The Smoke and Mirrors of Unlimited Paid Time Off (bbc.com) 126
An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: Investment-banking firm Goldman Sachs made an eye-catching move last week: it granted unlimited paid holiday to its senior staff. According to a memo seen by a number of media organizations, partners and managing directors will be able to "take time off when needed without a fixed vacation day entitlement." Junior staff were given two more annual days off, and the company said all workers had to take a minimum of 15 days holiday each year.
At first glance, this looks like a positive initiative from a company known for grueling work hours and demanding culture. Unlimited paid time off (UPTO), after all, could allow overworked staff more time to rest and improve their mental health and overall work-life balance. Plus, a generous holiday policy at the top could trickle down into the wider workforce, potentially making for happier and more productive staff on the whole. Yet what sounds like an amazing benefit comes with major caveats. Workers will likely only take a decent amount of holiday if firms create an environment that encourages them to do so. In some firms with UPTO, workers end up taking less holiday -- not more -- because of peer pressure and perceived expectations around 'acceptable' amounts of holiday.
The latest data, meanwhile, shows UPTO isn't the benefit that workers covet the most; rather than an unlimited amount of holiday, most people prize flexibility, including the option to work from home. Is this recently introduced perk the shiny new toy workers have wanted all along -- or is it the gift no one asked for? "With UPTO, workers are not technically owed any vacation days, since there's no fixed number, and everything must be cleared by the boss on a case-by-case basis," notes the BBC. "For workers, establishing what the 'right' amount of paid time off to ask for often depends on observing the behavior of colleagues and bosses. If colleagues are only taking 10 days per year, asking for more could feel inappropriate."
Companies that adopt UPTO, says Peter Cappelli, professor of management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business, have "moved from a model where you accrue it -- so you're actually owed the vacation -- to one where you kind of [have to] ask. And there's nothing stopping your boss from yelling at you if you want to take additional time off -- or punishing you if you do."
The BBC adds, citing Cappelli: "UPTO also removes the safeguards that protect workers' interests if they can't take time off -- there are no leftover days workers are legally required to take by year's end, or carry over to the next year. There's also nothing for workers to cash out if they quit and have days left over, which [...] saves companies money."
At first glance, this looks like a positive initiative from a company known for grueling work hours and demanding culture. Unlimited paid time off (UPTO), after all, could allow overworked staff more time to rest and improve their mental health and overall work-life balance. Plus, a generous holiday policy at the top could trickle down into the wider workforce, potentially making for happier and more productive staff on the whole. Yet what sounds like an amazing benefit comes with major caveats. Workers will likely only take a decent amount of holiday if firms create an environment that encourages them to do so. In some firms with UPTO, workers end up taking less holiday -- not more -- because of peer pressure and perceived expectations around 'acceptable' amounts of holiday.
The latest data, meanwhile, shows UPTO isn't the benefit that workers covet the most; rather than an unlimited amount of holiday, most people prize flexibility, including the option to work from home. Is this recently introduced perk the shiny new toy workers have wanted all along -- or is it the gift no one asked for? "With UPTO, workers are not technically owed any vacation days, since there's no fixed number, and everything must be cleared by the boss on a case-by-case basis," notes the BBC. "For workers, establishing what the 'right' amount of paid time off to ask for often depends on observing the behavior of colleagues and bosses. If colleagues are only taking 10 days per year, asking for more could feel inappropriate."
Companies that adopt UPTO, says Peter Cappelli, professor of management at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School of Business, have "moved from a model where you accrue it -- so you're actually owed the vacation -- to one where you kind of [have to] ask. And there's nothing stopping your boss from yelling at you if you want to take additional time off -- or punishing you if you do."
The BBC adds, citing Cappelli: "UPTO also removes the safeguards that protect workers' interests if they can't take time off -- there are no leftover days workers are legally required to take by year's end, or carry over to the next year. There's also nothing for workers to cash out if they quit and have days left over, which [...] saves companies money."
