Earned sick and safe time ordinance hits a snag

The Duluth City Council continues to wrestle with a controversial ordinance that would require local employers to provide workers with access to earned time off to deal with illnesses or family emergencies, such as domestic abuse.

At a Thursday evening agenda session meeting, another complication came to light.

Council President Elissa Hansen and 2nd District Councilor Joel Sipress flagged a concern with the accrual system laid out in the proposed ordinance.

"We've identified what appears to us to be a glitch or a discrepancy in how the ordinance would operate, as currently drafted. And we do not yet have a solution, but we're working on it, and we do not anticipate having a solution for Monday's meeting," Sipress said.

He shared a memo with fellow councilors laying out a problematic scenario.

Under the proposed system, workers can earn one hour of paid time off for every 30 hours worked, up to a maximum of 40 hours in a year.

A full-time employee working 40 hours a week for 50 weeks would log 2,000 hours in a year, accruing 66 hours of earned sick and safe time, but the actual benefit would top out at 40 hours each year.

Meanwhile, a part-time worker logging half as many hours would accrue 33 hours of earned sick and safe time. And a person working two half-time jobs would earn 33 hours from both employers - or 66 hours of earned sick and safe time in all.

"We're all in agreement that we're looking for an elegant solution that would not be, to quote the city attorney, 'an administrative nightmare,'" said Sipress, adding that he would welcome suggestions.

"I think our intent would be that your usable earned sick and safe time per year should be, in some sense, proportional to the number of hours you're working," he said.

At Large Councilor Noah Hobbs suggested perhaps a system under which workers would earn time off at a rate of one hour for every 50 hours worked.

"It's simple, and we've certainly heard from the business community that would have to administer this, to keep it as simple as possible," he said, noting that it would result in greater proportionality.

Any further amendments of the proposed ordinance will delay council action for at least another two weeks, because the policy would go back to a first reading, and the council can vote on an ordinance only after a second reading has occurred.

Nevertheless, Sipress said it was important for the council to take its time and get the ordinance right.