From CBS News/Marketwatch:
Why Americans take only half their vacation timeQuoteAmericans are lousy about taking vacations, and it's not only because the U.S. is the sole industrialized country that doesn't guarantee paid days off.
"Fear is still motivating people to not be away from the workplace," even though concerns about layoffs have mitigated since the recession, said Rusty Rueff, a career and workplace expert at employment site Glassdoor.
American workers only used half of their eligible vacation time during the past 12 months, a Glassdoor survey found. The top reason for not taking vacation time was the concern that no other employee could do the job, followed by a fear of getting behind. Seventeen percent of respondents said they were afraid of losing their job.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (http://markholtz.info/rt)
QuoteWhile it may seem as if Americans are more dedicated workers -- that old Protestant work ethic kicking in -- the reality may be more stark. Thanks to technology, which makes it almost impossible to claim you didn't read an email or aren't available via phone, there's a growing sense of fear about taking a genuine, disconnected vacation.
I wouldn't call it "fear", but this is definitely true. In my job, my coworkers know when I am on vacation and know not to call me when I am. But the clients I work with usually do not know when I am on vacation and even if they did, many of them do not have a point of contact other than me and thus would have to call me anyway. This means that if I am taking a week off, I am not at liberty to completely pretend my job does not exist for that time as much as I'd like to, since ignoring a client for a week without even responding to say "on vacation, will deal with this when I get back" is totally unprofessional. Like it or not, we live in a world where taking more than 48 hours to respond to someone is rude, regardless of where you are or what you're doing. Completely unplugging is not socially acceptable.
As for people not going on vacation at all, well...
1) Just because someone has vacation time does not mean they can afford to take a trip somewhere. Some people will take vacation days and not travel, but others will not see a point in doing that.
2) Likewise, there are (shockingly) people who have little interest in traveling even if they could afford to. These people may similarly see little use for vacation days.
3) Some people are just compulsive workaholics and shudder at the thought of missing a day of work for any reason. I work with at least one of those.
Also, the actual availability of vacation time depends on more than just the number of days offered. I have it easy: if I want to take vacation time, all I have to do is inform my manager and that's it, it's done. But most companies require that employees put in a formal request for time off on specific days, and that request may be approved or denied. I'm sure you also have people who would
like to take vacation time, but keep having their requests denied because "we're gonna be busy that week, I need you in the office" or whatever. And then you have the banking industry, where demanding that employees cancel their vacation plans at the last minute because something suddenly came up that they need to work on NOW is normal and expected.
QuoteAlso, the actual availability of vacation time depends on more than just the number of days offered. I have it easy: if I want to take vacation time, all I have to do is inform my manager and that's it, it's done. But most companies require that employees put in a formal request for time off on specific days, and that request may be approved or denied. I'm sure you also have people who would like to take vacation time, but keep having their requests denied because "we're gonna be busy that week, I need you in the office" or whatever. And then you have the banking industry, where demanding that employees cancel their vacation plans at the last minute because something suddenly came up that they need to work on NOW is normal and expected.
I think that's a big problem. When I was in grad school, I worked overnights at a hotel. For me to get a night off was nearly impossible- I had to request it like a month in advance, I usually had to train somebody to work overnights in the meantime, and it was often denied anyway. The only way I was able to take time off was when I had maxed out my vacation time, and if I didn't use it I'd lose it, so at that point they basically had to let me take it and they would.
My shift was R/F/S/S overnight, working 4/10s. In the two years I worked there, I was off two Saturday nights and three Friday nights.
Overnights are worst case, but getting time off in the service industry can be quite difficult.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 10, 2014, 12:20:42 AM
In my job, my coworkers know when I am on vacation and know not to call me when I am. But the clients I work with usually do not know when I am on vacation and even if they did, many of them do not have a point of contact other than me and thus would have to call me anyway. This means that if I am taking a week off, I am not at liberty to completely pretend my job does not exist for that time as much as I'd like to, since ignoring a client for a week without even responding to say "on vacation, will deal with this when I get back" is totally unprofessional. Like it or not, we live in a world where taking more than 48 hours to respond to someone is rude, regardless of where you are or what you're doing. Completely unplugging is not socially acceptable.
