Democrat debate schedule? I'm wondering this too

From your link

"The Family Friendly and Workplace Flexibility Act would allow employers and employees in the private sector to come to agreements by which hourly workers could put overtime earned toward paid leave rather than extra compensation...

A similar system exists for employees in the public sector. However, private companies employing hourly, non-exempt employees are required under the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act to pay time-and-a-half for overtime work. The Republican proposal would amend that law, letting employers voluntarily offer an hour and a half in compensatory time off for every hour of overtime worked. The employee could choose whether to accept the leave time or the overtime pay."

As you see, it's not a gift but an alternative for work actually performed. Employees can bank their overtime and trade it for leave. Is that OK by you? Sounds fine to me.

And what about "businesses" that don't have any "overtime"?

The business will "make" overtime?

They want you to work 1 and 1/2 times as hard/fast during your regular work week?

Study Finds Calif. Paid Family Leave a Success

California’s landmark paid family leave program—the first of only two state programs in the country that offer paid leave to workers to care for a new child or sick family member—has produced significant economic, social and health benefits for workers while the downside for employers has been minimal, according to a report released Jan. 11, 2011.

California’s Paid Family Leave law, which went into effect July 1, 2004, allows workers in private industry to take up to six weeks a year off to care for a new child or a sick family member. It supplements the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, which allows up to 12 weeks off, but is unpaid. Payments under the California program replace 55 percent of a worker’s weekly wages up to $987 in 2011. The program is funded through a 1.2 percent payroll tax paid by workers that covers both state disability and paid family leave.

and not company "good will".

You think people should get something for nothing? Somewhere, sometime, someone has to pay.

Have you ever wished/thought you would like to be able to take some time off work to help another person or group, BUT your employer would object?

"good will" on your part AND your employers part? YOU pay, and YOUR employer works around YOUR absence?

You're starting to get it. What goes into one person's pocket comes out of that of another person. Sometimes a person might want to hold onto their own pocket flaps rather than have another person lift and remove the contents without their approval. There's a name for that.

With Socialism, sooner rather than later, you run out of other people's money.

A form of Xenonosocomiophobia?

Sometimes a person might want to hold onto their own pocket flaps rather than have another person lift and remove the contents without their approval.

Next time you're taking advantage of a government paid benefit....I hope you thank ALL the people that pay into THAT benefit that haven't used THAT benefit.

don't use the benefit are ones who actually die before they can or shortly after they start.

Social Security for years has been called a Ponzi scheme, and I agree with that comparison.........however, it would still be very solvent if government didn't decide years ago to include those who become disabled as well as never setting it up as a separate entity where agencies couldn't 'borrow' from it for pet projects that usually failed with no way to pay it back.

who gave out of personal desire to do so, right? Those who did so unwillingly or grudgingly won't care to say "you're welcome".

Now if you're really into doing charitable works, I can try to explain something contained in the context of what is called "stewardship" which means we really own nothing. What we give from that which is in our possession is our thanks for what we have received...as what we have received is the opportunity to give.

Mull that one over and see if your head will keep from spinning off.

"WE" is less than perfect. (grammar error intentional) That is one reason why "WE", as a collective, make laws based on punishment rather than reward. "WE" don't know how to encourage the goodness in people but only how to discourage them from being bad. "WE", being less than perfect, make imperfect laws. Thus, our laws don't work that well.