ali Shu almost 2 years ago
          Too many words for a simple premise. For their to be any real "negotiation", the playing field must be level. It's not level. Have you tried to "negotiate"the terms of your mortgage, or credit card agreement? Not level either.
          Hide Replies (2)
          • kyleafh almost 2 years ago
            "the playing field must be level."What an empty statement. When the government respects all individuals the same by enforcing the law that protects all individuals and their individual rights, that is a level playing field. "Have you tried to "negotiate"the terms of your mortgage, or credit card agreement?"If you don't try to negotiate every aspect of your life for your benefit, you are doing it wrong. You can't just have everything you desire, but you can sure as hell make a voice for yourself and benefit from speaking up for yourself. But when you start to demand, with force, that others provide something to you... That is evil. And that is what you are advocating for if you support mandatory paid sick leave. You are supporting the evil premise that if workers don't get what they want, they can demand it with force. Is that really what you want?
          • TurboSpencer almost 2 years ago
            You negotiate your mortgage or credit card agreement by taking your business elsewhere. However if all banks and credit card companies are in collusion against you , a monopoly, or working together, then I would agree with you and they should and are regulated so that this is not the case. If that is not so, then that should be changed (ant-trust laws). You negotiate your employee benefits for working for an employer that supplies what you want.
        • Charlene Gelb almost 2 years ago
          What's barbaric is forcing employees to come to work sick.
          Hide reply (1)
          • kyleafh almost 2 years ago
            Who said anything about using force? The only people advocating the use of force would be people in support of forcing companies to pay employees paid sick leave. I am anti-force. If an individual is sick, they should probably not come into work or else other people will get sick. Any business knows they will save money by preventing their workforce from getting sick. So most businesses will just say, "oh, just stay home today and get better soon." But honestly, it is up to whatever the contract is between the employer and the employee. If the worker agreed to always coming in to work no matter what, then they better stay true to their word. If they didn't read the sign on contract, then that is their problem and we can't blame the ignorance of a majority of people if most people don't read what they sign. But seriously, do you really think that a company will force its workers to come to work sick? No. Workers that are actually sick under perform and will only spread that sickness to others who will then also under perform. A smart business would just send them home, or keep them home, and just not pay them for the day or days that they miss. Any kind of paid leave is merely an added incentive to attract better skilled employees for hire. Also, most companies do have paid leave, its just that you have to work first and earn that kind of leave. Most companies are actually switching to just calling it "leave" instead of labeling it "sick leave" or "vacation leave" because if you want to be away from work for whatever reason, it doesn't matter to them so long as you have earned that leave.
  • lrroberts almost 2 years ago
    "We at Civitas Learning believe that every full time employee deserves ample time for not only sick days and personal health days, but also for flexible additional time that may be needed for special or unforeseen situations (i.e. wedding or child's graduation to helping a sick loved one). Our company has been able to successfully set "norms" and a process of manager-to-employee planning that allows us to thrive as a business while allowing our people the time out of office they need to thrive in their lives. We are still a small, growing company, and this plan has allowed us to have teams that successfully keep our business moving forward while reducing software, reporting and time investments required to create tracking for a more structured and meticulous time tracking plan. A one-size-fits-all government-mandated sick leave policy does not reflect the innovation and enhanced benefits tech companies, like Civitas Learning, have afforded our employees. Flexible sick leave and time off policies have become the standard in tech and innovation companies, and forcing changes to these options will be a disruptive shift for current employees. In addition, forcing Austin- area employers to adopt these one-size fits-all policies, while employers in other cities in Texas have no similar obligations, puts Austin businesses at a competitive disadvantage. We strongly recommend, if the City of Austin does adopt a mandatory sick leave policy for private employers, that such policy allows existing innovative paid time off and flexible vacation policies to satisfy any new adopted regulation, and that such policy minimize any burdensome notice, tracking, and notification requirements."
  • fabfab almost 2 years ago
    If it's so valuable to businesses to provide PTO then go and educate businesses or lobby them, don't regulate yet another thing you have no business interfering with. Please don't drive low-paid jobs outside of city limits!