My former job, as a Federal agency lawyer, did allow some latitude for "unplugging" when necessary, using auto-replies for e-mails and voicemail to let people know when I was out of the office, and also arranging for others in my office to cover for me as needed. Usually I checked for messages once a day, but when that was not possible -- more often when I was medically unavailable than from travel to remote locations -- we found a way to manage.
Of course, it helped that working for the government, I didn't really have outside "clients" to please (except in an ironic sense -- if I had you under investigation, you didn't have a lot of choice in the matter). My friends in private law firms had much tighter electronic tethers, obligated to be available to their clients pretty much 24/7. That was a key reason for my not leaving the government until I retired.
Some of the remote places I visited that had no cellphone/Blackberry/other smartphone reception used that as a marketing advantage, guaranteeing visiting businessmen that they would be pretty much "unplugged" whether their offices and clients liked it or not.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 10, 2014, 12:20:42 AM
I wouldn't call it "fear", but this is definitely true. In my job, my coworkers know when I am on vacation and know not to call me when I am. But the clients I work with usually do not know when I am on vacation and even if they did, many of them do not have a point of contact other than me and thus would have to call me anyway. This means that if I am taking a week off, I am not at liberty to completely pretend my job does not exist for that time as much as I'd like to, since ignoring a client for a week without even responding to say "on vacation, will deal with this when I get back" is totally unprofessional. Like it or not, we live in a world where taking more than 48 hours to respond to someone is rude, regardless of where you are or what you're doing. Completely unplugging is not socially acceptable.
Outlook autoreply + voicemail message with contact info for your alternate isn't sufficient?
Quote from: corco on April 10, 2014, 12:36:10 AM
My shift was R/F/S/S overnight
Shouldn't that be R/F/S/N?
My paid time off accumulates by one chunk of about 10 hours every three months. I have something like 60.3 hours saved up, and I intend to take two one-week vacations this year. Actually that number doesn't seem to have gone up for a while, and I wonder if I'm maxed out.
QuoteMy paid time off accumulates by one chunk of about 10 hours every three months. I have something like 60.3 hours saved up, and I intend to take two one-week vacations this year. Actually that number doesn't seem to have gone up for a while, and I wonder if I'm maxed out.
the accumulation acceleration is very nice. mine goes up 5 days/year for every 4 years of service. (hooray 4 year anniversary in 4 days!) so that's about 1.25 days/year^2 acceleration (and it's also very coarse granularity), while yours is 10 hours/year/3 months which comes out to 5 days/year^2 if I'm doing the math correctly.
a cap of 60.3 hours does not seem correct... one would not be able to take a vacation longer than about a week and a half! my cap is 240 hours, which is a very nice thing to have.
I have a work-assigned smartphone (a BlackBerry, which I hate; I will hopefully be getting an iPhone in a few months) and an iPad. That means I can take calls, answer emails and perform functions of my job no matter where I am.
However, when I am going to be gone, I always make my supervisor and co-workers aware of how reachable and accessible I will be. If I am going to be traveling, I make it known that I will not be able to respond during business hours. More and more states are requiring hands-free use of cell phones, and I don't have a hands-free device for my BlackBerry and won't pay for one out of my own pocket. Also, even more states prohibit emailing while driving and I'm usually on a tight enough schedule that I don't want to waste 15 minutes reading and answering messages. That's what the out-of-office auto-reply is for. I also set my office phone to play an out-of-office greeting and set it to NOT accept messages; instead giving an alternate number for assistance.
I try to make it known that I may be able to take care of business messages in the evening hours, but that's not always the case. In actuality, I've never really been totally unplugged, as occasionally I will fire off a quick reply if I get a chance.
