I had to add some emphasis and links to this one.

Quote of note:

That bill would cause a problem for the business community, Randel Johnson, vice president of labor, immigration and employee benefits at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said yesterday. "We would oppose the bill because it sets a precedent for paid leave which will be expensive," he said, adding that the bill would also create confusion and could spur a new onslaught of lawsuits.

And it would create confusion exactly how? Employees can count to seven. So can employers.

Anyway…

Studies Show U.S. Trails On Sick Leave
Proposed Law at Odds With Employers' Goal

By Amy Joyce
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 16, 2004; Page E02

The United States lags behind the rest of the world in giving workers paid leave to stay home sick or to take care of ill family members, and almost half of all private-sector employees have no paid sick days, according to two new studies.

A report on state laws (PDF), conducted by the nonprofit National Partnership for Women & Families, was released in conjunction with legislation two Democrats proposed yesterday to provide all full-time employees with seven days of paid sick leave per year. The other study, which covers global leave laws and was funded by the Ford Foundation, will be released today.

The push for requiring paid leave comes at a time some major business groups are asking the Bush administration to head in the opposite direction by making it harder for workers to take the up to 12 weeks of unpaid family leave allowed under federal law.

"This [proposed bill] is in contrast to pious concern for the future of manufacturing when the answer is to drape more chains across the backs of employers," said Neil Trautwein, assistant vice president for human resource policy at the National Association of Manufacturers.