Vacation. 1-days vs weeks

Parkanzky · Mar 1, 2015

ustmd said:
The minimum 1 week off policy is to force you to use your PTO. In addition to some of the other reasons already mentioned:

1. The company could be truly interested in your well being and wants you to take at least 1 week away from work per year for mental health reasons.

2. Depending on the structure of your company and the state laws, unused PTO time is a liability for a company--like an unpaid bill that could come due at any time. Consequently, the company must hold an accrual (cash in the balance sheet) for the liability. In a large company, this can tie up a lot of cash very quickly (ex 1000 employees, average salary of $1500/week, with 1 week PTO = $1.5 million). By requiring employees to take PTO and limiting carry over PTO, the company can minimize the amount of the accrual.

The company I currently work for is fairly generous with vacation time and used to have no limit on the amount that people could roll over. There were people that had been there for 25-30 years that barely took any time off who had over six months each of vacation and comp. time! Over a year of PTO in the bank!

The company sent a note out saying that the purpose of vacation time was to help people to maintain their work-life balances and that it was meant to be taken. Now, you can roll over two weeks on your anniversary date each year. If you rolled over two weeks last year, then you have to take everything you get this year. Anything you have in excess of the two weeks gets paid out at 50% of your salary. That's important, because it's meant to encourage people to use their vacation time for what it is intended for, and not as additional salary or a savings account.

vtsnowedin · Mar 1, 2015

I think the one solid week rules came from union negotiations with the auto industry back in the 1930s and 40s. It gave a union worker that had moved to the job time to ride the trains back home for a real visit with the folks. Not only did you have to take it but management had to give it to you. Assembly lines being what they were then it was often easier for the whole line to be shut down for a week and not try to cross train fill in people. I used to work for State government and a one week rule was in the books but never enforced. You earned a day and a half a month and could take a day or part of a day anytime with approval but they would look unfavorably on you if you took time off during the construction season. I'd save up time and use it on winter weeks with a holiday in it so it only took four days vacation time to have nine days off. Then they made the day after Thanksgiving a holiday as well so it only took three days to get the last nine days of deer hunting off. You could also take a day off on a snow day and save yourself a hundred mile commute in dangerous driving without having to pretend you were sick. I was careful to use it slower then it accrued until I had the balances up to the max allowed and when I retired they paid me for all the annual leave etc and 375 hours of the 900 sick I had on the books. About $22K in all that counted on my highest years computation for my retirement determination.

2LaneCruzer · Mar 1, 2015

I worked for the state for 18 years, and had four lawyers and a legal secretary reporting to me. The only rule we went by was the rule that we have all bases covered. We had regular staff meetings, so we all knew what was going on, what reports were due and what meetings or hearings were scheduled. I treated them like professionals and they came through in the same manner.

nybirdman · Mar 1, 2015

I'm glad I retired and don't have to put up with that hassle any more.Our vacation time was determined (when you could take it) by seniority;kind of sucked until you got into that position.
My last 17 years working was in an industrial plant and had"vacation"time before that it was 25 years of construction and your vacation was when you were laid-off.
I took any and all I could;we had a lot of folks that never took vacation;took the money instead.

LD1 · Mar 2, 2015

ustmd said:
The minimum 1 week off policy is to force you to use your PTO. In addition to some of the other reasons already mentioned:

1. The company could be truly interested in your well being and wants you to take at least 1 week away from work per year for mental health reasons.

2. Depending on the structure of your company and the state laws, unused PTO time is a liability for a company--like an unpaid bill that could come due at any time. Consequently, the company must hold an accrual (cash in the balance sheet) for the liability. In a large company, this can tie up a lot of cash very quickly (ex 1000 employees, average salary of $1500/week, with 1 week PTO = $1.5 million). By requiring employees to take PTO and limiting carry over PTO, the company can minimize the amount of the accrual.

1. Not true. They dont make us take it. (but if we dont, we loose it). If they really cared, they would force us to use it but they dont. They could care less.

2. Not sure how/why they would have to have cash tied up to cover my vacation. Its the same amount paid to me weather I work, or take a vacation. We are not allowed to just be paid and NOT take the day off. (no selling back vacation). And not allowed to roll it over either.

What brought this up is that this rule has been in place for a very long time. But it was never enforced. Until this year that is.

Parkanzky · Mar 2, 2015

LD1 said:
2. Not sure how/why they would have to have cash tied up to cover my vacation. Its the same amount paid to me weather I work, or take a vacation. We are not allowed to just be paid and NOT take the day off. (no selling back vacation). And not allowed to roll it over either.

It's considered a liability on a company's balance sheet. That vacation time is a benefit they've given you. It's money they'll have to spend for which they won't get any work in return.

At least where I've worked, if you leave the company and you aren't "fired for cause," then you are paid for the balance of your vacation time. I knew people that retired and received over six months' salary in their last paycheck.

paulharvey · Mar 2, 2015

Does anyone still have a vacation buy back? I know there used to be lots of companies that would buy back up to 40 hours once every 6 months. Worked great, you could sell back a weeks worth at Christmas time and summer time, so you had some cash to actually enjoy any time you actually had left. I know I generally don't have the spare money do do much when ever I actually have time off; and on the Rare time I have spare cash (is there really such thing) I'm working 60+ hrs a week for months on end.

As a variation; a lot of paving companies will shut down 1 week at 4th of July and a week between Christmas and new years. It helps eliminate all the scheduling problems, and superintendents and higher would get a third week worth to use the rest of the year (but probably better not try to use it all at once)

LD1 · Mar 2, 2015

paulharvey said:
Does anyone still have a vacation buy back? I know there used to be lots of companies that would buy back up to 40 hours once every 6 months. Worked great, you could sell back a weeks worth at Christmas time and summer time, so you had some cash to actually enjoy any time you actually had left. I know I generally don't have the spare money do do much when ever I actually have time off; and on the Rare time I have spare cash (is there really such thing) I'm working 60+ hrs a week for months on end.

The last company I worked for did. And you didnt even have to request it.

Any unused vacation time was automatically paid out the check before christmas to get it off the books, and to give an nice christmas bonus feeling.

In the event you wanted a vacation day at some point after the payout, if you still had time left (that they paid out) you could still get your days off, just under the understanding that you have already been paid in advance for it.

KennyG · Mar 2, 2015

We encourage people to take a full week off so they can actually get away and relax. We also only allow vacation to be carried over to the next year, after that it can be lost (but in practice is paid) to encourage them to actually take vacation.

On the company side, we don't want to build up large vacation liability on the books and we require more review and approval for vacations over a week long because of the need to plan for project impact.

I think this is pretty normal in non-union situations.