About the only time I've been totally out of contact is when I'm driving in some rural mountainous areas where I don't have cell service.
Interesting that when my company announced it is no longer paying off vacation days over the maximum, so many people scrambled to take days off because they were maxed out. I've maintained a balance of about half of my maximum hours. I conserve days to take a couple of long trips, but I'm never scared about being laid off. Is it odd that I expect to be judged on my performance?
Quote from: realjd on April 10, 2014, 01:01:50 PM
Outlook autoreply + voicemail message with contact info for your alternate isn't sufficient?
My company does not allow us to set up automatic replies on our email, for security reasons.
As for voicemail, I suppose I could change that, but since I would still have to check my messages to delete them (and to make the light stop blinking), it wouldn't really save me much effort. So meh.
Quote from: Alps on April 10, 2014, 11:19:02 PM
I've maintained a balance of about half of my maximum hours. I conserve days to take a couple of long trips, but I'm never scared about being laid off. Is it odd that I expect to be judged on my performance?
No, but all other things being equal, an employee who takes less vacation time is marginally more productive than an employee who uses it all. So if you
know layoffs are coming, it becomes a competition to prove you're more productive than your coworkers in any way you can.
Now, in my office they
actively encourage everyone to use their vacation time, so this doesn't apply!
I suppose I'm lucky. My current employer allows 3 weeks of vacation and unlimited sick time. I use all of my vacation strategically - spring time for waterfalls and backpacking trips, summer sparsely (too hot to camp or backpack good distances), fall for foliage and backpacking trips. My new workplace allows for 3 weeks as well, plus unpaid whenever. When I travel overseas, it's usually a combination of vacation and unpaid.
My coworker is looking at leaving and his new workplace has TWO days of vacation for the first year and FIVE days a year after that. Oh, you can buy an extra five days of vacation after your first year. And turnover at that place is quite high.
Screw that.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 10, 2014, 01:44:32 PM
while yours is 10 hours/year/3 months
No no, that's 10 hours / 3 months, or 40 hours per year. No acceleration.
The reason more hasn't accumulated lately is more likely beaurocratic incompetence, or maybe I haven't "earned" it due to a safety violation (on the part of myself or possibly the whole department).
I spend too much money on my days off. Going on vacation would probably make me broke. I managed to spend well over a grand on just dining out since New Years.
When you don't use your vacation days, you're basically working that time for free. Your employer expects (working - vacation) days of productivity for what they pay you over a year. When you don't take your vacation days, you're adding extra working days back into that productivity equation, but you don't get paid for them.
Ergo, I never let my vacation time go to waste. I almost did once because of a miscalculation on my part, but I managed to get HR to transfer them to the following year, and I took them that year. If I have no vacation plans, I'll use that time off on other things.
I set an auto-reply on my e-mails and a voicemail message every time I leave, telling people to reach my backup in case of an emergency, or wait until I get back. Only one of my colleagues has my cell phone number, and he hasn't ever contacted me during vacation so far.
Anyway, when the end of the year comes closer and I have unused vacation days, my boss will bug me to take them.
I work with the government, so of course they're pretty generous with time off. There's 3 personal days we have to use every year. We can carry over our sick days indefinitely. Our vacation time we can carry over up to one year's worth.
There's many people that use up their entire time ASAP...or at least within the year. There's a few that never use their entire allotment and lose a few days. Me, I don't lose time, but I'm a carry-over.
I've been here 15 years or so. At 12 years, I got 20 days vaca. Last year was the first year I carried over the entire 20 days. I generally carry over about 10 - 15 days a year, but took a little less time off last year, so it allowed me to carry over all 20 days.
A few years back, in December, I had an appendectomy...on my birthday, no less! (Happy Birthday Me!). Because I rarely use my sick time, I took 2 weeks off (sick time) after the surgery to recover, then returned to work. At the end of the year, I still has sick time to carry over from that year alone!
BTW, after that surgery was ONLY time I appreciated full-serve gas in NJ. Getting into and out of the car was a pain. I even paid to park in the closer parking garage the day or two after I returned, just so I wouldn't have a longer walk to deal with.
