A recent study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention found that employees with paid sick leave are 28 percent less likely to be involved in a work-related accident than employees who do not receive payment for sick leave. Researchers hypothesiz

The article states that employees with paid sick leave are less engaged in work-related accident than employees without it. The argument for this position is based on a study made by the Center of Diseases Control which shows the percentage of employees included in work accident. While this argument seems convincing on first glance, there are significant underlying flaws that raise doubt about the article conclusion.

One piece of evidence provided is that employees with unpaid sick leave feel pressured to work during time of illness. However, there are some potential problems with relying on this information. It is reasonable to believe that it exists employees who do not receive paid sick leave do not mind working under this condition. Moreover, it is acceptable they need to work so that they afford their families or they like that sort of work. Also, time of illness is not clear. Even if there is a time when a virus comes and start affecting the employees, it is reasonable to accept it might not affect everybody . It may affect just whose receive paid sick leave. However, It is unlikely to believe that there is a time of illness.

Likewise, the evidence that job accidents are spurred by impaired judgment or motor-skills due to illness or illness-related medications is ambiguous. First, it does not necessarily mean that any disease is related to job. It might have started at home, for example cold, and it got worst later. Second, if it is related to medications , obviously it is not related to the job. Furthermore, it would be worth if the employee had been to the doctor and had taken the doctor’s receipt to show to the boss.

Finally, the article states that the highest occupation showed the highest discrepancy between with and without paid leave. However, this evidence is not convinced because there is no the highest-risk occupation. In any work, every sort of occupations are the highest-risk. For example, in the construction, an employee may fall from the building or elevator. Similarly, an employee which work is driving either a car or a motorcycle may be involved in an motorcycle accident.

Owing to the above reasons, it is not a strong conclusion to make. If the article were to provide greater evidence regarding the pressure felt by the employees with unpaid sick leave, the job accidents spurred by impaired judgment or motor-skills, and the highest discrepancy showed by the highest occupation, the argument would be more convincing.