Not Completely Relevant Here (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Not Completely Relevant Here (Score:5, Insightful)
Many of the issues that come with unlimited paid time off are solved by the other thing that Goldman Sachs did, set a minimum number of vacation days that every employee must take. With the 15 days a year requirement, there's no longer an issue of people not taking the days due to pressure since, instead, there's pressure to take them.
it depends. If its anything like my toxic workplace there are corporate policy then there are corporate policy. the first not only not enforced and have no enforcement mechanism but management actively ignore them and will get you penalized for some other bullshit like low productivity if you take advantage of these policies. then there are the second ones are ones that corporate really cares about and will potential fire you over or if your penalize your boss if they override them. vacation days would probably get shuffled into the first category for anyone of an insufficient pay-grade
Re:Not Completely Relevant Here (Score:5, Insightful)
You Americans ought to demand better. 15 days annual leave is sad.
Re: (Score:2)
7 of the 15 days is a FINRA requirement. Financial markets need to know that there is nobody at the company who could not be out for 7 days in a row and the company not function
Re:Not Completely Relevant Here (Score:5, Interesting)
Gullible folk is why we can't have nice things... (Score:2)
Financial markets need to know that there is nobody at the company who could not be out for 7 days in a row and the company not function
Nearly all my life I've lived next to one graveyard or another. They were all full of irreplaceable people.
Just imagine what would happen to OMG! FINANCIAL MARKETS OMG! should some of those 7-day-people suddenly join all those other irreplaceable people in their quest to beat the horizontal Olympics record.
Now imagine that OMG! FINANCIAL MARKETS BBQs have a fail-safe for such or other, less permanent, forays into horizontal Olympics territory, from comas to say a global pandemic causing everyone to stay at
Re: Not Completely Relevant Here (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Geez, how the fuck do ya'll get anything done?
I mean, with potentially that many people off at any given time for so long...how do you deal with coverage, etc?
Re: (Score:2)
Geez, how the fuck do ya'll get anything done?
Weirdly, we manage. Maybe our identities don't revolve around our work.
Re: (Score:2)
Only because it's legally mandated. In London you get 25 days, plus public holidays. Usually your employer requires you to use a few days around new year, to cover the period between xmas and New Year's Day when they company is closed down.
Re: (Score:2)
Only because it's legally mandated.
That is entirely the point, well done.
If these rapacious corporations are not legally obliged to provide reasonable working conditions they won't. I can just imagine what the arseholes who run Goldman Sachs would do to their staff if they were allowed to.
Re: (Score:2)
Another US worker here. 40 years in the business, and I get 20 PTO days (vacation + sick time). In most years, that works out to one week of actually going on holiday, and the rest divided up between sick days and family obligations.
The problem here is the cycle of mass layoffs. The longest I've ever been at any job before being laid off or switching to a new job because I was about to get laid off is eight years. I'm never able to stay in one place long enough to earn the extra weeks you typically get at 1
Re: (Score:2)
Judging from the (surprising) number of people I've read from here and other polls, about how they actually WANT to go back to the office to work....I'd judge they'd not really want more vacation days as it would lead to having to spend more time with the family?!?!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is a trade-off.
Most Americans have access to "unpaid" time-off:
https://www.bls.gov/news.relea... [bls.gov].
One would say: "Sure, yes, but we on the other side of the pond have access to more 'paid' leave".
That is the trick. The American jobs pay more, and you have the option to get less. But we start from a higher base. Not only median wages are higher here, even the US minimum wage is higher than EU zone (which happens to be in Bulgaria). You can opt to work as much as EU people, and still get a higher wage in to
Re: (Score:2)
Many of the issues that come with unlimited paid time off are solved by the other thing that Goldman Sachs did, set a minimum number of vacation days that every employee must take. With the 15 days a year requirement, there's no longer an issue of people not taking the days due to pressure since, instead, there's pressure to take them.
