Bi-weekly pay may still be an item on the holiday wish list for some local organizations, but the likelihood of such legislation being passed during the upcoming session of the General Assembly seems as likely as Rudolph landing on the State House lawn.
Proponents of the measure, which would allow employers to pay hourly wage workers twice monthly instead of weekly, say the issue is about fairness. Opponents of the action say it’s about paying workers in a timely manner. The result is a battle with roots dating back years.
Rhode Island's Market Has Changed. Developers, Builders, Investors and Sellers Must Change With It.
By Emilio DiSpirito IV License Partner | Engel & Völkers Oceanside Leader | The DiSpirito…
Learn More
“Rhode Island is the only state in the country that requires hourly workers to be paid on a weekly basis,” said Paul DeRoche, senior vice president of government relations and small business at the Greater Rhode Island Chamber of Commerce. “It’s always on our wish list. I would like to bring it back on the table, but it doesn’t look like that is going to happen.”
George Nee, secretary/treasurer of the AFL-CIO, the state’s largest labor organization, said being the only state in the nation not to support the idea isn’t a good enough reason to change.
“If we are the only one that’s fine,” he said. “That’s why we have the Independent Man on the top of the State House. Our people work hard for their money, they need it, and want it as soon as they can have it.”
The one thing both sides agree on – the issue most likely won’t be debated this year.
“I think that other things have taken the forefront like health care and tax issues,” said Terry S. Martiesian, state director for the National Federation of Independent Business. “I would like to think that it might surface again this year, but it doesn’t look that way right now.”
Rep. Paul E. Moura, a Providence Democrat who works as a field representative for the AFL-CIO, said, “I think it’s just the wrong time to be thinking about legislation like this. I generally don’t support people waiting two weeks for their pay. A lot of people live week to week and I would be very concerned about the effects of changing that, especially during these tough economic times.”
Bi-weekly pay was hotly debated during the 1999 legislative session when the Greater Providence Chamber of Commerce retained the law firm of Brown, Rudnick, Freed & Gesmer to lobby for the passage of a bill that would have given businesses the choice of bi-weekly pay. The measure was buried in both the House and Senate.
No action pertaining to new legislation on the issue was taken during the last legislative session. But despite the fact that bi-weekly pay has taken a back seat, Martiesian said it remains an important issue.
“Not allowing bi-weekly pay is problematic, especially to those businesses that operate in a number of states,” he said. “They have do a separate payroll for their operations here. It’s an added cost that may not be large, but it’s another cost that makes it expensive to business in Rhode Island.”
Nee disagreed.
“It’s an absolutely silly economic development idea, if it’s even an economic development idea,” he said. “It’s a selfish concept and I see absolutely no reason for the change.”
Martiesian noted that the state government pays workers on a bi-weekly basis, and it’s only the private sector that is held to the rules of weekly pay.
“To me there is no logic,” he said. “If you work for the city or state then you are bi-weekly. If you are on Social Security then you are bi-weekly. But when the private sector wants to change, they can’t it just doesn’t make sense.”
According to Moura, it isn’t about the businesses or the owners, but about the workers. “Until it’s proven to me that bi-weekly pay is a deterrent in doing business in the state or has a negative fiscal impact I will be hesitant to put the burden on the individual workers,” he said. “It’s that simple.”
