Slashdot Mirror
Are American Vacation Policies Outdated?
GiorgioG asks: "Am I the only one who sees US vacation policies as outdated compared to Europe? If I have 3-4 weeks of vacation time, why is it that most companies won't allow you to take more than 1 or 2 consecutive weeks of time off - especially if you aren't performing a 'mission-critical' function. I find it quite frustrating, considering I only want to take 1 long vacation a year (to visit family in Europe.)" This depends, of course, on the types of vacation policies found in Europe and those types found here in the US. So what do both sides of the fence have to say about what they have seen on the other side when it comes to vacation time?
When I was a reporter working on a monthly magazine, I got paid vacation (I think 1 week for the first year, 2 weeks per year after that) but guess what, during the month when I took the vacation I pretty much had to write the same number of words.
Later, when I was an attorney, I got paid vacation time but again, my billable hour 'guidelines' for the year didn't really seem to reflect any weeks off. (Later, working for the same law firm, I switched to a straight model of getting paid per billable hour, instead of a salary, and ever since then I've had no paid vacations at all, nearly 10 years now).
Ultimately, paid vacation is just something you negotiate for, and it's part of the equation for how much your employer thinks it can pay. Unfortunately, vesting rules for vacation days often create a perverse incentive for a manager to actually fire someone (just before the days vest).
I suspect that a majority of Slashdot's readers can really pick their own vacation schedules, and if they wanted 5 weeks of vacation, they'd get it, but they'd get paid 3/52nds less than if they just took 2 weeks of paid vacation, all other things being equal. A substantial minority may work for anal-retentive corporations that won't allow any special cases, even unpaid days off during periods when there is no critical need for that labor.
Sigh. Last September, I took my first real vacation in more than 5 years -- and my first-ever vacation to Europe. Surprise! My week-long vacation was extended to two weeks because my original return flight was scheduled for September 12. I'm sure that 90% of employers would be understanding in that extraordinary situation, though it's unclear how many would give extra paid days of vacation.
I must admit that vacation and days off are less important to me, than for many folks, because I don't have a spouse or kids. Trying to book vacations when there are so many schedules to work with, and when so many "personal days" may pop up to deal with kids' medical needs or competitions or whatever, must be a nightmare.
Finally, my understanding is that the way much of Europe deals with those four weeks of vacation, is that everybody has to take them at the same time, and business essentially shuts down during the month of August. Is that the model we aspire to?
-- http://www.MarkWelch.com/ Pleasanton California
I will point out that this is not necessarily a good thing.
In Europe the countries set the rules for vacations while in the US, the companies set the polices.
More accurately, vacation policies are determined by the market. Most companies give vacation time in the amount to which it will best increase total productivity (taking turnover into account). If you legislate, you risk hurting the companies, who will then hire fewer people. At best, you get exactly the same results as would occur in the market, so why not just leave it be?
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
Heck, the agency I'm with now doesn't offer any vacation time during the first year; you have to borrow against the following year's allotment -- which amounts to two weeks spread out over two years. Ugh.
End result: it's become yet another item one has to bargain for when going through the experienced hire job hop. And you might find you'll need to trade away more than you expected (in terms of salary, perks, etc.) if time off is really that important to you.
Well... at least until the job market opens up some; then it's safe to play a bit of hardball again. =)
You get more spam from hotmail than you do from your school address? I'm guessing Cornell, Brown as backup.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
...we're more or less encourage to take most, if not all our vacation in one large block, usually during July. This so called "industry vacation" usually means that the entire country grinds to a virtual halt during the summer months. Quite distressing really...
Anyhoo, it's of course up to the employer to accept your vacation request, but I'd be surprised if anybody was denied vacation (even five consecutive weeks or more) unless a project depended on it.
Oh, and btw, five weeks is the legal minimum. I've had two employers so far that offered six week vacation contracts.
May we live long and die out
they are outdated. I have worked in three countries (Canada, Japan and the UK), and the policies in North America fall somewhere in between Japan and Europe.
Note that there is considerable variation within Europe itself (ie/ the UK was thought the 'workaholic' of the EU -- strange but true), between Canadian provinces and between US states. Moreover, it would make more sense to speak of a spectrum of vacation attitudes and sensibilities.
To generalise though, there is a stronger work ethic in the US than in Canada and Europe. Calvinist Protestantism at one time was thought to be a prime source (cf. Weber), as well as the free-market capitalist orientation. In my personal experience the European attitude is preferable, as I feel that living in a culture goes beyond the confines of just working, working, working all the time. It is much more in tune with how I would like to be. Others may differ, and that's fair enough.