Except that typically people had at least 20 days vacation and could carry over up to 10.
In practice people will take the 15 if they have to and will worry that taking more will look bad.
"Looking bad" translates into getting downrated on the stack rankings and getting screwed on bonus comp.
Re: (Score:3)
MOD PARENT UP (Score:4, Informative)
Most tech companies have the same policy. And the same catch. The boss has to approve. The goal here is that no vacation is on the books anymore, it's not a liability in the annual reports. But you'll still mostly get the same amount of approved vacation you always did. And I have found that with the unlimited vacation that I am taking fewer days because HR isn't nagging to use them or lose them.
You hit the nail on the head.
While the company didn't officially have a limit, but you can be sure as hell that every manager is responsible to "manage" how many vacation days each employee took so "business is not impacted", which translates to every manager making sure not to approve more vacation days than before. And for some, it could even mean not taking any vacation days all year round.
Re: (Score:3)
Most tech companies have the same policy. And the same catch. The boss has to approve. The goal here is that no vacation is on the books anymore, it's not a liability in the annual reports. But you'll still mostly get the same amount of approved vacation you always did. And I have found that with the unlimited vacation that I am taking fewer days because HR isn't nagging to use them or lose them.
The "not on the books" is key:
If you leave a company, PTO is considered time/money owed to the employee. You have 2 week's worth saved up, you get two weeks pay added to your last paycheck. With UPTO, there isn't any. You quit or get laid off - you get your hours for that pay period, and that's that.
It's just a scam employers dreamed up to enrich themselves and put a pretty bow on it. The problem is, it'll start to spread throughout the industry.
Re: Not Completely Relevant Here (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the state. Not all locations require employers to let their employees cash out. Some large companies hinge cashing out on signing a non disparagement agreement.
That's in order to get a severance package. You do not have to sign anything to get wages earned from hours worked or accrued vacation time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Many of the issues that come with unlimited paid time off are solved by the other thing that Goldman Sachs did, set a minimum number of vacation days that every employee must take. With the 15 days a year requirement, there's no longer an issue of people not taking the days due to pressure since, instead, there's pressure to take them.
Guess I don't feel much for those who might feel pressure from being "forced" to take vacation, since I highly doubt that same individual works 7 days a week non-stop anyway. On top of that, defining the number of days of vacation, doesn't really mean shit unless you're willing to define the terms. Sitting on a beach somewhere with a corporate cellular leash shoved up your ass that hasn't stopped ringing, isn't what I would call relaxing.
A forced vacation policy, also tends to convey the message that bur
Re: (Score:2)
This was done to eliminate the financial responsibility and liability that businesses currently carry when it comes to actual accrued vacation you as an employee, used to be legally owed when you are terminated.
From a financial liability perspective, it's brilliant.
From the human perspective, as many are perched over an obvious cliff and future decline, it's fucking horrific.
Greed once again, doing what it does best. We'll see if people are still supporting this when this loophole becomes infectious and st
Re: (Score:2)
That 15 days is including holidays. Every company I've ever worked at starts out with 13 holidays and 10 paid vacation days with the exception of those that have eliminated sick days in exchange for going from 10 paid vacation days to something like 20.
So, basically, there minimum is the 13 holidays and 2 vacation days. That's ridiculous.
It's pretty much worthless if... (Score:4, Informative)
UPTO is pretty much worthless if the employee can't reliably choose the days they actually get to 'take off' due to requiring the approval of their management chain (who deny them).
My wife has conventional vacation accrual working for a consulting firm. She is currently deployed on a project for a major telcom provider, which frankly is a sh*t show and why they had to bring in outside consultants to fix things. A co-worker of hers has been stuck on a parallel project there for over 3 years.
Since there are always new fires to put out, due to the client's inability to handle pretty much anything, every one of her vacation day requests for the past year so far have been denied, as the client is telling her managers that they need her doing the work of 2 or more people, and her managers value that over her needs.