    Hide Replies (8)
    • Sarah almost 2 years ago
      Most jobs are so location-based, such as food service and retail, that we don’t need to worry about the companies moving the store because of a new policy. It will be interesting to see if there is any fallout from implanting this ordinance, but almost all businesses will find that they can provide a few paid sick days and not go belly-up. The ones that do go belly-up were probably going to go out of business due to rising rent costs or some other financial difficulty anyway.
      Hide Replies (3)
      • fabfab almost 2 years ago
        You seem to lack business experience. What percentage of employees do you think work in brick and mortar retail locations? I have a food delivery business and it's very small with 6 employees, barely profitable so far, and of course I'm going to move it to Pflugerville or Round Rock or Hays county. Every catering business and every food truck and every plumber and every accountant and every cleaning service etc. will rent a mailbox outside of city limits of this is passed.No one's even asking if this proposed regulation should apply to businesses with less than 10 employees.
        Hide Replies (2)
        • Sarah almost 2 years ago
          I’m sorry that your business is barely profitable. That must be stressful. But I’m more sorry about the 38% of Austinites who aren’t able to take a couple days off work to get over strep throat without losing a lot of their earnings. There are many individuals making even more heart-breaking choices. So I feel for the person who is stressed trying to run a business, but I feel much more for the working poor in this city. (For all I know, you may pay your workers a good wage and you may try to do well by them, but there are so many other workers who will not get any kind of fair treatment from their bosses until the city requires them to provide some baseline, best-practice benefits.)
          Hide reply (1)
          • fabfab almost 2 years ago
            Can't be done at a city level. All you do is make things worse.You do not better the world by regulating things at a micro level where it can't work. You do not achieve betterment for the majority of poorly paid hourly workers by regulating PTO at a city council level. What this regulation would do is reduce low-wage jobs which drive poor people further out of town (or worse: make them even poorer with nowhere to go), and it will increase illicit work relationships. The latter problems you can only fight by pouring money into enforcement, wasting good money that could be used to actually help people. And the former will of course increase the need for money to help people who now can't help themselves. I would love for everyone to have PTO. I too feel for the working poor and I bet I can outdo you in describing a terrible situation someone close to me is in. And I would love for a sensible sick leave regulation to be put in place, and mandatory health insurance, and btw a sensible maternity leave requirement, and I wouldn't even be half done. BUT YOU DO NOT DO THIS AS A CITY. That's truly idiotic. And you have to consider different industries, size of revenue, number of employees, etc. And you need to understand that it will increase prices of goods (which usually hurts the poor btw, especially in the prepared foods industry, it's basically a non-regressive tax), so you have to adjust for that. And understand that it will quickly drive automation, and a host of other things that clearly our city council members have little clue about. This public hearing process is hilarious because they don't ask fundamental questions, just some half-cocked details that show how little they understand about the economics of this topic.
    • Tyson_512 almost 2 years ago
      You could make the same argument against minimum wage and health inspections. Jobs aren't going to leave a city of a million people just because employers have to provide time off, that has never happened anywhere.
      Hide reply (1)
      • fabfab almost 2 years ago
        That doesn't work when you sprint too far ahead and beyond what you should regulate at a local level. Health inspections exist everywhere and sensibly so. But where crazy $15 minimum wages get introduced, like what rich people consider to be "livable wage", yes, the number of available jobs goes down significantly.
    • Charlene Gelb almost 2 years ago
      "...don't regulate yet another thing you have no business interfering with." That's what 19th century robber barons said about child labor, minimum wage, and workplace safety regulations.
      Hide reply (1)
      • fabfab almost 2 years ago
        Even if I let your comparison stand... it isn't CITIES who regulate that. Just because you have a worthy cause, it doesn't mean you have the expertise of how it can be implemented properly.
  • Charlene Gelb almost 2 years ago
    Paid sick leave should cover personal or family illness and doctor's appointments. A healthy workforce benefits everyone, including employers.
  • TurboSpencer almost 2 years ago
    The coverage should be left up to the private employer as they see fit. The private employers are the best qualified to determine the impact to their business and what they can or cannot afford. If they are losing people because of their policies they will change their policies appropriately.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • Sarah almost 2 years ago
      This type of free-market principle does not work in practice, unfortunately. Employers tend to have the upper hand and employees don’t have as much power to look for new jobs as we would hope.
