this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2023
128 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19097 readers
4801 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The bill offers employers flexibility in accruing sick leave. However, by the 200th day of employment, it should amount to five days.

This is not enough, but it’s a start I guess.

At my company we tried to negotiate for paid sick leave on top of our meager Paid Time Off (no current distinction) and corporate basically laughed at us. This shit needs to not be optional, and not just in California. Everybody gets sick and/or needs to take care of someone who’s sick. Ignoring that basic fact of life is absurd and inhumane.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Corporations are already upset about the push to pay existing workers more money. To have much more paid time off means they'd have to hire more workers to cover those (already run lean) shifts, AND pay them leave time too. Think of the profit loss!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You mean a decease in Profit Margins

There profits will increase because more people have more money to spend and time to spend that money

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ha, you're right, and isn't it ironic that doing the better thing for everyone ends up being more profitable? It's almost like they aren't concerned with the actual value that's lost, but more the difference between them and everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right!!!!!

It’s almost always about the abuse of power than the acquisition of wealth itself

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Back on Reddit I had a very old post reply saved from someone who through his work and connections had an inside view of the "wealthy", and they broke down the change from money to power as one goes from "just" millionaire to higher up. When money becomes no longer a concern, or rather when obtaining "stuff" (as Carlin would say) is no longer a factor, how much power and influence becomes more of a way to compare one's wealth to another. It may not even be important anymore on net value if one has a bigger leverage arm on things.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

That’s spot on, and a lot their resistance to any sort of regulation is more out of distaste that the lessers put rules on them and it’s their right to abuse others and the environment

Progress can’t be made without that understanding