She has had to take a few sicks days recently, and I suspect job offers coming from other companies may somehow be related to that.... *cough*
Re: (Score:3)
Burning out your most in-demand employees is pretty short-sighted. It either just makes them miserable, or pushes them to find better jobs.
My current job offers standard PTO accrual, a generous amount, and that works fine for me. I almost always have extra PTO, and no one balks at my taking a day or week off when I want, so long as I give enough notice.
Most of us are not ER surgeons. People are not going to die if we take off a little time for outselves.
Re:It's pretty much worthless if... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do ER surgeons fall into a different category?
Their employers should staff the facility enough that a surgeon can reasonably take time off, just like the rest of us...
If someone is at risk of dying because you took time off, thats not your concern, thats your employer failing to plan accordingly.
Re: (Score:2)
Please take that remark as tongue in cheek. The point I was trying to make (apparently badly) is, for most of us, nobody is literally going to die if you don't do your job. i.e. Your job probably isn't as important as your boss seems to think it is. Life will go on, somehow. i.e. it's stupid not to let people take vacation days because you can't see past the latest fires.
Re: (Score:2)
Burning out your most in-demand employees is pretty short-sighted. It either just makes them miserable, or pushes them to find better jobs.
Managers do that because even the managers themselves aren't sure they will be still around in a few years.
That's what you when everyone in the company starting from the top CEO only look at the next quarter, and is willing to fire people for short term gains. Everyone in the command chain have no choice but to sacrifice the long term for the short term.
Re: (Score:2)
Burning out your most in-demand employees is pretty short-sighted.
So?
Short term profit. That's what shareholders want. if you're in upper management, you just need to make sure that you switch your job often enough to the next company where you can get a few more short wins. Call it "career planning"
Re: (Score:2)
So, continuing to screw over your most in-demand employees and watching them all walk out the door without realizing the actual threat to the entire companies' existence? There's a word for that. Call it "Ignorant".
And constant job hopping, is not a "career". That's playing Survivor.
Re: (Score:2)
Adding-
I've had a long string of capricious managers who will decline and reschedule leave at whim (often with no more than a day's notice), even going so far as to explain to them giving leave in alternating minutes satisfies the amount requirement but is personally worthless inless there is some control over it.
Consequently they are way over budget with overtime as people will take leave, paid or otherwise, as circumstances dictate; and can't pull their heads out of their asses to figure out why.
Denying c
Re: (Score:2)
I've had a long string of capricious managers who will decline and reschedule leave at whim (often with no more than a day's notice), even going so far as to explain to them giving leave in alternating minutes satisfies the amount requirement but is personally worthless inless there is some control over it.
A "long string" of such managers. Wow, you are one unlucky guy.
People make plans, buy plane tickets, book time at attractions and venues in high demand and with full schedules. And granting leave in alternating minutes?? That sounds like grounds for a lawsuit that the employee would win.
Re: (Score:2)
Whenever I read accounts like the above, it makes me wonder what is wrong with the poster. I have never had a manager like that in 20+ years working. If you let the manager walk all over you like that and don't move on, it is you that is allowing the situation, not the manager. If you give the manager notice you are not going to be in the office, and they try to cancel, why would you accept that? If it is truly an emergency, fine, than I will delay my departure by a day, but that is a one time thing, no
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting.
Not what is wrong with management who is breaking the law, but what is wrong with the workers.
Thus far, the outcome has been numerous (and on-going) NLRB investigations and even case law that applies nationally. Someone a bit quicker might surmise a portion of management's response has been retaliatory in nature.
Further, while the rugged individualist response might be to just quit, that only kicks the can down the line to become someone else's problem.
You response is as asinine as after being m
Re: (Score:2)
The first time, you are a victim, but as you said:
I've had a long string of capricious managers who will decline and reschedule leave at whim
That indicates a problem on your end, if you have a long string of managers who break the law, why are you still at the company? Why haven't you moved on to a company that doesn't break the law? After filing a lawsuit once, why do you put up with it instead of pointing the manager at the law and telling them you are leaving on vacation?
