Disconnecting Completely While On Vacation?

vonsneerderhooten asks: "This summer, I took a week-long vacation, left my cell phone at home and enjoyed the liberation of being completely disconnected from the (working) world. Recently, I came upon an article stating that many people don't take vacations longer than a long weekend. Worse still, a majority are worrying about work, calling the office and checking e-mail. How far removed are you when on vacation? To what lengths will you go to make yourself (un)available?"

Comments

Re:Weekends aren't vacations.

[denebian devil]

I can not imagine NOT taking 2-3 weeks off each quarter for a real vacation. What prevents people from doing that? I hear it from friends who are overworked (usually because they are over-indebted): they can't leave because they'll miss something important at work. I never heard of this before because I always make sure that my future replacement in my position is trained for handling any emergencies when I am gone. I guess too many people are too protective of their position -- this usually means they see the future as a dead end or they see their abilities as plateaud. In this case, not taking a vacation really means they are just trying to hold ground.

I think what usually prevents people from doing that is that most people do not receive 50 vacation days per year, which is what would approximately be required to take four 2-3 week vacations every year. Most people don't even get half that number of days, especially not until they either a) reach the upper echelons, or b) work at the same company for years/decades.

Lucky you!

Re:Weekends aren't vacations.

[gigne]

If your life doesn't allow for it, what are you doing even bothering to live?

Thanks for the encouragement, please excuse me while I hang myself.

Are your monthly expenses so big that you can't pay them for 24 months with zero income?

Is this the fabled 2 year buffer in the bank account? I don't know any one person who doesn't have to work the arse off to make enough money to live. I agree that some people spend more money than needed on non essential items, but competition in the market is so great that even cutting those out (internet/tv/phone) makes little difference. If I got rid of non-essentials, I would cut my (admittedly higher than average) income by little more than £100/m That would take me approx 18 years to make that two year buffer.

There are some eye opening statistics here http://www.poverty.org.uk/summary/key_facts.htm

Unless you earn the top brass money, you have to live as the cash flows in.

Back on topic... The above is related. People put so much emphasis on work because it is their lifeline to living. If you can afford to let your work ethic slip, then you either don't care about income, or are too rich to worry. When I go away I have to at least check my phone messages once a day, even with the trained monkey in my place things can still go wrong. It's a tragic fact of society that things need to be fixed yesterday, unfortunately this seeps into holiday time.

My 2p

Are none of you system administrators?

[greenmars]

Reading the comments here about turning off your cellphone, not checking email, etc., makes me wonder if there are any system administrators reading this thread.

My peace of mind is dependent on 16 servers in a server room. If all of those are working, then it's my executive director's wireless connection I have to worry about. In fact, anyone at work with a laptop is bound to have a network "problem" once a week, usually having to do with switching between home, hotel, work, etc.

Some day, I'll find a reliable "number two" person, but until then, it's 24-7. Real vacations are a distant memory -- 20 years ago during college summers.

I'm glad your company isn't a provider of mine ...

[debest]

.. because personally I wouldn't want to do business with an outfit that would fall apart because of the absence of a single employee. That is what would happen, isn't it? Your presence is critical to the operation of the business, and if a "problem" occured while you were unavailable, the entire operation would crumble. Right?

No? You mean that you would, in fact, be able to leave for a week and come back to find the building still occupied by employees, phones still ringing, sales still being made, etc.?

Face it: you're not THAT important. If you were hit by a bus, you'd be replaced. Business would continue without you. If they can replace you in that circumstance, they can figure out a way for you to have a vacation. The fact that they are not indicates you like never having a vacation (you're a control freak), or you don't like it and your "executive director" and his coworkers are abusive dicks for not allowing you to arrange vacation time.

Either way, your company is being very shortsighted, and cannot see that they are going to be sorry when you *do* stop working there (regarless of the circumstances of your departure). True, you're not irreplacable, but they're still going to be hurt by your not having an effective team under you.