5 ms·

Very common in the US to use sick time for either you being sick of staying home for a sick kid. At one co this causes some friction. Company policy was 20 vac

Very common in the US to use sick time for either you being sick of staying home for a sick kid. At one co this causes some friction. Company policy was 20 vacation days and 10 sick days. A young healthy type guy would use maybe 1 sick day and 20 vacation days, for 21 days off a year. Anyone with kids know they get sick a LOT. So basically anyone with any amount of kids would use all 10 for their kids. So parents go 10 sick + 20 vacation = 30 days off a year. I guess enough people complained that they just combined the two into a single "PTO" pool of 28 days. That way you can take the 28 days if you have kids or not. I guess the downside is people with kids got less vacation, but it seemed bit more "fair" overall.

ncallaway 10y ago
I guess it's more fair if you view someone taking a day to care for their sick child as "vacation". I personally don't view it that way (I say this as someone who doesn't have a child).
- SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
  Having to meet with a lawyer, accountant, etc isnt a "vacation", but I'm expected to use vacation not sick days for those appointments. Arguably, those are all more essential to life than having children, which is optional. Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't incentivize having children by making extra allowances for that, but let's not pretend it's anything but unfair. But if we're talking fair, why should they get a day to take care of their child but I don't get one to take care of necessary legal paperwork?
  - pbhjpbhj 10y ago
    >those are all more essential to life than having children, which is optional. // If as a species we don't raise children how will we continue to have life? It's not optional if we wish to continue the species; ergo it's "essential to life".
    - SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
      Essential to species continuation, not your life. It's like you and the sibling comment decided to ignore my second paragraph entirely. It's unfair, not a bad idea or illegal. Sometimes, we want options not to be fair because we're trying to incentivize behavior. Incentivizing the continuation of the species is generally regarded as a good idea, so we make extra allowances for people who do that, even though it isn't fair.
  - dvtv75 10y ago
    > Having to meet with a lawyer, accountant, etc isnt a "vacation", but I'm expected to use vacation not > sick days for those appointments. You think you've made a point, but you really haven't. You don't have to take vacation time for that, you can always take unpaid leave - at least, everywhere I've ever worked. If you dispute using sick days for looking after children, perhaps you should examine your employment contract and perhaps consult an employment lawyer? There will be plenty of legal reasons why it's this way. Feel free to apply to take a sick day while consulting the lawyer, too.
    - SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
      And those reasons are unfair. They're fundamentally about incentivizing a behavior via the legal system. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's ridiculous to say it's fair when at a fundamental level, the exact point is that it's not.
  - mst 10y ago
    > But if we're talking fair, why should they get a day to take care of their child but I don't get one to take care of necessary legal paperwork? Compassion.
    - SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
      Please read my second paragraph. Compassion isn't fairness. Fairness isn't the only criterion we should make decisions on. However, I was responding to the comment about it being fair, which to be honest, none of the replies have addressed and instead gone on tangents about why it might be a good idea for other reasons. But also, what, compassion for their child being sick but not me having to defend myself against, eg, an unfair ticket? Seems a very narrow kind of compassion. Why doesn't compassion apply to the legal case?
      - mst 10y ago
        As a salaried worker, I've been allowed to take a half day to deal with something ridiculous like that too, on the basis the hours get made up. "Defending yourself against an unfair ticket" is a very different case than "I need to see my accountant" though - had you used that example in the first place I suspect you might've got a different set of responses.
- dsr_ 10y ago
  As someone with multiple children, I assure you that you are correct. It's not a vacation. On the other hand, most of the time I can work from home while tending to a sick kid.
- aanm1988 10y ago
  It's still a day off work. You made the decision to have a child. I don't actually have a problem with taking time off for family reasons, but it does sound more fair to just give people a bucket of days and let them figure it out.
Broken_Hippo 10y ago
I think it is quite fair that parents get more sick time than single folks. I do not have children, and never will. You see, parents aren't just slacking off. They are doing the responsible thing - not making a bunch of other children sick while taking care of their own sick child, whom they are responsible for and cannot yet take care of themselves. I'd not trust a 7 year old to take the right dose of medicines on time, for example, nor can the 7 year old go off to the doctor on their own. As you can see in your example, the parents are going to be home with their children regardless, even if using vacation, PTO time, or aren't paid at all. Luckily, I'm now in a country that allows for this sort of thing.
- brianwawok 10y ago
  > I think it is quite fair that parents get more sick time than single folks. I do not have children, and never will. That is a very European attitude. The American attitude is more or less "You choose to have kids, why should everyone else help pay for it?" Some laws still help, for example you get a small tax break for kids. But it is a struggle. In some towns, the schools are literally falling apart due to age and lack of repair. The school has to do a local vote for approval for funds. The towns with > 50% of the people old and without kids living at home? They tend to vote NO over and over, preferring to have more money for cable TV and not fund other people's kids. (Ignore the fact themselves and their own kids went to the same schools years before).
  - Broken_Hippo 10y ago
    Then I had an European attitude long before I moved away from the states. I never really have understood such attitudes, honestly. Today's children are the very folks that will be taking care of me in a doctor's office in the future, driving, raising children of their own, and intertwined with my own life. I'm seriously invested in the folks around me actually making it. It was always frustrating to see such things voted down.
danmaz74 10y ago
Anyone with kids also knows that being at home with a sick kid is anything but a "vacation"...
pavel_lishin 10y ago
> 30 days off a year. Yeah, boy, it sure is an "off" day when I have to stay home with my vomiting kid. Gosh, I sure am sticking it to all those suckers who only get to be away from the office for 21 days. Sarcasm aside, it seems like explaining that sick time isn't "off" time might help.

ncallaway 10y ago

I guess it's more fair if you view someone taking a day to care for their sick child as "vacation". I personally don't view it that way (I say this as someone who doesn't have a child).

SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
Having to meet with a lawyer, accountant, etc isnt a "vacation", but I'm expected to use vacation not sick days for those appointments. Arguably, those are all more essential to life than having children, which is optional. Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't incentivize having children by making extra allowances for that, but let's not pretend it's anything but unfair. But if we're talking fair, why should they get a day to take care of their child but I don't get one to take care of necessary legal paperwork?
- pbhjpbhj 10y ago
  >those are all more essential to life than having children, which is optional. // If as a species we don't raise children how will we continue to have life? It's not optional if we wish to continue the species; ergo it's "essential to life".
  - SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
    Essential to species continuation, not your life. It's like you and the sibling comment decided to ignore my second paragraph entirely. It's unfair, not a bad idea or illegal. Sometimes, we want options not to be fair because we're trying to incentivize behavior. Incentivizing the continuation of the species is generally regarded as a good idea, so we make extra allowances for people who do that, even though it isn't fair.
- dvtv75 10y ago
  > Having to meet with a lawyer, accountant, etc isnt a "vacation", but I'm expected to use vacation not > sick days for those appointments. You think you've made a point, but you really haven't. You don't have to take vacation time for that, you can always take unpaid leave - at least, everywhere I've ever worked. If you dispute using sick days for looking after children, perhaps you should examine your employment contract and perhaps consult an employment lawyer? There will be plenty of legal reasons why it's this way. Feel free to apply to take a sick day while consulting the lawyer, too.
  - SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
    And those reasons are unfair. They're fundamentally about incentivizing a behavior via the legal system. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's ridiculous to say it's fair when at a fundamental level, the exact point is that it's not.
- mst 10y ago
  > But if we're talking fair, why should they get a day to take care of their child but I don't get one to take care of necessary legal paperwork? Compassion.
  - SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
    Please read my second paragraph. Compassion isn't fairness. Fairness isn't the only criterion we should make decisions on. However, I was responding to the comment about it being fair, which to be honest, none of the replies have addressed and instead gone on tangents about why it might be a good idea for other reasons. But also, what, compassion for their child being sick but not me having to defend myself against, eg, an unfair ticket? Seems a very narrow kind of compassion. Why doesn't compassion apply to the legal case?
    - mst 10y ago
      As a salaried worker, I've been allowed to take a half day to deal with something ridiculous like that too, on the basis the hours get made up. "Defending yourself against an unfair ticket" is a very different case than "I need to see my accountant" though - had you used that example in the first place I suspect you might've got a different set of responses.
dsr_ 10y ago
As someone with multiple children, I assure you that you are correct. It's not a vacation. On the other hand, most of the time I can work from home while tending to a sick kid.
aanm1988 10y ago
It's still a day off work. You made the decision to have a child. I don't actually have a problem with taking time off for family reasons, but it does sound more fair to just give people a bucket of days and let them figure it out.

Broken_Hippo 10y ago

I think it is quite fair that parents get more sick time than single folks. I do not have children, and never will. You see, parents aren't just slacking off. They are doing the responsible thing - not making a bunch of other children sick while taking care of their own sick child, whom they are responsible for and cannot yet take care of themselves. I'd not trust a 7 year old to take the right dose of medicines on time, for example, nor can the 7 year old go off to the doctor on their own. As you can see in your example, the parents are going to be home with their children regardless, even if using vacation, PTO time, or aren't paid at all. Luckily, I'm now in a country that allows for this sort of thing.

brianwawok 10y ago
> I think it is quite fair that parents get more sick time than single folks. I do not have children, and never will. That is a very European attitude. The American attitude is more or less "You choose to have kids, why should everyone else help pay for it?" Some laws still help, for example you get a small tax break for kids. But it is a struggle. In some towns, the schools are literally falling apart due to age and lack of repair. The school has to do a local vote for approval for funds. The towns with > 50% of the people old and without kids living at home? They tend to vote NO over and over, preferring to have more money for cable TV and not fund other people's kids. (Ignore the fact themselves and their own kids went to the same schools years before).
- Broken_Hippo 10y ago
  Then I had an European attitude long before I moved away from the states. I never really have understood such attitudes, honestly. Today's children are the very folks that will be taking care of me in a doctor's office in the future, driving, raising children of their own, and intertwined with my own life. I'm seriously invested in the folks around me actually making it. It was always frustrating to see such things voted down.

danmaz74 10y ago

Anyone with kids also knows that being at home with a sick kid is anything but a "vacation"...

pavel_lishin 10y ago

> 30 days off a year. Yeah, boy, it sure is an "off" day when I have to stay home with my vomiting kid. Gosh, I sure am sticking it to all those suckers who only get to be away from the office for 21 days. Sarcasm aside, it seems like explaining that sick time isn't "off" time might help.