5 ms·

Lots of good ideas in the article - the key is to really stand out. I take 10 weeks off a year to go travelling - true vacation time, not remote work. I know

Lots of good ideas in the article - the key is to really stand out. I take 10 weeks off a year to go travelling - true vacation time, not remote work. I know I can get a 20% raise if I switched companies (I know that because I got an offer), but I stay where I am because i can't imagine going back down to 3 weeks of vacation a year.

x0x0 9y ago
That's an awesome situation. Two interview cycles ago, I wanted a full month of unpaid vacation on top of the normal vacation package. I told each I would take a 1/12 pay cut in exchange. It was a huge obstacle for employers.
- freyfogle 9y ago
  The problem is if they give you your special deal, they have to give everyone their own special deal which becomes an absolute nightmare to manage.
  - jakobegger 9y ago
    And here's an opportunity for smaller companies. I have a small company, and I can't offer my employees the prestige or high salary that larger companies offer. But I can offer to accommodate whatever other special wishes people have. Want to work just 4 days a week? Fine. Want to work from 12pm to 8pm? Fine. Want to take a day off on short notice? Fine with me. Larger companies have all kinds of rules and policies in place. In a small company, you can design the policies together with the employees.
    - matwood 9y ago
      This is basically what we do. I think we offer competitive salaries, but also give tons of work flexibility. We judge on work produced, not hours in seats (within reason for meetings or time critical items like customer support) or any other useless metric. Since each person has to be thought of individually, I can see where it would be hard to scale in a really large environment. Some employees also have a hard time without strict policies in place (weird I know). We make sure to let people know in the interview that responsibility comes with the freedom. One last thing, we treat every position in the company this way and not just the developers.
  - zxcmx 9y ago
    Yes and there often fixed overheads per employee (desk space, health insurance, payroll costs, management overhead) that don't necessarily go down when the employee chooses to work less.
  - crdoconnor 9y ago
    I think that's bullshit. I think it's purely about trying to keep everybody in the dark about each other's compensation packages. It's easier to keep employees in the dark about money because of the taboo talking about it. If Tom spent the last month sunning himself in the Maldives, on the other hand, he's probably not going to shut up about it. Compensation secrecy is a fairly straightforward way of dragging down payroll costs, which are going to be the biggest drag by far on the bottom line in a software company.
    - freyfogle 9y ago
      In my experience as founder of a 20 plus employee start-up, I assumed all employees would find out each other's salary. There is no way to enforce secrecy, people talk. For exactly this reason it is better to have a clear policy. Having 20 different special deals - like "I want to work one month less, but get paid less" etc - means you spend all of your time managing HR. Everyone thinks the other person's deal is better. Absolute nightmare to manage. Much better to transparently say "This is what we pay, this is what we offer in terms of benefits / flexibility (location, time off, etc). If that matches your needs, great. If not, we are not the right employer for you."
      - crdoconnor 9y ago
        In my experience employers will often profess transparency but will refrain from sharing salary information (citing 'personal secrecy') and rely upon the taboo around discussing compensation do its work, which it usually does. You sadly professed transparency and then immediately gave the game away when you said this: "Everyone thinks the other person's deal is better." That happens when compensation packages are kept secret or are revealed suddenly, not when they are open as a matter of policy. It's not being 'transparent' when you share details of everybody's holiday entitlement, because it's easy to spot when people aren't in the office and there is zero taboo surrounding sharing how many days of holiday you take or whether you took friday afternoon off. It's simply a tacit acceptance of reality.
      - x0x0 9y ago
        It's actually illegal to attempt to enforce that secrecy, at least in CA. https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/California_Equal_Pay_Act.htm https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/California_Equal_Pay_Act.htm
crdoconnor 9y ago
It's weird that more companies don't offer more vacation as a perk. Offering 40 days instead of 25 means 15 days of foregone work for the company - 6% fewer days worked a year. But, it looks a lot better than a 6% increase in pay on paper. Moreover, you probably lose much less than that because you'll have better rested, less stressed, probably more productive employees and it will help cut down on employees making themselves critical choke points. Something to think about the next time you read the phrase "war for talent".
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  From me experience at least in the US there is a moral component to more vacation. The managers I have dealt with acted a little as if wanting more vacation is a moral failing of the person.
  - lotsofpulp 9y ago
    That's just because the manager is then responsible for the work when people take vacation, so dissuading it as much as possible saves them time and stress personally. Vacation is a big problem of you're running with just enough people to operate the business, which most are people are one of the most expensive parts of the business. Unless you're not doing anything time sensitive, mission critical, or customer facing, then being on vacation means someone is stretched to cover you.
    - maxxxxx 9y ago
      Thinking that everything is time sensitive is often an illusion or management failure in my view. You can't be constantly on the critical path.
  - crdoconnor 9y ago
    It's not real. I've gotten that when asking for more money too. Running a guilt trip on employees or potential employees is a pretty standard tool of psychological manipulation and intimidation. A manager whose bonus is on the line and who knows that they have no chance of getting an increase in holiday allowance approved is quite likely to do that.
maxxxxx 9y ago
I would love that. I have offered a pay cut in exchange for more vacation but management couldn't even compute the suggestion. It's a foreign concept to them.