    • Tyson_512 almost 2 years ago
      Why? We don't leave health inspections, minimum wage and fire safety up to private employers or let them decide "what they can afford." I'm not gonna let them decide they can "afford" sick people making my food either.
  • TanDao almost 2 years ago
    Paid sick leave should cover employees who need to visit a primary care doctor and has proof of the visit.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Tyson_512 almost 2 years ago
      You don't always need to go to a doctor when you're sick, and sometimes it's better to stay in bed for the day instead of busing around town to medical providers and paying for visits. Better to just trust your workers.
  • Jessica W almost 2 years ago
    It should be available to cover a wide range of things like taking care of your family members, preventative care, time to deal with a domestic violence incident, mental health issues, etc
  • Sarah almost 2 years ago
    Employers should not have the right to inspect what reason the employee is taking a sick day for. The employee should be able to use the days as they need them, whether it is for their own health, a family member’s health, a death in the family, a court appearance, or any other reason that they should need to be absent from work. I don’t think that a set of rules about “why” would be useful.
  • Nolan almost 2 years ago
    I think we should all support privacy. How do you have accountability without intruding on privacy? How would an employee or employer prove their need to take paid sick leave. I don't think it should be a requirement for all employers, so let's let the employers decide how to handle these unique issues.
  • Ashkan almost 2 years ago
    Circumstances covered under paid sick leave should be fairly open-ended and flexible. Health is an expansive topic, it is appropriate to use sick leave for doctor's visits, personal time off if ill, facilitating the health of one's child by transporting them to and from the doctor, the pharmacy, school, etc. It should cover time off to support any family member in this capacity, and family members are defined by the individual, not just blood relations. It should cover parents or caretakers who need to retrieve a child from school for whatever reason: snow day, personal troubles, etc. In terms of how to codify proper use, I urge the city to take extreme care in imposing any restriction. We should trust beneficiaries- our fellow Austinites- to be responsible users of the benefits and protections they are provided.
  • lillian_m almost 2 years ago
    A just policy would be really inclusive. Apart from the worker getting sick, they should be able to use their sick days if someone in their family is sick. Dealing with disabilities or chronic illness count as "sick." They should also be allowed to use their days to recover from or settle domestic violence cases, which can be physically and emotionally distressing.
  • gift almost 2 years ago
    Again, concentrate on critical city responsibilities/duties, services and enterprises and stop interfereing in private business affaris.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • PaidSickDaysNow almost 2 years ago
      Protecting residents from serious harm and abuse seems like a pretty serious responsibility/duty. Making sick people work is harmful to their health, their coworkers' health, and the public interest.
    • TheRationalAtheist almost 2 years ago
      I think people being ill on the job is absolutely a critical responsibility! If you were sick, I should treat that as more critical than a parking ticket, don't you think? By observing my simple reasoning you'll arrive at the right conclusion, that paid sick leave is an absolutely necessary reform. Also, this comment does not answer the query! Please amend it with your response -- The Rational Atheist.
  • TheRationalAtheist almost 2 years ago
    Greetings. I think paid sick leave should have the widest possible interpretation. Let us go through the options one by one. Family illness certainly qualifies as a health emergency in my book - if my family is seriously ill, it requires my immediate attention. Skipping a parole meeting can be a crime - so making it an unpaid day off would just be an unfair tax. Mental health should be included as well - this would ensure the best possible performance from our employees. Let's make our country great by passing the best paid sick leave policy! Good night friends -- The Rational Atheist.
  • cstrombe almost 2 years ago
    Whatever circumstances the employer decides.
    Hide reply (1)
    • PaidSickDaysNow almost 2 years ago
      There was a time when Texas employers had the power to determine all work conditions, but it came to an end in 1865. Nowadays we expect there to be certain minimum protections and paid sick days not only protect the workers, they protect their coworkers and the public. I have worked at a restaurant with the flu before because I couldn't afford to miss a day's pay. That could have been your kids I got sick, and if employers aren't going to care enough to protect their health then we need our elected officials to step in and make them.