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on April 11, 2014, 11:21:22 AM
When you don't use your vacation days, you're basically working that time for free. Your employer expects (working - vacation) days of productivity for what they pay you over a year. When you don't take your vacation days, you're adding extra working days back into that productivity equation, but you don't get paid for them.
Yes. I believe it's a federal rule that vacation days are legally compensation, hence the requirement that you be paid for any vacation balance when leaving.
This makes it even more ridiculous that there are workplaces where the culture discourages taking losable vacation days — this is like pressuring someone to return a few paychecks.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 11, 2014, 02:13:43 PM
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on April 11, 2014, 11:21:22 AM
When you don't use your vacation days, you're basically working that time for free. Your employer expects (working - vacation) days of productivity for what they pay you over a year. When you don't take your vacation days, you're adding extra working days back into that productivity equation, but you don't get paid for them.
Yes. I believe it's a federal rule that vacation days are legally compensation, hence the requirement that you be paid for any vacation balance when leaving.
To my knowledge there is no such requirement. Workplaces cash out vacation balances to prevent employees from putting a two-week notice in and then redeeming all of their vacation time before it is forfeited.
http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/workhours/vacation_leave.htm
There is no such law. In fact, the law states that businesses are NOT required to pay employees for vacation time.
Government contracts are different, and states are permitted to have rules that state otherwise.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 11, 2014, 02:13:43 PM
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on April 11, 2014, 11:21:22 AM
When you don't use your vacation days, you're basically working that time for free. Your employer expects (working - vacation) days of productivity for what they pay you over a year. When you don't take your vacation days, you're adding extra working days back into that productivity equation, but you don't get paid for them.
Yes. I believe it's a federal rule that vacation days are legally compensation, hence the requirement that you be paid for any vacation balance when leaving.
This makes it even more ridiculous that there are workplaces where the culture discourages taking losable vacation days — this is like pressuring someone to return a few paychecks.
Bear in mind that Dr Frankenstein is from Canada, where the rules may be different from the rules in the USA or in any given state.
California Labor Law is a bit different from many states in that vacation time is considered part of accumulated wages.
QuoteQ. What happens to my earned and accrued but unused vacation if I am discharged or quit my job?
A. Under California law, unless otherwise stipulated by a collective bargaining agreement, whenever the employment relationship ends, for any reason whatsoever, and the employee has not used all of his or her earned and accrued vacation, the employer must pay the employee at his or her final rate of pay for all of his or her earned and accrued and unused vacation days. Labor Code Section 227.3. Because paid vacation benefits are considered wages, such pay must be included in the employee's final paycheck.
FULL INFO HERE (http://markholtz.info/s1)
Considering how the business currently is for the past few years, I've been stingy with taking vacation time, and now I'm closely monitoring my accumulation so that I don't cap out. It makes approvals a bit easier especially when I give advance notice.
When I first started with my current employer, we would get our vacation time in a single chunk at the beginning of July (start of the fiscal year). Because of the very stringent "use or lose" policy that has always applied to vacation hours that exceeded the maximum carryover limit, many of the senior staff that had accrued a large number of hours over the years would largely be absent for most of the month of June.
This is far less of an issue now since they shifted to monthly accrual of leave time several years ago. Also, the "use or lose" deadline has been changed to the end of the calendar year instead of the fiscal one, and HR gives employees at least six month's advance notice about any "use or lose" balances.
I think vacation time is legally NOT considered to be compensation... in fact, banks consider accrued vacation time to be a liability! At least, that was the explanation the company I worked for gave when they adopted a "use it or lose it" policy... apparently the bank forced them to. Even though the company considered the money for the vacation pay as already spent, the bank didn't.
I've only ever had one job where I had paid vacation time (1 week) so it was easy enough to take.
