Looking at it from a labor law perspective we can look at what other countries have done. Sweden for example do not provide any paid grieving period, but labor laws does give a right to take a leave of absence. Unions often extend this to paid leave, but also limits it to a set number of days, and often the amount seems to be a single day for the funeral.

What I have seen for actually grieving is that either people go back to work or they go to a doctor and get diagnosed with acute stress or depression because of the situation. I suspect that if the case in the article had occurred in Sweden then that is what actually would happen and the person would have got a few months to recover.

That doesn’t speak to why the employer should do this rather than government.

When employers provide this social good they will inevitably call some of the shots; why should their voice have influence on this matter?

To me, this is similar to the public coming to the feeling that digital public spaces are worthy, but then the conversation turns to whether Facebook should be the one doing it...

The employer has to do it because they're the one who employs the person experiencing the loss. If this guarantee is written into law, then the company's voice will not have much influence on the matter. This is how labor law works.

You only have to look at worrying trend of declining minimum wages in very many developed countries to find employer exploitation is alive and well.

My preference would be for law makers started with laws that forced companies to give theirs workers a fair days pay for a fair days work.