TRENTON, N.J. – New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie may soon have an important decision to make: follow the lead of state Democrats who want to require all business to offer paid sick days, or veto the bill some believe to be a “job-killing government mandate.”

Christie told the media he has “grave concerns” about a bill that recently passed the Assembly Labor Committee that would require all businesses in the state with 10 workers or more to allow employees to earn at least 72 hours of paid time off for sick leave, or to care for ill family members, NJ.com reports.

The bill would require business with fewer than 10 employees to allow workers to earn at least 40 hours of paid sick leave for the same purpose. The bill also contains provisions that would require the paid time off to be approved for those dealing with domestic violence, according to the news site.

MORE NEWS: Know These Before Moving From Cyprus To The UK

The measure is being promoted by labor unions and liberal advocacy groups at the state and local level. Similar provisions to the state law have already been approved in Newark, Jersey City, Paterson, Passaic, Irvington and East Orange, while Montclair and Trenton put the issue before voters in the upcoming election, according to NJ.com.

Assemblyman Parker Space opposed the measure in the Labor Committee, where it passed by a vote of 6-3 along party lines.

He described the bill as a “job-killing government mandate on businesses” that New Jersey can’t afford.

“We can’t keep piling on the already high cost of doing business in this state and wonder why nearly 300,000 people are out of work,” Space said, according to NJ.com. “Small businesses need flexibility in order to do what they do best – create jobs.”

Christie has said he believes the bill would make New Jersey “less competitive for businesses,” but hasn’t indicated whether or not he’d sign the measure into law if it reaches his desk.

Business advocacy groups largely oppose the bill and “said it would only further burden companies and small employers still struggling to recover from the recent recession,” NJ.com reports.

MORE NEWS: How to prepare for face-to-face classes

New Jersey Democrats, which control both chambers of the state legislature, believe everyone should be entitled to paid sick time.

“Workers should not have to choose between caring for their health and keeping their paychecks or jobs,” said Pamela Lampitt, a Democrat assemblywoman and a sponsor of the bill. “Guaranteeing workers the ability to earn paid sick days would help ensure workers do not have to choose between their health and their economic security.

“New Jersey should be a leader in the fight for this common sense, pro-worker policy,” she said, NJ.com reports.

California and Connecticut are the only two states that currently require employers to provide paid sick leave. Massachusetts are asking voters about the issue Nov. 4.

Commenter NJCivilJustice pointed out at least one problem with the New Jersey bill that’s currently not part of the discussion: “As drafted, this paid sick leave bill would create unprecedented liability for New Jersey’s employers and make NJ the only state where an employee can sue over the paid sick leave requirement.

“Under A2354, an employer who does almost anything related to paid sick leave, including simply informing any person about the availability of paid sick leave, gets a 90 day window during which any adverse employment action is presumed to be retaliatory. If an employee files suit during that 90 day window, the burden is on the employer to prove in court that the action was unrelated to the employees’ sick leave-related activity. It is not even clear that reassignments to meet business demands would be lawful under this legislation, since “retaliatory action” is defined to include even an unfavorable work assignments. Under these conditions, employers would have difficulty effectively managing their employees without generating a lawsuit.

“The expansive scope of potential liability is compounded by the severe penalties that attach to violations of this legislation. Plaintiffs are entitled to actual damages plus an equal amount of punitive damages, plus attorney fees and court costs. The high cost of litigation, and the financial risk of losing the case, mean many claims would settle immediately, regardless of their merit. These costs are all passed on to consumers.

“Disputes over regulatory mandates such as paid sick leave can be resolved more efficiently through agency actions, and more fairly by removing one-sided presumptions. Putting enforcement in the hands of the court may lower the bill’s fiscal note, but it is still a costly policy choice for employers and consumers.”