Yes, I blame you, I blame you because you have failed to stick up for yourself, as you report, many times, not just once,
Re: (Score:2)
UPTO and PTO is no different in that regard. Unless it's a sick day, vacation always (at least at almost all employers) needs to be approved. Managers need to make sure they don't have their entire teams taking vacation at once. Project schedules need to be able to accommodate worker PTO, backups need to be in place in case of emergencies during planned PTO (can't have the only two people that know X on PTO at the same time), etc. Just because you have 80 hours of PTO does not mean you can just say, "I'
Re: (Score:2)
Depends (Score:3)
I guess it depends on the company. My employer didn't roll over vacation. They would pay you out when you leave, but they don't pay you out at the end of the year. It was a use it or lose it deal. However, at the beginning of the year, you had gotten 3 weeks immediately rather than accruing time.
We went to an unlimited PDO policy in 2021. At first I thought it was a sham, but I take so many random days that it has changed my mind. If I had a flat tire, I'd just take the day off instead of returning to work after getting it repaired. I work remote 100% so technically tha'll never happen again. I now schedule doctor visits during working hours. I'll take 1-2 hours here and there every few weeks for errands. People with children can leave and pick up their kid whenever, and they won't work late to make up time.
The company's policy for managers is to not count how many days you've taken. So managers cannot hold it against you if you take a lot It's only if you are not getting work done, then they start to review your performance. In the world of IT, this usually isn't a problem unless you're understaffed. In which case you're probably going to hate your job even if you had fixed PDO days.
Re: Depends (Score:2)
Unlimited (Score:2)
I worked somewhere that had the unlimited time off option, it was tempered with unlimited time on. It did provide flexibility. When my wife had a baby I was asked to return to the office after 1 week off for the baby. Somehow that unlimited time on always won and I don't work there anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
I once answered a job ad that said that they "work hard and play hard" which I thought sounded great, because I was young and single and up for some hard playing.
Of course they didn't play at all, and the boss expected everyone to be available 24/7.
He couldn't understand why they had such high staff turnover either.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I hear that line and I'm immediately translating it to "You work hard so I can play hard".
Re: (Score:2)
Been there. It meant they supplied beer with your pizza on late work nights (nearly every night).
Re: (Score:2)
And then they cancel UPTO (Score:2)
and then you're left with no time off according to your contract.
I do not want this (Score:5, Insightful)
It quite obvious that "unlimited". doesn't mean you can take 365 days a year off. Clearly that they aren't going to put up with that. It's also obvious that zero wouldn't be appropriate.
Other than that, it's a fucking mystery how many will be considered appropriate. For me, I prefer to be clear up front about it. Let's make a decision about how much is appropriate and actually say it out loud, rather than having people guessing - and my boss guessing differently than I do.
Even with the traditional method of saying it out loud, my boss still can (and does) occasionally tell me to take the day off and not submit it, either to offset a long day or to recognize and reward achievement. Being explicit about your policy rather than making people guess still leaves flexibility when it's needed. It just avoids having to guess in typical situations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The people I know whose companies have done this have NOT been happy.
Yep. My old company did the unlimited thing, and then it became a joke at the water cooler with people shaming other people for taking too much time off.
From my experience" (Score:4, Interesting)
During the hiring process, they made a big deal about "unlimited time off", with a guaranty of three weeks.
I had been there for 7 months and had been through a review cycle. During that cycle it was made obvious that management above my manager thought that I was a "keeper"
When I put in a request to take a one week (the only week that I had off in a year) for a family raft trip through the Snake river in Oregon/Idaho, my completely dysfunctional manager strolled into my cube and informed me that I would need to put in more "unpaid overtime" if I wanted that week off.
I said, and I quote "Jeff, you are a fucking idiot, get the fuck out of my cube". way not for the first time.