In all honesty, I'm going back the first chance I get. You *can* have the best of all worlds.
========================================
Death will come, and will have your eyes
-- Pavese
Apologies for antagonistic tone...I read your Stephen Hawking post and your "Slashdot Moderator" lyrics. You will not be placed in ~tps12/foes anytime soon.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
My current job (at a State University) started me at 3 weeks per year, and if I stick around I'll get to five weeks per year. I can bank up to something like 1040 hours (26 work weeks), then it's a use-it-or-lose-it scheme. I also get 2 weeks of sick leave per year, and that can be banked to 1040 hours as well. It's also pretty lax with flex time. If I work a late night or weekend fixing or installing a machine, it goes into a under-the-table vacation bank (sanctioned by my manager, of course), which I use for extra vacation/sick time.
My last job at a small software shop started at 2 weeks per year and you could only bank 4 or 6 weeks before you lost it. There was no distinction between sick and vacation time, just a generic "leave" bank, which was really lame.
I'm getting paid less here (or at least I was when I left the last job), but I feel far better off now.
My plan is to transition to a more consultant/freelance self-employed state over the next 5-10 years, so that I can spend even more time with my kids as they get older (and before they leave the nest).
I guess it's all about your priorities. I know people my age with far different priorities, who take little time off, have no kids, and easily make twice my salary. I know guys in sales (yuck!) that work pretty much when and where they want to.
So here in the States, you have to taylor your job to fit your life goals. The government won't enforce anything more than minimum wage and safe workplaces, which I suppose is fine (I have too much of a libertarian tendancy to expect/want anything more).
Method of processing duck feet
leave conditions etc are generally worked out by industry/company here in australia, and four weeks is the average. i get six weeks because i don't get any public holidays/long weekends.
despite that, i think you'd be hard pressed to find a company where everyone used their entitlements every year.
the lack of leave in the US is really outdated considering the era of 'family friendly' working conditions etc.
However, one might also note that employment % and productivity are higher in the United States than in Europe.
You are wrong on the first point. Comparing a country to a continent isn't right either.. Europe has some truly awful countries in it (economy wise).
Current US unemployment is 5.7% and rising. Current UK unemployment is 5.1% and falling.
mogorific carpentry experiments
I don't know about vacations but I sure could use a good nap.
I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
People do leave their jobs here - in many positions, it's hard to get a reasonable raise unless you change roles or companies / departments. However, there are plenty of people who have been with the same company for 15+ years.
The 3 months off you're talking about would be long service leave, and I believe it's a statutory requirement. I think it might be longer than 3 months though, and I'm not sure it takes 20 years to get it (I think it might be less). I don't know though, as I've changed jobs a few times b/c of changing focus and interest in a pay-rise, so long-service leave doesn't really figure in my decision making process.
4 weeks per year is the legal requirement, plus public holidays (around 10 a year), plus sick days. Figure we only really work 44 weeks a year normally (8 weeks off between public holidays, sick days, and vacation time). You may get paid more in the US, but you *sure* work for it in comparison. In many ways I think the US is quite backwards - Oz and Europe have similar policies towards work (except I think Europe in general is even better for the employee than Oz).
This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time.
I think that it would be good for employers to give employees longer vacations and more time off. But instead of deducting from their paychecks, they should just give them everything and let them save up for their own vacations.
On a slightly unrelated note, you get a wide variety of vaction plans and coffee break styles, even within the same country.
My brother's wife works for a company that gives her around 5 weeks off, and she works in the payroll dept. Apparently, she's quite good. She gets paid a fairly decent wage too.
On the other extreme, I've had low end retail jobs. One time I asked if I could go on a coffee break assuming that I was entitled to 2 15 paid breaks. But the manager wouldn't allow that. She insisted that it all [30 minute lunch + 2 15s] be done at once, and even tried to reduce it.
"Is it alright if I go on a break now?"
"You have to go?"
That didn't sit well with me. Another employer gave an unpaid 30 minute lunch for each 6 hours of work, and an unpaid 15 only if you worked an 8 hour shift. Another employer gave one 30 minute paid coffee for 4 hours of work, another 15 minute paid coffee if there was another 2 hours after that, and a 30 minute unpaid lunch if hours worked totalled 8 hours. That was a unionized company.
As people go higher up the ladder and to better careers they'll get better breaks and holidays in general.
I believe that it would be best if companies asked employees to come in for approx. 8 hours, and paid them for the expected work. It would be entirely up to the employee to budget the time and money according to the employee's needs. If I need 4 hours of break today, and manage to complete the tasks, then lucky me. If not, then too bad. There are days when I don't mind working longer just to have a sense of acheivement. While there are others when I wish that I could relax a bit more and enjoy life.
