While there have been cases of private-sector employees losing their jobs because of absenteeism due not only to sickness but from situations stemming from domestic violence, government intervention would be an extraordinary and wrong reaction.

Private business rightfully appeared in large numbers at the Legislature this week to protest legislation to mandate paid sick or safe days off, which would add to Hawaii’s reputation as onerous to businesses, an absurd message during this stage of the economy.

Businesses with fewer than 100 employees or those with collective barganing agreements would be exempt from the proposal, which was approved Wednesday by the state Senate Judiciary and Labor Committee and now heads to the full Senate.

House Bill 341 was introduced in last year’s legislative session but has since added the “safe leave” as a new category.

It would allow each employee to earn one hour of paid “sick or safe” time for every 40 hours worked, with the number of days capped at five per year, identical to the law in Connecticut, which last year became the first state in the country to mandate sick leave for private-sector workers.

Sen. Clayton Hee, the committee’s chairman, said that provision was aimed at helping victims of domestic violence.

Though well-intentioned, it goes far beyond such a circumstance. For example, the bill includes an employee’s need to care for a child whose school has been closed because of a public health emergency.

The Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii and various business interests understandably point out that a “one size fits all” policy is not practical for many companies and could be costly.

The Chamber says businesses generally offer sick leave as a benefit for employees but forcing a provision for sick leave “may force many businesses, especially small companies, to reduce or eliminate voluntary sick leave due to the potential abuse of this benefit that could result.” Like anything of this sort, the requirement would raise wages and costs.

The Hawaii Commission on the Status of Women does make some good points in setting a standard for allowing sick and safe leave. It points to U.S. Department of Justice information in 2009 that of the 79 percent of stalking victims who had a job, one in eight lost time from work, and more than half lost five or more work days.

Catherine Betts, the commission’s executive director, pointed to a report that 42 percent of private-sector workers don’t have access to paid sick leave through their employers.

Still, the need for forcing businesses to provide sick leave has yet to be proved; the de facto granting of sick, even safe, leave in many cases may not be in writing, but verbally or on a situational basis. This heavy-handed legislation seems to be a solution in search of a quantified problem.

Connecticut law is confined to service workers in businesses with 50 or more employees. “Sick and safe” leave has been adopted in Washington, D.C., San Francisco and Seattle. That’s it, and Hawaii should not be compelled to jump into what may be the very early stages of a controversial movement at a time when many businesses are struggling to make ends meet.