I'm currently a contractor so I don't get any paid time off. I'm careful about the time I take, but I still take time off for the occasional long weekend and vacation. I need to for my own sanity, to be honest. I went for almost three years without a vacation at one point, and it kept me in a state of perpetual stress. I now include the lost wages as part of my vacation budget.
Mike gets two weeks of vacation at his job, but he isn't allowed to use more than one week at a time. What usually happens is that he uses one week as a full week and the other divided up over the course of the year.
iPhone
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 10, 2014, 01:44:32 PM
a cap of 60.3 hours does not seem correct... one would not be able to take a vacation longer than about a week and a half! my cap is 240 hours, which is a very nice thing to have.
This is probably by design. For workplaces that have employees who are not readily interchangeable, someone missing for a week and a half is annoying but not horribly disruptive. "We need to have Brad look at the project plans before we proceed. But he's on vacation. Remind me to run it by him on Wednesday." An absence of 48 work days (assuming I mathed the 240 hour cap right) can be outright disruptive. And if there's no one else qualified to do Brad's work, imagine what will be waiting for him when he gets back.
I know, I know, you should have a backup employee that can step in and take over if Brad is gone. But occasionally, Brad may be "irreplaceable"–he may have a insightful technical mind, or be an artist with a distinct style. Or Brad could just be one of those guys who keeps everything running smoothly and you don't realize to what extent the company depends on him
until he vanishes for 48 days.
Probably the best thing would be to have a high cap like yours but disallow anyone from spending more than, say 80 hours in one go.
240 hours is six weeks off, or 30 workdays, assuming the company doesn't allow redeeming more than 40 vacation hours per week.
Quote from: vdeane on April 12, 2014, 12:05:37 AM
I think vacation time is legally NOT considered to be compensation... in fact, banks consider accrued vacation time to be a liability! At least, that was the explanation the company I worked for gave when they adopted a "use it or lose it" policy... apparently the bank forced them to. Even though the company considered the money for the vacation pay as already spent, the bank didn't.
If it's not treated as compensation everywhere, it sure is in Massachusetts, where the Attorney General's office has stated in its advisory on the subject, "Vacation payments are wages."
http://www.mass.gov/ago/docs/workplace/vacation-advisory.pdf
"Like wages, the vacation time promised to an employee is compensation for services which vests as the employee's services are rendered."This doesn't mean (at least in Mass.) that accrual can't be capped.
Another reason that I forgot to mention: people probably take less of their vacation time because they are saving it in case something happens. My father worked a local government job and saved up eighteen years worth of time... Which he ended up using when he got really ill back in 1998 with viral meningitis and shingles (among other things). He took the entirety of his time (about a year) at one go and then retired at the end of it.
Most places will not let you do this now, probably because they can't afford it: they basically paid for an extra worker for an entire year at once.
iPhone
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 12, 2014, 02:43:04 PM
I know, I know, you should have a backup employee that can step in and take over if Brad is gone. But occasionally, Brad may be "irreplaceable"–he may have a insightful technical mind, or be an artist with a distinct style. Or Brad could just be one of those guys who keeps everything running smoothly and you don't realize to what extent the company depends on him until he vanishes for 48 days.
Someone's knowledge may be irreplaceable, but everyone is replaceable. You just hope that his technical eye has rubbed off on others. "Bad news everyone: Brad was killed in a house fire. Let's send him an Edible Arrangement and welcome him back in 2 weeks" isn't going to happen.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 13, 2014, 09:15:52 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 12, 2014, 02:43:04 PM
I know, I know, you should have a backup employee that can step in and take over if Brad is gone. But occasionally, Brad may be "irreplaceable"–he may have a insightful technical mind, or be an artist with a distinct style. Or Brad could just be one of those guys who keeps everything running smoothly and you don't realize to what extent the company depends on him until he vanishes for 48 days.
Someone's knowledge may be irreplaceable, but everyone is replaceable. You just hope that his technical eye has rubbed off on others. "Bad news everyone: Brad was killed in a house fire. Let's send him an Edible Arrangement and welcome him back in 2 weeks" isn't going to happen.
