Tea party questions Schaumburg’s sick-time policies

The Palatine Tea Party is holding up Schaumburg as the first example in its campaign against municipalities letting employees roll over sick time from year to year, saying it could cost taxpayers significant money without providing additional services.

But Schaumburg officials say their policy not only minimizes the number of workers paid for unused sick time at the end of their employment, but also improves cost-efficiency and productivity far beyond the “use-it-or-lose-it” stance advocated by the tea party group.

Palatine Tea Party Coordinator Craig Mijares said Schaumburg records he obtained through a Freedom of Information request show that current village employees have accrued approximately $17 million in unused sick time. His concern is that taxpayers may be on the hook for that amount when those workers either leave or retire.

But Schaumburg Village Manager Ken Fritz said that claim shows Mijares’ investigation of the issue wasn’t thorough. He estimates that no more than 15 to 25 percent of the village’s employees will ever receive any payout of unpaid sick time, and none will receive more than half the amount accrued.

“I wish they would ask more questions before they start throwing raw data around,” Fritz said. “My frustration is that no one talks to us to get an actual explanation before they reach their conclusions.”

Under village policy, nonunion employees must wok at least 25 years for Schaumburg, have accumulated more than 700 to 800 hours of sick time to demonstrate they haven’t abused the system, have given 90 days notice of their departure and have a good performance record to be eligible for a 50 percent payout of their sick time.

For members of the village’s five labor unions, only a third of their unused sick time will be paid out if they meet all the criteria.

Fritz cited the recent retirement of finance Director Doug Ellsworth, at the time one the village’s highest paid employees. But as someone who worked for Schaumburg for only about a decade, Ellsworth wasn’t close to being able to cash in any of his sick time, Fritz said.

Mijares responded that if Schaumburg actually pays out as little of its unpaid sick time as Fritz says, it shouldn’t pay any at all.

“(Cutting) this program will not affect any services, any policemen or firemen,” Mijares said. “I’m bringing to light how the elimination of this program won’t affect services. I’m not criticizing without a plan.”

Fritz believes a “use-it-or-lose-it” policy advocated by the tea party group could cost taxpayers more if overtime was needed to fill in for workers who felt they had to use up their sick days unnecessarily.

Fritz and Mijares also disagreed over how common the rollover of sick time is in the private sector.

Mijares argued that such policies are virtually unknown in the private sector, seeing them as an example of government’s abuse of taxpayers.

“Sick time is to be used when you are sick ... period,” Mijares said. “Sick time is not guaranteed time to be taken off. In the private sector, abuse is managed by requiring a doctor’s note for any sick absences exceeding three consecutive days.”

Fritz concedes that allowing employees to rollover sick time and then possibly receive a payout is more common in the public sector, but argued that it was adapted from similar policies among large private-sector employers.