Why should anyone get cash for unused sick days?

I can see both sides of the argument, but it's really up to the employer or what's negotiated in the contract. Not all employers do it. Where I work, you can get paid for a portion of your accumulated sick days when you retire, not all of them. You don't get anything if you leave for any other reason but retirement. It is negotiated into the contract and sick days are considered a benefit. We accumulate sick hours monthly, so really, we earn it just as we earn vacation time. I don't really understand why you think rolling over, or accumulating sick hours is a scam. It's simply banking the hours so you have them if you need them. The employer doesn't really get ripped off if you think about it. Take two employees for example. One calls out sick a lot and uses all his sick hours as he gets them and doesn't bank any. The other doesn't call in sick much and builds up his hours. Which one is the better employee, the one that calls out sick a lot or the one that shows up for work every day? The employer is paying sick hours when the first guy calls out sick, so he's paying for no work. He just pays it over the course of the year as the guy calls out sick. The other guy shows up for work every day and gets paid for hours worked, then he gets paid for his sick hours (or a portion of it) when he retires. The employer is actually coming out the same as far as how much he pays for hours not worked by each employee, or if they only pay out a portion of the sick hours at retirement, they actually come out ahead. As an employer, would you want your employees at work every day or would you want them to call out sick on a regular basis? The money paid out in sick days would be the same for every employee, whether they call out sick all the time or show up for work every day and collect them at the end. If I was an employer, I would rather have my employees show up for work every day and I wouldn't feel bad paying him his sick time at retirement. I'd rather pay someone that way as sort of a reward for being a great employee over the course of his career. I guess it's all in the way you look at it though.

Aren't you happy that they are actually paying for unused sick leaves? In my country not all employers are that generous. Most of contractual employees in my country don't even have that benefit. They are on a no-work, no-pay basis. That is why greedy employers don't regularize them so as to avoid giving out these benefits. Which for me is really unfair. The poor employee don't have any choice but still work rather than get sacked. There are a lot of unemployed people in my country that they would surely grab their place.

Were I work we get 10 sick days a year. If you don't use them up at the end of the year,they roll over to the next. I saved up enough sick days to be out the 6 weeks I needed to be when I had a hystercomy 3 years ago. That is my story about sick days.

Hi Parated2k, Okay, I am not a specialist on these things but I would try to explain some points. First, it is a benefit. Meaning if you get sick and you have to be out of the office, it is acceptable, and you still get paid. It is a benefit usually given for employees who have been in the company for a certain period of time. Second, as a benefit, it is meant to be enjoyed. Since some of the people don't get sick, technically they didn't enjoy such a benefit. They weren't able to enjoy such a benefit. Because they didn't get sick for a period. Third, in the employer's side. They sense loyalty and value of the people who served the company diligently and these people who don't get sick on working days could mean that they avoid every circumstance that could make them sick because they give value to their job. They just love their job. And it's just worth rewarding. Fourth, it's not a scam. It's legal. It's not being unfair to the employer because in the first place it's the employer's discretion to vest the benefit to the employee. Our company gives sick leave benefits after the employee renders a ONE Year of service in the company. And the unused sick leave benefit is not carried over to the next year, and is not convertible to cash. So it's really up to the employer.

ted, you have an excellent point. however, when i first looked for a job years ago, i chose one over the other based on the fringe benefits even though the salary was lower. i look at those benefits as part of my compensation, and the actual payout for unused sick time should have been calculated at the time of my being hired. btw, i've not heard of any employer allowing unlimited accumulation of sick days. unfortunately, this sounds a lot like the "i don't have it, so you shouldn't either" argument.

because its your money.

Interesting concept, but there are companies that still do this, and it does seem unreal. Unless they do it the way my job where I am at now does, where you have to work so many hrs. to earn your Sick pay, personally this is not right, because even where I work I think you have to be sick in order to get paid for them.

Never heard of hem roling over like that most place drop them for you to start building sick day for the next year. like ya get a sick day built up after you have worked a couple of weeks then you get a sick day and you can only have so many if ya dont use them ya lose them. Same way for Vacation days ya have to work to build them up but ya beter take some vacatoin time or ya lose them too when year is up

I think it's ridiculous to be able to carry over sick days. We're not given a designated number of sick days. If you're sick, you take a sick day. (paid). However, if you're off for more than two consecutive days, you need to provide a doctor's note. If you're off for more than 3 weeks, you go on short term disability, and so on. I don't think you should be monetarily rewarded for not taking them. I think they're a benefit that is very necessary to the well being of everyone. They shouldn't be carried over, and you certainly shouldn't get a big "bonus" for not taking them. If you don't take them, you're being honest.

i work for a small not for profit religious organization and we dont get anything for our sick days, in fact, here where i live the boss doesnt even have to give us sick days. they dont get rolled over, it is on a use 'em or lose 'em sort of deal.

Hi Ted, I didn't realize that there were places that did that. I'd have a nice little nest egg built up if I could get benefits like that. I just don't miss work. When I worked at the insurance company, we got sick days each year but they could not be rolled over and collected year after year and we certainly did not get paid for unused ones. At one point we were allowed to save up our vacation time but they put an end to that too. One woman in the office had months saved up which I'm sure she was planning on using at the end of her employment before officially retiring. They actually made her take a couple days off per week to use them up. I understand getting paid for unused vacation time as it is time owed to the employee but sick time is completely different. Makes no sense to me. Why would a company even go along with such a policy?

I have never had a job that allowed paid sick days but it seems to me that would be a wonderful luxury! I would go to work sick as a dog because I could not afford to take time off. I remember my boss coming to my apartment after I'd been in an accident and was recovering from surgery and telling me I had to get back ASAP because she couldn't hold my job much longer. So I went against medical advice and went back to work just 10 days after major surgery. People now have no idea how good they have it. I agree that sick days should not be able to be accrued but expire each year. It's a burden on employers. Because of policies like that, prices of things we need go up to make up for it. Getting something for nothing isn't right. And an employer paying you for a day twice--which is what happens with accrued paid sick days--is not right, either.

I think that's ridiculous! Yes, it's a benefit, and people should avail of it when they are really sick. But I don't want people coming to work even when they are sick (even contagious) just because they would lose the money for not coming to work. Still, I've known companies who do this.

To begin with, why an employee must have "sick days" at all? It sounds somewhat unethical to have such kinds of free days, sort of warranting that he will become sick beforehand. It's fair and a right of every employee to be respected when he becomes sick, and not to be discounted for every day he can't comply with his tasks, but really having a predefined number of days is ridiculous, and even more be paid an "extra" because of that, regardless if you use them or not. When one becomes sick, he must get a medical certificate to prove he's sick, then the employer must allow him to stay at home, maybe sending his own doctor to check, and then pay his salary like all other day.