Wed Apr 09, 2008 at 10:50:29 AM EDT
|
| I love to read the differing takes that the news outlets often have on the same issue. Take today's example, Paid Family Leave. Now here on Blue Jersey, we have followed the debate and often overblown rhetoric about the effects this program may have. Today, we have the Star Ledger calling the Chamber on their crap, while the Courier continues to do their bidding by shoveling some more of it. Let's go to the papers. We have the Star Ledger editorial, "Scare talk on Paid Family Leave" battling the Courier Editorial, "With Family leave, jobs leave". Are you scared from the title because I know I'll be sleeping with a nightlight. The Ledger begins... Spring has arrived, but Scrooge is still firmly ensconced in Trenton. Scrooge would be the state Chamber of Commerce and other staunch opponents of paid family leave. A sensible, compassionate paid family leave bill has, finally, passed the Legislature and Gov. Jon Corzine promises to sign it shortly. Yet the critics will not let up on their drumbeat of doom.Paid family leave will be the death of small business, the naysayers insist; it will drive more businesses out of the state; it will never be able to support itself on the 64 cents or so to be deducted from employees' paychecks each week. The way the Chamber and others yelp, you would think Lenin's embalmed body had been transferred to the Statehouse dome, followed by an order for mandatory Communist Party membership for all. And the counter opening from the Courier... Paid family leave will further drive employers away from New Jersey.
It was not unexpected that the state Senate approved paid family leave for New Jersey workers. With Gov. Jon Corzine already having pledged his support, family leave is now inevitable.
It's too bad our state lawmakers cannot see the error of this. New Jersey is already a state that many businesses don't want to move to. Taxes for both businesses and their employees are extremely high. Government regulations are complex and arduous. Traffic is heavy. Are the Courier and Star Ledger reading the same bill? That's right boys and girls, traffic is heavy so we can't have family leave. It's the latest reasoning because all of the other reasons haven't worked and they say it's inevitable like it's the worst thing to ever happen anywhere at any time. Follow me below the fold as the contrast in coverage continues... |
| Jason Springer :: A tale of two papers- Paid Family Leave Edition |
The ledger continues by debunking some of the arguments being made by the critics... Please. Allowing a worker up to six weeks' paid time off to care for an infant, seriously ill child or parent will make life easier for residents who find themselves in a jam and will make New Jersey a better place to live.
Firms with fewer than 50 employees don't have to hold a leave-taking employee's job for him and cannot be sued for hir ing a replacement. Workers can be required to use two weeks of vacation, sick or personal days before being eligible. And employers aren't paying for paid family leave. Workers are.
Sure, a few people will always try to game the system. But we doubt scads of workers will look at family leave as a tempting scam for staying home and watching TV or jetting off to sightsee in Europe. Not when the "pay" is two- thirds of salary, with a maxi mum of $524 a week. At that level, it's hard in New Jersey to keep food in the cupboard and the property taxes paid.
The same arguments now being marshaled against paid family leave were used to decry unpaid family leave more than a decade ago. That program hasn't hamstrung employers any more than the 40-hour workweek, which business also saw as the first step to economic ruin. So the businesses didn't want unpaid leave, is anyone really surprised that they don't want to have paid family leave? Back to the Courier where the sky is still falling...Statistics show New Jersey isn't creating high-paying jobs as briskly as it should, and these factors are likely why. Now, on top of that, New Jersey is about to become only the third state to grant employees paid time off (six weeks) to care for a sick family member. The courier is right, we're not creating high-paying jobs as briskly as we should, but the reason is because an employee might have to take 6 weeks off to care for a family member? We're in much worse shape than I even thought and the Ledger would beg to differ arguing that it willl make the state a better place to live for those employees. The courier does however begrudgingly acknowledge reality...Certainly some workers can and will use this time to care for a dying parent or a suffering spouse, and it will help them tremendously. And in my opinion, the Ledger is right to acknowledge some of the concerns... The critics are correct, however, about the need for the state to carefully monitor paid family leave finances. The Legislature estimates revenues from employee payroll deduc tions will handily outstrip payouts for the program in 2009, leaving a $15.7 million balance. But in future years, revenues and payouts are forecast to be much closer.
That makes it essential for lawmakers and state officials to keep their mitts off the family leave fund's accumulated balance. The program must be self-supporting. Not surprisingly, the editorials arrive at very differing conclusions. First the Courier's take...But if, over the long run, family leave takes jobs away from New Jersey and causes companies to move out, it will not benefit this state. Our legislators, regretfully, have not thought about that. Again, the editors of the Ledger are not in agreement...Paid family leave is a civilized way to help people cope with hard personal times. Ultimately, that is good for everyone -- employees and employers. Depending on which editorial I read, this is either the best or worst thing to ever happen to our state. What's a reader to think? |
|
Featured Stories  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