Yes, but in that instance you know Brad will never return, and can set out actually replacing him. Most companies aren't in the position to hire a new employee to cover someone for vacation.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 13, 2014, 01:09:30 PM
Yes, but in that instance you know Brad will never return, and can set out actually replacing him. Most companies aren't in the position to hire a new employee to cover someone for vacation.
This is more of an issue with small companies. Larger companies tend to have people that can cover for them. I may be only one of three engineers working on my particular contract, but we have dozens of other engineers working for the same company on other similar contracts, all of whom can be called into service to help out with things outside of their normal work if needed. And I've been on the other end of this myself - I even got paid to take a road trip to Albany. :D
So, when I took two weeks plus one day off at once in the summer of 2012 to drive cross country, no objections were raised.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 12, 2014, 08:28:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 12, 2014, 12:05:37 AM
I think vacation time is legally NOT considered to be compensation... in fact, banks consider accrued vacation time to be a liability! At least, that was the explanation the company I worked for gave when they adopted a "use it or lose it" policy... apparently the bank forced them to. Even though the company considered the money for the vacation pay as already spent, the bank didn't.
If it's not treated as compensation everywhere, it sure is in Massachusetts, where the Attorney General's office has stated in its advisory on the subject, "Vacation payments are wages."
http://www.mass.gov/ago/docs/workplace/vacation-advisory.pdf
"Like wages, the vacation time promised to an employee is compensation for services which vests as the employee's services are rendered."
This doesn't mean (at least in Mass.) that accrual can't be capped.
If it's compensation, then companies should be required to pay the equivalent wage for unused vacation over the cap rather than have it go "poof". After all, the money was essentially spent when the vacation was accrued.
Quote from: vdeane on April 13, 2014, 03:39:24 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 12, 2014, 08:28:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 12, 2014, 12:05:37 AM
I think vacation time is legally NOT considered to be compensation... in fact, banks consider accrued vacation time to be a liability! At least, that was the explanation the company I worked for gave when they adopted a "use it or lose it" policy... apparently the bank forced them to. Even though the company considered the money for the vacation pay as already spent, the bank didn't.
If it's not treated as compensation everywhere, it sure is in Massachusetts, where the Attorney General's office has stated in its advisory on the subject, "Vacation payments are wages."
http://www.mass.gov/ago/docs/workplace/vacation-advisory.pdf
"Like wages, the vacation time promised to an employee is compensation for services which vests as the employee's services are rendered."
This doesn't mean (at least in Mass.) that accrual can't be capped.
If it's compensation, then companies should be required to pay the equivalent wage for unused vacation over the cap rather than have it go "poof". After all, the money was essentially spent when the vacation was accrued.
You're expected to use it before it goes "poof." The regs here, at least, provide for a reasonable system of laying out expectations for how the time will accrue, whether and how it will carry over, and when the cutoff is. If you're not allowed to take the time within the guidelines in the terms of your employment, that's between you and your lawyer and your company.
It's surely little consolation, but it could be worse -- try working for yourself, and figuring out how many unpaid vacation days you should allow yourself. It makes every trip you take much more expensive than it is for vacation-timers.
I know a couple people who used vacation accrual as "layoff protection" by using the maximum accrual amount as the minimum amount they would keep, ensuring an eight week payout should they ever be separated from the company (one of these people was laid off last August and it came in handy during his three month long job search; the other was a workaholic who was famous for working more than 80 hours a week; after the layoffs, he stopped caring and used the vacation accrual rate to work 34 hour weeks.). This worked because the company paid off any additional hours after the accrual cap at the end of each year. Starting this year, that will no longer happen at the instance of their bank.
Quote from: vdeane on April 13, 2014, 03:39:24 PM
If it's compensation, then companies should be required to pay the equivalent wage for unused vacation over the cap rather than have it go "poof". After all, the money was essentially spent when the vacation was accrued.
