Ah, yes, the NFIB. Call me crazy but I hesitate to put much stock in a "study" done by lobbyist organizations. On their website you can see what they are lobbying for and against, whose interests they have in mind, and what political candidates they have officially endorsed.
It's kind of like when the Sugar Growers Association does its own study proving that sugar has no relation to cavities. Sugar may or may not cause cavities, but I don't think anyone in their right mind is going to put much stock in what the Sugar Growers have to say on the matter, as they have an agenda to push. Much like the NFIB.
I'd have a little more confidence if I could look at the NFIB's methodology, but their original study seems to be MIA on the internet.
Also, I thought this conversation was about the impact the Ohio Healthy Families Act will have on Ohio. Different bill, different state.
We may have some disagreements about what makes a valid source, but I absolutely applaud your effort to join the ranks of those who prefer to deal in the realm of facts rather than myths.
OldManGrump, that is a catchy expression but its implications are absolutely ludicrous: hide your head in the sand.
What you should be suspicious of is a campaign that does not cite any facts or sources whatsoever to back up its bold claims.
I welcome you to question the validity of the sources of the facts on this issue. Do your research. Read the cited studies for yourself. Find out if there is contradictory research (if there is, I'm really puzzled as to why the opposition is not trumpeting it).
If we all end up agreeing that the research is sound, it's also fair to propose that an alternative conclusion might be drawn from that research. Such debate would be a welcome change from the fearmongering that has driven the opposition's message thus far.
An alternative to making public policy based on facts is making public policy based on myths. Is that really what's best for Ohio?
Much like in the opinion piece above, groups that oppose the Ohio Healthy Families Act have not produced a single hard fact, information source, or study to back up their claims. Claims that the Act is a "jobs killer," and accusations that workers will abuse such a policy are not supported by the facts. Additionally, these opposition groups are choosing to ignore the experience of thousands of Ohio businesses that do offer paid sick days and continue to thrive.
FACT: 53.7 percent of all workers with paid sick days do not miss a single day of work. (SOURCE: IWPR’s analysis of the 2004 National Health Interview Survey)
FACT: Ohio employers save $1.25 per employee every week when offering paid sick days. (SOURCE: Institute for Women’s Policy Research)
FACT: Nationally, 78 percent of all workers dealing with accommodation and food service do not have access to paid sick days. (SOURCE: Institute for Women’s Policy Research)
FACT: A survey of New York City restaurant workers found that 52 percent went to work when sick. (SOURCE: Center for Law and Social Policy)
FACT: 79 percent of all Ohio employees earning less than $9.23 an hour do not have the ability to take care of their ill family members. (SOURCE: Policy Matters Ohio)
Ohio House speaker John Husted, who has been vocally opposed to the Ohio Healthy Families Act, has paid sick days himself. So do the rest of our elected officials here in Ohio, and the CEOs who oppose the Act. Yet they have not come up with a single fact-based reason why they deserve paid sick days but the people of Ohio do not.
Sick leave law would kill Ohio
Ah, yes, the NFIB. Call me crazy but I hesitate to put much stock in a "study" done by lobbyist organizations. On their website you can see what they are lobbying for and against, whose interests they have in mind, and what political candidates they have officially endorsed.
It's kind of like when the Sugar Growers Association does its own study proving that sugar has no relation to cavities. Sugar may or may not cause cavities, but I don't think anyone in their right mind is going to put much stock in what the Sugar Growers have to say on the matter, as they have an agenda to push. Much like the NFIB.
I'd have a little more confidence if I could look at the NFIB's methodology, but their original study seems to be MIA on the internet.
Also, I thought this conversation was about the impact the Ohio Healthy Families Act will have on Ohio. Different bill, different state.
But as long as we're talking California, a more trustworthy study relevant to that state is here:
http://www.iwpr.org/pdf/B259capsd.pdf
We may have some disagreements about what makes a valid source, but I absolutely applaud your effort to join the ranks of those who prefer to deal in the realm of facts rather than myths.
Logging out now... have a nice Sunday.
August 10, 2008 at 1:33 p.m. permalink suggest removal
Sick leave law would kill Ohio
OldManGrump, that is a catchy expression but its implications are absolutely ludicrous: hide your head in the sand.
What you should be suspicious of is a campaign that does not cite any facts or sources whatsoever to back up its bold claims.
I welcome you to question the validity of the sources of the facts on this issue. Do your research. Read the cited studies for yourself. Find out if there is contradictory research (if there is, I'm really puzzled as to why the opposition is not trumpeting it).
If we all end up agreeing that the research is sound, it's also fair to propose that an alternative conclusion might be drawn from that research. Such debate would be a welcome change from the fearmongering that has driven the opposition's message thus far.
An alternative to making public policy based on facts is making public policy based on myths. Is that really what's best for Ohio?
August 10, 2008 at 10:29 a.m. permalink suggest removal
Sick leave law would kill Ohio
Much like in the opinion piece above, groups that oppose the Ohio Healthy Families Act have not produced a single hard fact, information source, or study to back up their claims.
Claims that the Act is a "jobs killer," and accusations that workers will abuse such a policy are not supported by the facts. Additionally, these opposition groups are choosing to ignore the experience of thousands of Ohio businesses that do offer paid sick days and continue to thrive.
FACT: 53.7 percent of all workers with paid sick days do not miss a single day of work. (SOURCE: IWPR’s analysis of the 2004 National Health Interview Survey)
FACT: Ohio employers save $1.25 per employee every week when offering paid sick days. (SOURCE: Institute for Women’s Policy Research)
FACT: Nationally, 78 percent of all workers dealing with accommodation and food service do not have access to paid sick days. (SOURCE: Institute for Women’s Policy Research)
FACT: A survey of New York City restaurant workers found that 52 percent went to work when sick. (SOURCE: Center for Law and Social Policy)
FACT: 79 percent of all Ohio employees earning less than $9.23 an hour do not have the ability to take care of their ill family members. (SOURCE: Policy Matters Ohio)
Ohio House speaker John Husted, who has been vocally opposed to the Ohio Healthy Families Act, has paid sick days himself. So do the rest of our elected officials here in Ohio, and the CEOs who oppose the Act. Yet they have not come up with a single fact-based reason why they deserve paid sick days but the people of Ohio do not.
August 10, 2008 at 8:41 a.m. permalink suggest removal