A proposition to mandate paid sick days for workers caring for family has sparked a face-off between traditional foes - unions and business organizations.

Supporters are presenting the legislation as a moral and family issue.

"It will be more just," said Tim Sullivan, for AFLC-CIO Massachusetts, which supports the legislation. "This is a family value. You can't make workers choose between a paycheck and taking care of their family or themselves."

The bill filed by state Sen. Patricia Jehlen, D-Somerville, and by state Rep. Kay Khan, D-Newton, in January 2007 would require Massachusetts' public and private employers to provide seven paid sick days a year.

The days could be used in case of illness, routine medical appointment and absences for domestic violence victims. They can also be taken to take care of a sick family member.

The Labor Committee reported favorably on the bill in late April. But opponents say that it would only add another burden on an already weakened business community.

"We are trying to create jobs in Massachusetts and this is another barrier," said Rep. Jay Barrows, R-Mansfield. "Here is another mandate whereas we haven't recovered the jobs lost in the last recession. I think this is poorly timed."

The bill's proponents say that workers shouldn't have to worry about losing a day's pay if they can't go to work because they are ill or need to take care of a family member.

"There are certain basic human rights that everyone should have, like being able to get sick or care for your family," said Rep. Steven D'Amico, D-Seekonk.

They also say that the legislation would reduce the spread of illnesses at work.

"We hear about health care costs all the time," Sullivan said. "If people go to work sick, they spread the disease. In terms of productivity, businesses don't lose. It will be better."

Opponents, including Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the state chapter of the National Federation of Independent Business and the majority of Republicans legislators, say negotiation between workers and their bosses is the best way to deal with paid sick days. They say that such a mandate would harm the business community, already struggling with an economic recession, increasing health care and energy costs.

"When you're heading into a recession, you don't increase the costs of businesses," said state Rep. John Lepper, R-Attleboro.

Lepper said the bill would be especially difficult for small businesses. He said that even if he considers such legislation to be beneficial for individuals, he thinks that now is not the best time to implement mandates on businesses. Barrows, who employs nine workers in his insurance company, said it needs to be left up to employers. His company offers six paid days per employee per year.

"Many businesses already do so," he said. "It will be especially difficult for small companies. Being in business, open six days a week, we need all hands, but we understand when people have to go."

State Rep. Betty Poirier, R-North Attleboro, said it is unreasonable to put such restrictions on employers, especially since the bill applies to all companies, whatever the number of employees.

"It would make sense if it applied to companies above 50 employees, but this is ridiculous," she said. "You could put somebody out of business."

She also said that such a measure could lead to abuses from employees.

Unions and legislators in favor of the bill say the mandate would provide a fair balance between employer and employee rights.

The bill specifies that employers may require a medical certification for an absence over three consecutive days and that they would not be required to provide more than the seven days mandated in the legislation.

Employers won't have to reimburse the unused paid sick days to an employee when he leaves his job.

Supporters also underline the fact that the vast majority of industrialized countries mandate paid sick days, unlike the United States.

"The U.S may be the only country on the planet that doesn't require paid sick leave," D'Amico said.

Alison Earle, a doctor at the Harvard School of Public Health who testified for the bill, conducted a study that found there are 156 countries across the world providing paid sick days to employees. Among them, 147 countries provide paid days for 10 or more days.

There is no federal law in the United States requiring employers to provide a certain number of paid sick days to their employees. It is left to the discretion to the employer. Paid sick leave is usually negotiated between employers and employees.

No other state in the country has adopted such legislation, but several legislatures have such a bill under study, including California, Washington and Minnesota.

U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and U.S. Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro, D-Conn., have introduced similar legislation at the federal level, the Healthy Families Act. It would require employers with 15 or more employees to provide seven paid sick days.