Again, according to California Labor Law (http://markholtz.info/s1):
QuoteQ. My employer's vacation policy provides that once an employee earns 200 hours of vacation, no more vacation may be earned (accrued) until the vacation balance falls below that level. Is this legal?
A. Yes, such a provision would be acceptable to the Labor Commissioner. Unlike "use it or lose it" policies, a vacation policy that places a "cap" or "ceiling" on vacation pay accruals is permissible. Whereas a "use it or lose it" policy results in a forfeiture of accrued vacation pay, a "cap" simply places a limit on the amount of vacation that can accrue; that is, once a certain level or amount of accrued vacation is earned but not taken, no further vacation or vacation pay accrues until the balance falls below the cap. The time periods involved for taking vacation must, of course, be reasonable. If implementation of a "cap" is a subterfuge to deny employees vacation or vacation benefits, the policy will not be recognized by the Labor Commissioner.
DLSE has repeatedly found vacation policies which provide that all vacation must be taken in the year it is earned (or in a very limited period following the accrual period) are unfair and will not be enforced by the Division.
That's why, at this point, I'm watching my vacation time like a hawk. Since I know the exact rate that I accumulate my PTO, this has allowed me to schedule my days off so that I don't hit the cap.
To me, it would seem that the ethical thing to do would be to pay the time out for anything over the cap. Vacation time is essentially pre-paid wage amounts distributed out at the time you take your vacation, no?
Quote from: vdeane on April 14, 2014, 05:04:20 PM
To me, it would seem that the ethical thing to do would be to pay the time out for anything over the cap. Vacation time is essentially pre-paid wage amounts distributed out at the time you take your vacation, no?
Someone here put it this way: you are getting paid X dollars with the expectation you will show up a full year minus vacation time. Asking for that time in cash because you chose not to take it is like asking for a raise because you never used the bathroom they provided, saving them money on water, cleaning, and wear. Or like staying late to voluntarily work outside your job description and saying it would only be ethical for them to pay you for that time.
If you take the vacation time, you get paid for the vacation days. If you don't take them, you also get paid for them -- you just choose to work on them. If your employer is not allowing you to take them, you probably have a grievance to bring to your HR department if you have one.
It looks as though beaurocratic incompetence was probably to blame for my stunted vacation time accrual. I now have 77.95 hours of PTO saved up, the larger than usual jump suggesting catching up on some overdue hours. This sounds about right; I can't know for sure if I'm missing any because I don't know the formula used to award PTO.
And, then, of course, a story like this comes along. Unfortunately, it has reared it's ugly head again many times. From SF Gate:
State racking up huge debt for employees' stored leaveQuote
California paid more than a quarter of a billion dollars last year alone to compensate departing and retiring state workers for vacation and other leave time saved during their careers, and one public employee topped the list with a $488,000 check.
Data show that 24,000 state employees are banking vacation time while exceeding a state cap on such mass accumulation of benefits, according to a 2013 report by the Legislative Analyst's Office. That's a 140 percent increase from 2005.
And the state's bill is sure to grow, too. The most recent calculation, done in 2012, showed the state owing its employees $3.9 billion in unused leave pay. There are no estimates of what that unfunded liability is today.
The state's cap on banked vacation leave for an employee in most departments is 640 hours, which is considered generous compared with the private sector and other state governments. But managers complain that the cap is hard to enforce because public employees aren't penalized when they exceed the limit.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (http://markholtz.info/t0)
Quote from: ZLoth on April 27, 2014, 04:31:38 AM
And, then, of course, a story like this comes along. Unfortunately, it has reared it's ugly head again many times. From SF Gate:
State racking up huge debt for employees' stored leave
Quote
California paid more than a quarter of a billion dollars last year alone to compensate departing and retiring state workers for vacation and other leave time saved during their careers, and one public employee topped the list with a $488,000 check.
Data show that 24,000 state employees are banking vacation time while exceeding a state cap on such mass accumulation of benefits, according to a 2013 report by the Legislative Analyst's Office. That's a 140 percent increase from 2005.
