Do workers need a week of guaranteed sick leave?

Now that we're through taking ownership of the company that makes the cars that we refuse to own, time to turn to improving working conditions for those of us who still have jobs. The Dems (101 of them) in the House have introduced legislation (HR 2460) to require every employer with more than 15 employees to offer 1 hour of paid sick leavefor every 30 hours worked, up to a total of 7 days per year. Read all about it in an informative About.com article. Sen Kennedy says that 89% of low-wage workers (low-wage undefined in article) are without any paid sick leave.
On the face of it, this sounds like a good idea. (Who wants coughing/hacking co-workers at the MacDonalds?) But Lupi R, who has close-up experience with small businesses that compete with low-cost producers in other countries, points out that it will put further strain on those firms struggling to make it in this economy. She believes that workers will be inclined to "use up" their sick leave every year, whether sick or not. Businesses that need to keep running will have to pay other workers time and a half to make up the difference. (As a retired Fed who hoarded sick leave, but only up to the point that I couldn't carry it over into the new year, I'm afraid she may be right. When it's use-or-lose, let's face it, we're gonna use!)
If you accept the labor economists' argument that total compensation is what employers pay (TC= wages + benefits), then greater benefits means higher TC. That makes us even less competitive than we already are. Or, more likely, employers will adjust wages downward to keep TC about the same as before. Of course, not every employer will do this right away, but the more competitive the sector, the more necessary such downward adjustment will be. Some employers will hire fewer workers and squeeze more work out of 'em. (How can that be? Aren't we a bunch of cellphone slaves as it is?) Some might demand higher cost-sharing for health coverage (oh, joy). Things have a way of working through the system. And, if they don't squeeze wages down, that's just more unemployment due to our even more evolved inability to compete globally.
Bottom line for me is that it's better to keep things as they are. If we want to subsidize workers without such benefits, we can do it through the myriad programs we already have to augment their incomes (earned income tax credits; subsidy programs; unemployment benefits, etc.) Mandates on employers, especially small businesses, are not the way to go right now, and perhaps right ever.
Do I sound like a Republican? Jeez! Either way you come out on this, you can weigh in with your congressman in minutes. Here's how.