[alborzb]

> "part time jobs should have to come with the same benefits as full time, by law."

All this does is eliminate more jobs.

In your hypothetical scenario, a company that hires 2 or 3 people part-time would need to do health insurance for each of them, benefits for each of them and the additional full-time equivalent paperwork for each of them...

In that scenario, the company would end up just hiring 1 person full-time for the hours, and have much less added overhead costs.

This would lead to higher unemployment, because now instead of 3 people being employed part-time, only 1 person is employed.

Where's the good in that? Maybe I'm just not seeing it from my perspective, if anyone else can chime in?

[gkmcd]

Do you know this is exactly how it works in most first world countries already? (except for the health insurance bit, because most first world countries have a public health system). Part-time workers get holiday pay, sick leave, and every entitlement of full-time workers, at a rate commensurate with their hours.