"I then went to his manager, who sat kitty-corner from me in the cube farm and said "Kurt, I am taking this time of and the only question is whether I am coming back next Monday.
He said, "Take what you need".
I quit that job after exactly 365 days from my hiring date. Went to work for a high end consulting firm in Beaverton with the understanding that I would never be rented out to Intel.
Three months later, started our business with HP in Corvallis, Oregon. 6 months later, after the whole project at Intel had imploded due to bad, stupid, arrogant, bullying management, the poor foo who inherited the mess (who I knew to be a decent guy) called my boss at UDP and said "It seems that Jim Bertling (me) is the only one who really knows what was going on the IFICS project, can we get him at any reasonable price.
My boss answered no before we even discussed it.
Moral of the story, money talks, bullshit walks.
Any perk must be evaluated for its potential for abused.by idiot managers/ "
Re: (Score:2)
Makes sense, actually (Score:2)
No more VACATION BALANCE! (Score:5, Insightful)
The ACTUAL corporate value of UPTO is that nobody can carry a vacation balance. No nice bump when getting laid-off or changing jobs. The vacation "account" and its balance are GONE.
Financially, accrued vacation is a significant liability on corporate balance sheets, as funding reserves must be set aside to service reductions in that balance (pay-outs). UPTO zeros that.
Re: (Score:3)
This would be illegal in Canada. In Ontario, where I live, the Employment Standards Act sets out rules for vacation and all employers have to obey them. They can be more generous if they want, but they have to provide at least the minimum.
If the US lacks such laws, then it's time to elect people who will change that.
Re: (Score:2)
This would be illegal in Canada.
In fact, that is illegal in most civilized countries, including most (if not all) of Europe and most Asian countries. Not so sure about Africa and Latin Americas.
If the US lacks such laws, then it's time to elect people who will change that.
Good luck with that. The US follows the Golden Rule: whoever has the gold, rules.
Re: (Score:3)
Happened to me. The company I worked at got acquired by a US company. Apparently not all the due dilligence was done because there was significant accrued vacation time (I had 40 days, but other
Re: (Score:3)
Happened to me. The company I worked at got acquired by a US company. Apparently not all the due dilligence was done because there was significant accrued vacation time (I had 40 days, but others have had significant amounts as well). So naturally, the first all hands meeting a few months later, everyone got unlimited time off. First question asked (by someone from the US head office) was what happened to the accrued vacation - and the response was it's gone.
In California, at least, that would be a lawsuit. Accrued time off is equivalent to money in the bank. No matter what conditions change, your employer cannot just take it away. The best they can do (for themselves) is force you to take the time off.
Re: (Score:2)
The company that acquired us is in Irvine, CA. So I don't know what happens. I never heard anything about it - I'm guessing they're relying on the ignorance of people to not question it.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn. Now that's what I call nailing it on the head. Didn't even think about the financial liability that has literally been vaporized from the books. My last company did this when they set a cap on accrued vacation. Sick time was also merged with vacation, and morphed into "PTO". I knew then that change was about the balance sheet, but this crap takes it to a whole new corrupt level.
Guess employees should remember that when "planning" for their separation or termination. There is no more vacation "ow
Re: (Score:2)
The ACTUAL corporate value of UPTO is that nobody can carry a vacation balance. No nice bump when getting laid-off or changing jobs. The vacation "account" and its balance are GONE.
Financially, accrued vacation is a significant liability on corporate balance sheets, as funding reserves must be set aside to service reductions in that balance (pay-outs). UPTO zeros that.
Doesn't matter much, all of my vacation balances were capped at previous companies. I have unlimited PTO where I work now, but this is a small company where I feel involved in the work, so I take less time off than I used to as I actually enjoy working.
Re: (Score:2)
And you account for this in your salary negotiation. I know I did. The loss of guaranteed pay was the amount I asked for above the amount they offered. Worked out well. I get the money every year and they get their pretty balance sheet.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm giving away 1 billion dollar bag of money (Score:2)
Just don't get bit by all of the scorpions and tarantulas that are also packed in there and do be careful with the small pox and Ebola as well.