And the state's bill is sure to grow, too. The most recent calculation, done in 2012, showed the state owing its employees $3.9 billion in unused leave pay. There are no estimates of what that unfunded liability is today.
The state's cap on banked vacation leave for an employee in most departments is 640 hours, which is considered generous compared with the private sector and other state governments. But managers complain that the cap is hard to enforce because public employees aren't penalized when they exceed the limit.
FULL ARTICLE HERE (http://markholtz.info/t0)
640 hours?!? That's nearly 13 40-hour weeks! No wonder California's always broke.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 27, 2014, 09:47:28 AM
640 hours?!? That's nearly 13 40-hour weeks! No wonder California's always broke.
Actually it's 16 full 40-hour weeks.
The easiest solution would be to just not let them accrue above the 640, rather than penalizing them if they do. But in the public sector, that requires union buy-in, so don't expect that to happen without other concessions by the government.
Quote from: Alps on April 27, 2014, 04:45:51 PM
The easiest solution would be to just not let them accrue above the 640, rather than penalizing them if they do. But in the public sector, that requires union buy-in, so don't expect that to happen without other concessions by the government.
Not all public employees are members of a union.
In Virginia, it is illegal for employees of the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions to belong to unions.
I do a lot of work in Virginia, but my employer is based in the District of Columbia.
But that's Virginia. We're talking about California, which is a much more union-friendly state.
It do find it odd, though, that you have a supposed cap on vacation hours, but there is no means of enforcing it. This means that for all intents and purposes there is no cap. So why bother with the policy at all?
Quote from: vtk on April 27, 2014, 01:54:55 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 27, 2014, 09:47:28 AM
640 hours?!? That's nearly 13 40-hour weeks! No wonder California's always broke.
Actually it's 16 full 40-hour weeks.
Yes it is. My math really is terrible in the morning.
CPZ: Thanks for the warning. I'll never apply at V.D.O.T.
VTK: How does your Personnel Dep't have trouble adding up a number that takes 2-1/2 years just to get to 3 digits? Is that because your total is calculated to .95 of an hour? How do you measure that time--punch in at :3 minutes after your start time?
VAL: Your time is actually considerred leave credits. You're paid the same amount whether you're there or not. A check is already made in your name even when you're not there. You just add up all your work hours for the week, then whatever number of hours below 40 you have, you use that many hours of leave time.
ALL: Thanks for your stories. You really make me appreciate the generous amounts of leave time N.Y.S. gives us. The 640 hour Calif. cash-out blows away our's of 30 days, but by and large I get more time off then most of you, significantly more than the younger guys. Part of the reason many people don't use it is a fear (often very legitimate) that they might not have a job to come back to, or the company finds out how well they can get along without them. In the hyper-capitalist society run by Wall St., your time off is just an expense with no return to the bean-counters, and it carries a loss of production with it. Don't ever be fooled into thinking you're a genuine person; you're just a cog in a machine. As soon as they can get a computer to do your work, or a slave to do it for less, you're history. Everyone loves to bash unions, until it's their own job on the line. Unless you're a top executive or you're on the board, where you get to divide up the millions the company saved by axing a thousand guys; then none of this applies to you.
Quote from: CANALLER on May 28, 2014, 02:03:05 AM
VTK: How does your Personnel Dep't have trouble adding up a number that takes 2-1/2 years just to get to 3 digits? Is that because your total is calculated to .95 of an hour? How do you measure that time--punch in at :3 minutes after your start time?
I am on-call, so I have no set schedule. Pay is indeed calculated per minute, and per mile, and possibly per centi-hour for some parts of the paysheet. Why my PTO is awarded in strange amounts rather than whole hours is a mystery, though. (To redeem, I simply fill out an online form to use some PTO to get paid on future days on which I won't be working per agreement with my manager. I suppose I have the flexibility to only use 7.61 PTO hours per vacation day rather than 8 if I so choose.)