July 23, 2008
Governor seeks advice
To sign or to veto? That is the question. In an unusual move, Governor David Paterson issued a press release soliciting additional advice on what action he should take today on a bill granting state and local government workers four hours of paid leave annually for breast and prostate cancer screening.
The operative word is "paid". Under existing laws, public employees can take off four hours a year for cancer screening. They don't have to charge the time against sick or personal time. However, the enabling laws don't say whether they should get paid, which has triggered lawsuits.
Employees currently get paid when they use sick or personal time for medical appointments. The bill basically gives them an additional half day of paid sick time a year.
Paterson's press release notes:
Some employers have expressed concerns about the additional costs that would result from approval of the bill, while others have cited the health benefits of allowing more employees to receive cancer screening.
For background, see here. Public Payroll Watch's June 2 item on "Body Part Bills". (The Legislature did not pass the leave bills for cervical and colon cancer screening.)
My previous report did not address a question that has gotten little coverage: Would the bill violate the federal medical privacy act known as HIPPA?
To get paid leave time (not charged to sick or personal time), an employee presumably must tell his or her employer the reason, that he or she is getting screened for prostate or breast cancer.
Not a big deal, perhaps. But if after undergoing cancer screening, the employee has a series of medical appointments, the employer may surmise (rightly or wrongly) a cancer diagnosis. There goes medical privacy.
« Previous |
Main
| Next »
|