Yes, UPTO is a sham (Score:2)
I worked at a company that had an accrued-vacation policy. They got acquired by a company that had an UPTO policy.
The new owners announced that existing employees would need to debit their accrued vacation down to zero before they could participate in the UPTO program.
Do you see what they did? Understandably (from their perspective) the acquiring company wanted to retire the debt on the books represented by all of this accrued vacation. However, they insisted that existing employees effectively pay for thei
“Unnumbered” Paid Time Off (Score:2)
sounds like it’s really an unnumbered amount of days, rather than “unlimited”, according to the summary.
Unlimited = No Guaranteed Time Off (Score:3)
It converts time off from something you earn, and have a right to use, to being a favor you have to ask for. Executives go for this because it eliminate vacation pay-out when staff is reduced or people are "let go", and makes taking time off risky - a possible motivation for firing in the many states with at-will employment. Instead of being a contracted condition of employment, it becomes a lever against people.
The consulting firm I work for gives time off, and both encourages and requires you to take it too (capping accrual) since people actually need time off to be productive over the long haul.
Why not both? (Score:2)
"The latest data, meanwhile, shows UPTO isn't the benefit that workers covet the most; rather than an unlimited amount of holiday, most people prize flexibility, including the option to work from home."
My company offers both. I can (and do) work from home and we also get unlimited PTO.
I get to take multi-week vacations but it's also nice to (also) be free to just take a few days off here and there whenever I feel like it.
Still triying to figure out ... (Score:2)
What the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has to do with this? Did someone patent this scam?
Unlimited time off doesn't work (Score:2)
UPTO - ZPTO == FAIL (Score:2)
Bad stats, bad logic (Score:2)
When people have an example of something not working, they tend to argue that it can't work.
Unlimited vacation can work, and in a link from the article there are details from the Netflix CEO what it took to get it to work. (Here: https://www.inc.com/justin-bar... [inc.com])
The Goldman Sachs policy that starts the article also doesn't sound bad.
So opposing this idea seems stupid to me. It's a good idea. Sure, like most good ideas it needs to be regularted, because there will be those who don't understand it or deliber
Regulation? (Score:3)
Sounds like the US needs some decent regulation in that area, too ... (worker-friendly regulation seem scarce and far between anyway)
Where's the problem to have - just like minimum wage - a minimum of paid leave time? E.g., Germany has a minimum of 24 days/year for full-time employees, with additional days for older people. Of course, conservatives & GQP would complain about socialism again, and corporations would complain about instantly going bankrupt if that were introduced (while paying out [mb]illions to stock holders at the same time)
Reduces financial liability for the company (Score:2)
Out With the Old (Score:2)
The young guys are ousting the "elderly man yells at crypto" guys.
They'd rather be on the links.
Unlimited PTO is a scam (Score:2)
With traditional PTO (or Paid Time Off) workers are granted paid time off either in a lump sum at the beginning of the year or more typically accrued on a monthly basis. This accumulated PTO goes into a "bank" where it sits until you use it. If you don't use it all by the end of the year most places will allow you to carry it over to next year, although there is usually a limit to how much you can collect before you have to start using it.
Unlimited PTO, in theory, is supposed to do away with the whole notio
Re: (Score:2)
I refuse to work at any company that has an "unlimited PTO" policy, and if my current company were to change over to that, I would be leaving and cashing out my PTO immediately. I'd get a nice $10,000 payout, and then get an increase in salary at my n
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, it feeds into the current narrative about getting something for nothing. Stimulus checks for sitting at home doing nothing. The "government" paying off your student loans. Getting a promotion based on your gender or racial group rather than getting it purely on merit.
Unlimited PTO will be seen by some as an entitlement. Not something you earn by seniority or tenure or just plain hard work. No - it's something given to you just because you are you. The ultimate participation trophy.
