Debate about the proposed sick leave ordinance continues to escalate between city committees and organizations as the proposal awaits a City Council vote next month.

The controversial proposal, which would require all private employers to provide a certain amount of paid sick days to employees, was recently rejected by the Economic Development Committee in a 7-3 vote. The next committee to review the proposal will be the Equal Opportunity Commission, a committee with much more influence on the topic.

Mark Clear, small business owner and Economic Development Commission member, expressed his doubts about the proposal, calling it a "bad idea."

"[The proposal] only covers a small geographic area and it is mandatory just for the city of Madison," he added. "The societal problem here is very real, but it can't be solved on a local level."

The Board of Health also examined the proposal, and though they have not yet made a formal recommendation, it seems to have the same concerns as the Economic Development Committee.

Alan Schwartzstein, chair of Madison and Dane County Board of Health, expressed his approval for the concept of paid sick leave, but joined Clear in expressing similar doubts about the proposal.

"The board felt policies that allow individuals to access health care — not necessarily paid — are good things," he added. "But maybe a statewide or national policy would be best."

Yet Ald. Austin King, District 8, who authored the proposal, said legislation at any level would improve the societal issue of low-income families and sick leave.

"Paid sick leave solves a glaring inequity in our local economy considering the vast majority of those without paid sick leave are low income," King added. "They are faced with a choice of losing pay or going to work sick, and that's a choice no one should have to make."

However, Clear argued that if the proposal is enacted, it might not even serve its initial purpose, as it might cause employers to take away other benefits to balance the cost of paid sick leave.

Another negative to the proposal, according to Clear, is its ability to discourage freedom between employers and employees to agree upon compensation that works for both parties.

"It is very possible employers will lower wages or other benefits to compensate for the cost of providing sick leave, and then the net benefit to employees would be nothing," he noted.

Clear added he does not expect the sick leave proposal to be put into effect any time soon because it does not have enough support from City Council.

Though Clear said many, including himself, would like to see a proposal like this at the state level, he also said such a proposal seems unlikely at this point.

But despite negativity among many committees, King continues to stand by his proposal.

"Sick employees are really not just hurting themselves, they are hurting the economy because they are getting other people and customers sick," King added. "Without [the sick leave proposal], you are giving people no other option but to infect others."