........................................Republicans will say that their leave bill provides full pay while Tucker caps his at $500 per week. I'm sure if the cap is the problem, Tucker would be happy to take it off. The money for all these salaries is already budgeted, no additional expenditure is incurred by the leave his bill provides. Under Tucker's bill as written, the state actually saves money on anyone making more than $26,000 a year.
The Irvin bill insures the state won't spend a cent. Money is tight. But I suspect this is more political than fiscal.
I wish I'd known about the Hutchinson administration's submarining of Tucker on this bill before I wrote a glowing column about the governor this week. At a minimu, I'd have added an asterisk.
If paid maternity leave is good employment policy it is and it ought to cover men, too (a deficiency of both bills) the employer should pay for it, not ask a bunch of working stiffs to fork over their accrued days off to do it.
Pregnancy isn't a catastrophe in my book. Republican governance? That is another matter.
Edit history
Please
sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):