2013 Federal Budget

[Sylvanfan]

I get 0 sick days off per year. If I'm sick, it also comes out of my vacation.

[Azure]

I don't have a limit on sick days, which would be nice except for the fact that I am never sick. Maybe 2 days a year.

Lots of room for abuse though.

I think 10 is a good starting number for a starting employee. Maybe increase it as you get older? Pay should be something like 60%? Don't really know. Guess it depends what line of work you are in.

I don't think you should have to use sick days for a serious illness like cancer treatments. The government especially should have a long-term plan in place in case you ever get sick.

10 sick days, 5 personal days. If you don't use the personal days, they add up year over year.

[Devils'Advocate]

Oh, there is a disability plan, but it only pays 70% of your salary. So if you still have the same expenses (rent, car payment, kids day care) you are kinda screwed. So that's where the sick day banking comes in. By having weeks of sick leave banked, that means the longer I would be at 100% pay during a serious illness.

Right now, hearing what the Conservatives are planning, many civil servants are pissed off. I and many others have been responsibly using our sick leave and banking a lot as an insurance against catastrophic illness, and shaking our heads at those irresponsibly burning it away knowing that should something bad happen, they could be in financial trouble. Now, if they take all that banked time away, the abusers get nothing really taken from them because they have been burning it anyway, but those that have been using it responsibly have their insurance measure taken away. It's punishing the responsible civil servants while the abusers have a good laugh.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

I get 0 sick days off per year. If I'm sick, it also comes out of my vacation.

And how much vacation time do you get? I was talking to someone last weekend that suggested such a solution. Give me 8 vacation days instead of 15 sick days. If I use only 3 for being sick, I get an extra week of vacation time.

I think I'd cash out the vacation time and put the money away for a rainy day (such as needing to top up a DI situation).

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Oh, there is a disability plan, but it only pays 70% of your salary. So if you still have the same expenses (rent, car payment, kids day care) you are kinda screwed. So that's where the sick day banking comes in. By having weeks of sick leave banked, that means the longer I would be at 100% pay during a serious illness.

Right now, hearing what the Conservatives are planning, many civil servants are pissed off. I and many others have been responsibly using our sick leave and banking a lot as an insurance against catastrophic illness, and shaking our heads at those irresponsibly burning it away knowing that should something bad happen, they could be in financial trouble. Now, if they take all that banked time away, the abusers get nothing really taken from them because they have been burning it anyway, but those that have been using it responsibly have their insurance measure taken away. It's punishing the responsible civil servants while the abusers have a good laugh.

If you have a severe illness, the taxpayer will cover your health care costs. Why should we also pay for your salary for an extended period of time?

Aren't there programs out there that help with that?

Honestly not sure why you think you should be able to collect 100% of your salary for those 170 days despite never showing up for work.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Oh, there is a disability plan, but it only pays 70% of your salary. So if you still have the same expenses (rent, car payment, kids day care) you are kinda screwed. So that's where the sick day banking comes in. By having weeks of sick leave banked, that means the longer I would be at 100% pay during a serious illness.

Right now, hearing what the Conservatives are planning, many civil servants are pissed off. I and many others have been responsibly using our sick leave and banking a lot as an insurance against catastrophic illness, and shaking our heads at those irresponsibly burning it away knowing that should something bad happen, they could be in financial trouble. Now, if they take all that banked time away, the abusers get nothing really taken from them because they have been burning it anyway, but those that have been using it responsibly have their insurance measure taken away. It's punishing the responsible civil servants while the abusers have a good laugh.

Sick days were meant to be used as sick days, not critical illness insurance.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Oh, there is a disability plan, but it only pays 70% of your salary. So if you still have the same expenses (rent, car payment, kids day care) you are kinda screwed. So that's where the sick day banking comes in. By having weeks of sick leave banked, that means the longer I would be at 100% pay during a serious illness.