  • Tyson_512 almost 2 years ago
    Paid sick time should be available for workers who need to take care of sick children, recover from physical violence, and meet legal obligations like parole or jury duty if needed. Forcing workers to choose between keeping a job and being a good parent is morally disgraceful.
  • badeutsch almost 2 years ago
    Sick leave should be available to all persons working, even temporary persons on assignment who get sick...
  • Melanieavant almost 2 years ago
    I prefer PTO to sick time, but anything is better than nothing.
  • WIndsorParker almost 2 years ago
    Paid sick leave should be available for all workers when they are too sick to go to work and when they need to take care of a sick dependent. This way parents wouldn't have to make the impossible choice of deciding to miss a day's pay to stay home with a child or send them to school. It's common sense that a child is going to have a difficult time learning when they spend the day feeling awful, and it opens up the possibility of spreading illness to others. The same logic applies to a sick worker. In addition, I support the policy covering the other issues mentioned in the prompt.
  • sbresnen almost 2 years ago
    There are no circumstances under which the COA should regulate this aspect of the employer/employee relationship.
  • Renee787 almost 2 years ago
    Sick time should not apply to domestic violence because this could cause employers to discriminate against people that they may know are in a bad situation and really need a job. There are already services in place to help victims of domestic violence.Criminal justice related appointments should be allowed but the time should be made up by the employee not paid as leave by the employer. Sick leave should cover only personal sick time.
  • strugglingsmallbizowner almost 2 years ago
    A policy SHOULD NOT be created. And having the City police a disagreement if someone has the flu or is just taking the day off to go swim seems like a thousand lawsuits waiting to happen. But the question is what circumstances should be paid, and it should ONLY include personal physical and mental illness.
  • bdm2701 almost 2 years ago
    Removed by moderator.
  • bdm2701 almost 2 years ago
    None, we libertarians do not want government dictated mandatory sick leave.
  • bdm2701 almost 2 years ago
    None, we libertarians do not want government required sick leave.
  • Art Klempner almost 2 years ago
    It should cover every issue you mentioned
  • mattwgore almost 2 years ago
    I think any city regulation on this subject would be a mistake. It is already difficult to find good employees in Austin, and so smart employers already work with their employees to be flexible around life events from illness to parole meetings. Although I believe any regulation on this subject from the city would be a mistake, an even greater mistake would be to make a cumbersome, vague, or broad law. Such a law would be difficult for employees to understand, and therefore difficult to know when their employers are not honoring it. Such a law would also be difficult for employers to implement, and therefore more expensive and more likely to lead to mistakes and misunderstandings. Although I think no city-level regulation should be implemented, if it is implemented it should be narrow, precise, and clear.
    Hide Replies (3)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, matt--how might you recommend the policy be narrow, precise, and clear? -Moderator
      Hide Replies (2)
      • someguy almost 2 years ago
        The shortest policy would be a non-existent one.
        Hide reply (1)
        • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
          Thanks for your comments, someguy. -Moderator
  • Ali Shu almost 2 years ago
    All of the above. We simply won't have a functioning society if we continue to treat the need for time off of work as something that is aberrant. Other developed nations recognize that people have obligations outside of work, and that when they can't meet those obligations, we all suffer (increased crime, sick kids go to school and get more people sick (and some people end up DEAD as a result of communicable illnesses spread in the workplace and schools that could have been easily avoided if people could stay home)).