Well, those folks ar
doesn't work without predefined work requirements (Score:2)
Company Holidays are Better than Vacation Days (Score:3)
I work for a large institution of higher education. I accrue ~14 hours of vacation time per month (sick time accrued separately), but I almost never take it-- particularly in the pandemic era. There's too much work to be done and it makes for very uneasy "vacation" knowing that everyone else is plugging away making more work while I'm not working.
The post-vacation hang-over has nothing to do with alcohol and everything to do with the 600+ emails in one's inbox after returning from a week of vacation.
The BEST paid leave are paid holidays-- Memorial Day, Thanksgiving (and the Friday following), and the like all provide ACTUAL rest because the campus is shut down. We have something like 14 paid holidays on my campus and I consider those days at least 300% more valuable than vacation days.
Does anyone here actually work? (Score:2)
I did. First, this is *senior staff* only. The rest get a measly TWO EXTRA DAYS. Wow. In the US, we get (if we're lucky) 10 vacation days/year. Everyone else has more, from Canada with 14 days up to five weeks for France.
Meanwhile, are they going to get to take those days? "Sorry, we need you, upper management gave us this impossible deadline, and we'll be here until midnight for the next two weeks."
*Salaried" used to mean "you worked till you'd gotten done what you needed to do that day, and then you could
Just call it a lunch break (Score:2)
Re:Even commies have to work. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
They might be shocked at how much better the average German or French person has it (for example).
Re: (Score:2)
While it would be nice to have that much time off....
I can't imagine you get as much done as we do in the US.
I think ya'll add on parental and sick leave on top of that 20-30 days don't you? Plus holidays?
Seriously curious.
Re: (Score:3)
I can't imagine you get as much done as we do in the US.
Why would that matter to you? I work for a vast American owned corporation that made more than $1 billion in profits last year and also spend nearly $500 million buying back shares.
They have offered us a 2.5% pay increase this year, which is a huge drop due to what inflation is doing.
What possible motivation could I have to do more for them?
Re: (Score:2)
I get 15 days vacation (with a bank that can hold 30) and 11 formal holidays. Nine years in and it goes to 20 days.
Do the Germany/France numbers include holidays or just vacation?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That was my expectation but am not super familiar with European holidays. Thanks for confirming my suspicions.
Re:Even commies have to work. (Score:5, Funny)
Yes the well known communist firm, Goldman Sachs.
Re: (Score:3)
Or just remember that old commie called Ford who paid his workers twice the standard rate because he thought it would boost his production ... and it did!
Re: Even commies have to work. (Score:2)
Funny that Communism is about work. And even better, you are forced to work and you often you don't get to pick the job you are assigned to.
The meaning of "commie" has become so dilluted like the word "nazi".
Re:"The Beating of a Liberal" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"The Beating of a Liberal" (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm guessing that, in your fantasy world, there are no liberal Marines?
Or no Marines with honor, ethics and morals who have pledged to defend the country, all its people and The Constitution -- including the 1st Amendment -- and don't just beat up people for funzies. This stupid meme says more about the moronic troll who keeps posting it -- over and over again -- and who thinks it's funny, meaningful or even accurate, than any one/thing else -- especially The US Marines. I'd speculate on the various probable characteristics of this person, and his almost certain chronic erectile dysfunction, but we all have a pretty good idea of what those are. Don't feed the troll...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: "The Beating of a Liberal" (Score:2)
I wonder how a real Marine would react to the drek you posted here.
"Outlook not so good"..for YOU.
Re: (Score:2)
Many folks also missed the entire point of this, which is significantly reducing financial liability.
If you're worried that the "little folks" won't be able to participate, I'd say give it a week or two. Greed will realize how much liability sits below the executive ranks soon, and they'll want to eliminate that before the obvious decline happens.
That massive downsizing will cost a HELL of a lot less when you don't owe any employee anything when you fire them.