CHARLESTON, W.Va. - The flu is flying around West Virginia, but there may be a partial cure in an unexpected place - through paid sick days.

Supporters are pushing both Congress and the West Virginia Legislature to expand the types of workers who can earn paid time off when they are ill. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, it's coming just as the state is seeing a pretty bad flu season.

Erin Snyder, a health-policy analyst for the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, said sick leave is a good public-health tool because it can slow the spread of infectious disease.

"The problem is that 44 percent of the private-sector workforce in West Virginia does not have access to sick days," she said, "and therefore does not have the option to stay home when they're sick."

Opponents say benefits such as sick leave make jobs more expensive and slow employment growth.

Snyder said states and cities that have expanded sick leave haven't had slower job growth because, while sick leave does cost employers, it saves them money in the long run by reducing turnover and other problems.

"It creates a higher level of job satisfaction, reduces absenteeism and increases productivity," she said. "The cost to replace someone is much higher than the cost to provide paid sick days."

One proposal in the Legislature would require companies with more than 15 employees to grant one hour of sick leave for every 40 hours worked. Sick leave at smaller businesses would be unpaid, but workers who took a sick day could not be fired or demoted for it.

Snyder said one CDC study found that half of all stomach-flu transmissions came from sick food-service workers - and almost two-thirds of West Virginia food-service workers don't have paid sick leave. She added that a sick-leave policy also could stop the flu from spreading at schools.

"When workers don't have access to paid sick time, children are 20 percent more likely to be sent to school when they're ill," she said. "This continues the outbreak to teachers and then, to other coworkers in the school system."

Supporters are pressing state lawmakers to take up the issue.

More information is online at wvpolicy.org.


get more stories like this via email

Workers at a hospital on the Oregon coast are citing a victory in contract negotiations with their employer.

More than 100 members of SEIU Local 49 at Samaritan North Lincoln Hospital in Lincoln City will receive raises averaging 10% over the first year of their new contract. Brittany King, a CT special imaging technologist at the hospital, said many workers have been struggling to afford living in the community, and this raise makes the hospital's wages competitive with the local job market.

"There are a lot of members," she said, "that told me specifically that, 'I think this is a wage that I can live with, that means I don't have to leave Samaritan.'"

King said workers have dealt with a number of tragedies in recent years, including the pandemic and 2020 wildfires. Their new contract also expands education funding.

Rachel Eggleton, a certified nursing assistant at the hospital, said workers rallied over Memorial Day weekend when contract negotiations stalled and the community members showed their support.

"Once they saw us out in the rain rallying," she said, "they realized, 'OK, maybe there's something wrong. Maybe we need to help out our health-care workers, because they've been there through thick and thin for the entire pandemic, regardless of whatever's happening.' We still provided the care that they needed."

Eggleton said this support has been key.

"Getting everybody involved and getting the community involved," she said, "it will always bring us better things."

A new Minnesota law, which goes into effect Sunday, removes requirements restricting Social Security recipients from receiving full jobless benefits as well.

Bill sponsors noted Minnesota was the last state to have the offset requirement. It reduced by 50% unemployment aid for laid-off workers who, within the first year, either received or started to apply for Social Security.

Kate Schaefers, volunteer state president of AARP Minnesota, said it had a profound effect on older workers as the pandemic began to take shape. She pointed to testimony from a Rochester man who had worked part-time in retail and lost his job but had no unemployment benefits to supplement his income.

"He told us that he cut back on expenses, including his medication, because he couldn't afford them living just off of his Social Security check," Schaefers recounted.

Schaefers pointed out they are disappointed the changes are not retroactive, leaving out many residents devastated by the crisis. But she noted supporters secured a compromise with the Senate by starting the repeal date this year, as opposed to waiting longer to appease concerns about the unemployment fund's balance.

Schaefers said looking ahead, the repeal will be beneficial to the growing number of older adults who cannot afford to solely rely on their pension in the face of rising consumer costs.

"This is a key part of their retirement ... continued work," Schaefers explained. "This is going to benefit them if they get laid off; that they can access those unemployment benefits."

The group estimated 16% of Minnesotans 62 and older receiving Social Security are still in the labor force. It added the benefits are modest, averaging nearly $1,600 a month in Minnesota.

The so-called "great resignation" isn't playing out for all workers. A new survey covering North Dakota and Minnesota shows people on the lower end of the income scale face obstacles in jumping to other job opportunities.

The Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank, along with Community Action agencies in both states, heard from more than 200 individuals, mainly working in social services, education and health care. Most expressed a desire to move up the career ladder, but said they lack the resources to learn new skills, or that expenses such as child care get in the way.

Erick Garcia Luna, regional outreach director at the Minneapolis Fed, said it becomes more pronounced for people earning very little in their current job.

"If a family is making minimum wage," he said, "they're going to have a harder time taking the time, for example, to get trained for another job."

Nearly 60% of respondents making between $10,000 and $25,000 dollars a year said it's either "somewhat or very difficult" to make an occupational change. Community Action Partnership of North Dakota said the survey also revealed these individuals are finding it harder to meet basic needs amid rising inflation, but also can't afford to pursue a better-paying job.

Ashley Littlewolf, workforce development case manager lead at the Southeastern North Dakota Community Action Agency, said she sees a lot of overlap with these barriers.

"They're feeding each other, the barriers are increasing each other," she said. "That need for new skills, and then finding the day care - and also, the jobs not paying enough."

While some employers are offering better pay, Littlewolf said the findings should prompt more action to boost starting wages. She said expanding the hiring pool can help, too.

"Taking a chance on someone who may not have that experience," she said, "but offering on-site training, offering the opportunity for them to enter that career path without the experience or education."