Right now, hearing what the Conservatives are planning, many civil servants are pissed off. I and many others have been responsibly using our sick leave and banking a lot as an insurance against catastrophic illness, and shaking our heads at those irresponsibly burning it away knowing that should something bad happen, they could be in financial trouble. Now, if they take all that banked time away, the abusers get nothing really taken from them because they have been burning it anyway, but those that have been using it responsibly have their insurance measure taken away. It's punishing the responsible civil servants while the abusers have a good laugh.

Isnt short term disabilty untaxed though as you are taxed on the premiums and therefore not the benefit? Could be completely wrong but I remember our HR people saying that for either short term or long term. If so 70% is about right for salary replacement.

I think that 15 days is excessive, especially when thereis no real way to deal with abusers. In the private sector 8-10 with no carry over isquite common. Giving everyone sick days is a very expensive form of insurance. Instead of paying a small premium for all employees for short term disability you are paying 100% of employees for 6 months of disability and hoping they dont abuse it and give it back.

[Ryan Coke]

Depends if you or the company pay the premiums. I know ours is structured that we pay (and are taxed) on STD & LTD premiums, so that 60 or 70% is tax free, so is a good replacement for your full income.

[cSpooge]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Oh, there is a disability plan, but it only pays 70% of your salary. So if you still have the same expenses (rent, car payment, kids day care) you are kinda screwed. So that's where the sick day banking comes in. By having weeks of sick leave banked, that means the longer I would be at 100% pay during a serious illness.

Right now, hearing what the Conservatives are planning, many civil servants are pissed off. I and many others have been responsibly using our sick leave and banking a lot as an insurance against catastrophic illness, and shaking our heads at those irresponsibly burning it away knowing that should something bad happen, they could be in financial trouble. Now, if they take all that banked time away, the abusers get nothing really taken from them because they have been burning it anyway, but those that have been using it responsibly have their insurance measure taken away. It's punishing the responsible civil servants while the abusers have a good laugh.

sadly it is only long term disability not short term, which is why everyone has to keep 13 weeks so they can get paid until they get on LTD.

[cSpooge]

Originally Posted by GGG

Isnt short term disabilty untaxed though as you are taxed on the premiums and therefore not the benefit? Could be completely wrong but I remember our HR people saying that for either short term or long term. If so 70% is about right for salary replacement.

I think that 15 days is excessive, especially when thereis no real way to deal with abusers. In the private sector 8-10 with no carry over isquite common. Giving everyone sick days is a very expensive form of insurance. Instead of paying a small premium for all employees for short term disability you are paying 100% of employees for 6 months of disability and hoping they dont abuse it and give it back.

disability plans (long or short term) are non-taxable if the employees pay 100% of the premiums. If the employer pays all of it it is fully taxable and if both pay you can deduct the amount of premiums paid from the amount you have to report as taxable.

[Azure]

Kevin Milligan ‏@kevinmilligan 4m
Just noticed the EI aspect of budget: p. 292. 2012-13 EI surplus of 0.5B. 2015-16 surplus of 4.1B. Echos of how budget was balanced in 90s

....

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

And how much vacation time do you get? I was talking to someone last weekend that suggested such a solution. Give me 8 vacation days instead of 15 sick days. If I use only 3 for being sick, I get an extra week of vacation time.

I think I'd cash out the vacation time and put the money away for a rainy day (such as needing to top up a DI situation).

The absolute minimum that the Alberta labour code permits.

I think too many sick days isn't great and can be abused. I can see allowing employees 5 additional vacation days that they can use as sick days or personal days as they need. For people with kids...there are days that schools close that are not stats like Easter Monday and Pro D days. Allows these people a day off without using up sick days, but is fair to all employees.

But I would insist that people take the time off. I find at my own work place a lot of people don't use up their hollidays yet come to work and waste hours every year doing nothing. Lots of 20 year employees who only take a week off every year.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Azure

....

In all fairness wasn't EI topped up by the conservatives during the recession?

Really EI should be run completely revenue neutral having to pay back debt to the government and lower premiums with significant surpluses

[Azure]

I do believe they want to go revenue neutral with EI at some point. Don't really have a problem if they have a few billion saved up though.