Negotiating for a new contract every year would give *both* employees *and* employers a better sense of control, and it would allow them both to adapt to the changing winds of the economy.
testing out my trending skills
I personally find that the best solution for me is to stick to contractor type positions, and take a lot of vacation time between contracts. This works well for me because I am single and love to travel and work in different cities.
;)
Naturally, working as a contractor is risky and can be tough in a slow economy. If you're a good engineer, save your money, and can live in a relatively cheap area, it's not too bad, though.
I find it exciting to always be doing something new, work on the latest technology, and take a few months off at a time for some kick-ass vacations.
Your milage may vary.
That all depends on the state. Most states do not have daily overtime limits, only weekly and have no limit on how little or much a salaried person works. Even if it is illegal in the state, there may be exceptions to the rule depending on the industry. California has similar laws to what you've described, but I believe the agriculture, film, and computer industries, among others, are exempt from them.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
The reason is obvious: if you've been cooking the books, you won't want to let them out of your sweaty little clutches, so it's a basic security precaution that you be thrown out of the office every so often, letting somebody else take over your work materials so they'll notice if you've been trying to pull a fast one.
Kind of different from programming, where managers are constantly trying to get you to postpone or skip or shorten your vacations.
In the Netherlands, about 23 days per year is the minimum by law. I've got 31 days, with an option to buy upto 21 extra days, or sell at most 5 days.
:)
You're "expected" to take one big holliday of 3 weeks, but you don't have to. You just have to coordinate with your boss.
When you buy 21 days, you can work 4x9 (instead of 5x8, which is normal), or you can just do 3 vacations of 3 weeks and still take the christmas-week off.
Most IT-jobs are less flexible, just 23 days is often what they'll give you.
Chris
In Germany (from what I heard) the gov requiers people to take a 6 week vacation. I recived a job offer from a German company and took it - 6 week vacation, company BMW (with paid 1000km a month for private use) med and dental.
The downside to all this - I was taxed 55%. I quit after a year becouse I was working for a tax, it was so depressing looking at your statment and seeing all that money go away.
So the moral of the story, in the end you pay for that vacation with your taxes!
hmm... for fun I enjoy launching DDoS attacks against 127.87.42.5
At my place of employment, a University I get 4 weeks leave, which can be banked up to 8 weeks, at which point it sits there and wont go any higher.
I get 15 days sick leave a year.
After 10 years I get long service leave which is 3 months at full pay or 6 months at half pay off.
I can also cash in 4/52th of my pay and have an extra 4 weeks giving me 8 weeks leave per year.
As well we work flex time, and I can flex up to 1 day a week per fortnight (= 2 weeks in Australian)
i.e. work 9 days in every 10.
I do get payed significantly less (approx 25% excluding Super which when added in makes the difference about 10%)
than I would in an industry job, but with 2 young kids, and a Doctor for a wife (who works for her self, and get no paid
leave, its great to have such a flexable job.
Dave...
Here in Canada, the legally required minimum is two weeks, plus 5 sick days (plus public holidays). That's what most companies offer around Toronto.
Quite pathetic, when most countries around the world offer 2 or 3 times that.
You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
I work for a state gov't, and we get a pretty liberal amount of vacation time.
We accumulate one workday (7.5 hours) of vacation per month, plus up to seven bonus days (1 your first year, 2 your second, etc) and can accrue up to 300 hours a year. You get 11.5 hours a month after ten years. Then you get a week of personal time and 5.5 hours of sick time. If you accumulate 1200 sick hours over the course of your career, you can use that banked time to pay for your health insurance when you retire.
The policies for taking time off vary, in some groups its very hard to get large blocks of time, in others its very easy.
People always consider gov't jobs to be low pay, but that really isn't true, if you consider the time you get, the excellent health benefits and great retirement program, you're actually making out pretty good in the end, esp for IT people.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
If they can't cope with your absence for a week, they have serious problems. What are they going to do if you get ill, or run over by a bus, or get a better offer?
Any organization that can't cope with you taking time off it fatally flawed, and you ought to leave before it collapses.
My colleagues are competent, and I have documented as much of my project as I can. They can do without me for a week. They could even, with some difficulty, pick up the pieces if I quit, or got run over by a streetcar.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Now, there have been cases where so-called "exempt" employees were found to be, in fact, non-exempt, because vacation was accrued on an hourly and not diaily basis (more particularly, it was lost on an hourly basis), but such cases were expensive to litigate. The motive was generally scads of back-overtime.
You could've hired me.