There’s doubt among some Vermont regulators whether the state has the authority or the need to interfere with food service provider Sodexo’s sick leave policy. The issue arose with a new bill that would prohibit companies from penalizing workers for taking sick days or other employer-offered benefits.
In a separate initiative, a coalition of groups has been working to mandate paid sick time for employees. The bill related to Sodexo seeks to end a policy of providing employees with sick leave, but punishing them for taking it.
In testimony last week on S.213, Sodexo employees from the University of Vermont and Johnson State College campuses testified that the company issues a demerit for each sick leave “occurrence.” Accrual of four demerits, or points, prompts a written “coaching.” Seven points is grounds for dismissal, they said.
One current Sodexo supervisor and one former employee testified that many employees work through their illnesses, for fear of jeopardizing their jobs. The stories prompted labor law and public health concerns among committee members.
Assistant Attorney General Julio Thompson said in an interview Wednesday that he had told the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Housing and General Affairs that his office had never heard of an employer punishing workers who use the sick days system “in good faith.”
If such a policy exists at Sodexo, Thompson said, “We would like to see it.” He said he had not yet been given documentation outlining the company’s policy and therefore could not comment on it.
For a more general take on Vermont’s current employment laws, Thompson clarified that there’s no blanket protection for any sick leave taken by someone with a protected condition — for example pregnancy, a disability or chronic illness.
“Protections depend on a case-by-case basis,” Thompson said.
Health Commissioner Harry Chen told lawmakers that, between federal and state laws, structures are in place that try to balance an employer’s need for productivity with public health interests in keeping sick people off work.
Those structures are particularly important in food service and health care settings, Chen pointed out.
“I would be supportive of changes that would make it easier for sick workers not to be preparing food,” Chen said. “From a public health perspective, that would make sense.”
But in the case of the Sodexo accusations, Chen said it’s unclear whether the state has statutory authority to step in.
Worker health and hygiene are among 44 considerations factored into Department of Health restaurant inspection scores. However, those inspections are only conducted at sites where food is prepared, according to the department’s food and lodging program manager, Elizabeth Wirsing. If any site sells food that’s prepared in another location, it would not be inspected according to restaurant protocols.
Jim Harrison, president of the Vermont Grocers’ Association, said after the committee discussion Wednesday morning that combined time off, or policies allowing unused sick days to be carried forward as vacation time in the next year, could also encourage workers to work through their illness when it would be better to stay home.
His main concern about S.213 is its potential for unintended consequences, Harrison said. Sodexo is not a member of his organization.
“We don’t want sick people dealing with food,” Harrison said. “If legislation needs to be looked at to make that clearer, fine.”
But instituting the new language might discourage employers from offering sick leave as part of their benefits packages, he cautioned.
