The Feb. 2 story reported “Bill would guarantee paid vacation.” The “vacation” bill, House Resolution 2238, that is currently under consideration should be opposed. If passed, this bill will result in more underemployment or unemployment, reduced hours for employees, and inhibit businesses from being successful in the state of Washington. Washington state currently has a 14 percent U-6 labor rate (Department of Labor, State of Washington, 2013) and this bill will only contribute to higher unemployment rates if passed.
The studies cited to justify this bill relate to countries like France, Italy and other European countries and look how well they’re doing in regards to national debts and forming successful businesses. They’re socialist countries; has the state Legislature forgotten that aspect of the countries studied for justifying this bill?
What is worse? Scraping by on minimal hours, trying to pay bills, and having a paid vacation, or being fully employed? I will say fully employed will reduce health risk and stress on any worker. I am ashamed of a state legislature that just doesn’t get how businesses work and succeed. The bill also covers public employers, which means taxes will go up even more to pay for this benefit to the public unions. Washington can’t pay for its unfunded public employee liabilities now.
Randy Stewart
Camas