  • Julia K almost 2 years ago
    I believe paid sick should cover the individual and all dependents relying on the individual for care and include all mental health needs, illness, and injury.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, Julia. -Moderator
  • Wendykalthoff almost 2 years ago
    I believe all important life events should be covered. Family should come before anything else.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, Wendy--can you clarify? How would you define an important life event? And which family members' events would the policy cover? -Moderator
  • Feedback2017 almost 2 years ago
    It should be for actual employee illness only. Anything else should be vacation or leave without pay
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, Feedback2017. -Moderator
  • onefl almost 2 years ago
    In order for paid sick leave to be effective, it should be flexible and cover a variety of things, including family illness.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, onefl. -Moderator
  • sellerle almost 2 years ago
    Paid sick leave should cover personal illness recovery time, recovery from a domestic violence or a sexual assault situation, and should be used to help someone to attend to an ongoing medical condition.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, sellerle. -Moderator
  • sbz almost 2 years ago
    It should allow for numerous uses related to health care, including family illness, domestic violence, medical appointments for preventative care, and dealing with chronic conditions. Allowing a wide range of uses will help ensure that everyone--regardless of disability, domestic abuse, etc--has access to the care they need. It will also allow kids who are sick to stay home with a working parent rather than going to school and making other students sick.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, sbz. -Moderator
  • Vivian Martin almost 2 years ago
    Should cover physical and mental sickness the employee and employee’s immediate family which includes spouse, children, and other family living in the household.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments. -Moderator
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, Vivian. -Moderator
  • ayork almost 2 years ago
    Illnesses or injuries for the worker or a minor dependent of the worker.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments. -Moderator
  • JasonLockhart almost 2 years ago
    None, this is not a proper function of a city government to tell one individual what they must provide in exchange for goods or services.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments. -Moderator
  • JoseGarza almost 2 years ago
    All of the examples listed in the question should be covered.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, Jose. -Moderator
  • mkcl almost 2 years ago
    The City of Austin should not be interfering in private companies’ benefits. Enough said.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments. -Moderator
  • Bo Delp almost 2 years ago
    The conversations I'm having with workers across the city strongly indicates a preference for a paid sick days policy to apply to all types of workers and should apply to all of the examples listed above.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, Bo. -Moderator
  • erothbauer almost 2 years ago
    Austin should set a positive example for other cities by creating a robust sick-leave policy that protects people who are dealing with a variety of circumstances beyond their control. It is shameful that we don't have more protections for workers who need to care for sick relatives or contend with domestic abuse. We finally have an opportunity to raise the bar and protect the people who are most vulnerable, so let's use it.
    Hide Replies (3)
    • mturpin almost 2 years ago
      The employees have had chance to raise their personal bar since grade school. Business owners should have the right to choose whether they want to pay these benefits as do the workers where they want to work. Why should I have to pay because someone else is in an abusive relationship? That is poor decision making on the part of the person in the abusive relationship not the business owner.
      Hide reply (1)
      • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
        Thanks for your comments, mturpin. -Moderator
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments. -Moderator
  • mturpin almost 2 years ago
    All PTO decisions should be made by employers not the city. Employers know better when they need to pay employees PTO to compete for talent. The city should not mandate that any employer be compelled to offer any benefit. Also, if you want to really scare off potential employers including Amazon and drive others to Pflugerville, Round Rock, Georgetown and Kyle then we should pass this policy. Why does the chamber try so hard to bring business here for the City council to scare them away?
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments. -Moderator
  • Gary Stroud about 2 years ago
    If an employee has to be off work because they are sick they should be awarded the benefit, if offered. Crimes are not being sick, domestic violence is not being sick - sick is being under the care of a physician. The question the employer needs to ask, should we require a note from a physician? If so, after how many days? For instance, a person has a cold and does not want (contagious) to go to work, should they have to have a note to return to work? That is a practice that needs to be determined by the company.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, Gary; I gather you feel that paid sick leave should not be given to someone who is a victim of domestic violence or a crime, correct? -Moderator
  • Jennifer Stevens about 2 years ago
    Why doesn't this question say "do we need to mandate paid sick leave"? The questions in this survey are all biased toward the idea that Austin needs to pass this mandate and I fundamentally disagree with that premise. My company doesn't provide "paid sick leave" we provide "paid time off" that can be used for a sick day or to run errands or take a vacation. The government should NOT be involved in this discussion.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks, Jennifer; your concern makes sense. Just to reiterate, this discussion includes questions that the Austin City Council has asked be posed to the public as outlined in their resolution, but your points will be shared with them as well. Resolution: http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=286396. -Moderator
  • Tom Fortin about 2 years ago
    Only personal sick time -- with note from Physician to confirm. All other exceptions only promote abuse.
    Hide reply (1)
    • Larry Schooler almost 2 years ago
      Thanks for your comments, Tom. -Moderator