x0x0 9y ago

That's an awesome situation. Two interview cycles ago, I wanted a full month of unpaid vacation on top of the normal vacation package. I told each I would take a 1/12 pay cut in exchange. It was a huge obstacle for employers.

freyfogle 9y ago
The problem is if they give you your special deal, they have to give everyone their own special deal which becomes an absolute nightmare to manage.
- jakobegger 9y ago
  And here's an opportunity for smaller companies. I have a small company, and I can't offer my employees the prestige or high salary that larger companies offer. But I can offer to accommodate whatever other special wishes people have. Want to work just 4 days a week? Fine. Want to work from 12pm to 8pm? Fine. Want to take a day off on short notice? Fine with me. Larger companies have all kinds of rules and policies in place. In a small company, you can design the policies together with the employees.
  - matwood 9y ago
    This is basically what we do. I think we offer competitive salaries, but also give tons of work flexibility. We judge on work produced, not hours in seats (within reason for meetings or time critical items like customer support) or any other useless metric. Since each person has to be thought of individually, I can see where it would be hard to scale in a really large environment. Some employees also have a hard time without strict policies in place (weird I know). We make sure to let people know in the interview that responsibility comes with the freedom. One last thing, we treat every position in the company this way and not just the developers.
- zxcmx 9y ago
  Yes and there often fixed overheads per employee (desk space, health insurance, payroll costs, management overhead) that don't necessarily go down when the employee chooses to work less.
- crdoconnor 9y ago
  I think that's bullshit. I think it's purely about trying to keep everybody in the dark about each other's compensation packages. It's easier to keep employees in the dark about money because of the taboo talking about it. If Tom spent the last month sunning himself in the Maldives, on the other hand, he's probably not going to shut up about it. Compensation secrecy is a fairly straightforward way of dragging down payroll costs, which are going to be the biggest drag by far on the bottom line in a software company.
  - freyfogle 9y ago
    In my experience as founder of a 20 plus employee start-up, I assumed all employees would find out each other's salary. There is no way to enforce secrecy, people talk. For exactly this reason it is better to have a clear policy. Having 20 different special deals - like "I want to work one month less, but get paid less" etc - means you spend all of your time managing HR. Everyone thinks the other person's deal is better. Absolute nightmare to manage. Much better to transparently say "This is what we pay, this is what we offer in terms of benefits / flexibility (location, time off, etc). If that matches your needs, great. If not, we are not the right employer for you."
    - crdoconnor 9y ago
      In my experience employers will often profess transparency but will refrain from sharing salary information (citing 'personal secrecy') and rely upon the taboo around discussing compensation do its work, which it usually does. You sadly professed transparency and then immediately gave the game away when you said this: "Everyone thinks the other person's deal is better." That happens when compensation packages are kept secret or are revealed suddenly, not when they are open as a matter of policy. It's not being 'transparent' when you share details of everybody's holiday entitlement, because it's easy to spot when people aren't in the office and there is zero taboo surrounding sharing how many days of holiday you take or whether you took friday afternoon off. It's simply a tacit acceptance of reality.
    - x0x0 9y ago
      It's actually illegal to attempt to enforce that secrecy, at least in CA. https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/California_Equal_Pay_Act.htm https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/California_Equal_Pay_Act.htm

crdoconnor 9y ago

It's weird that more companies don't offer more vacation as a perk. Offering 40 days instead of 25 means 15 days of foregone work for the company - 6% fewer days worked a year. But, it looks a lot better than a 6% increase in pay on paper. Moreover, you probably lose much less than that because you'll have better rested, less stressed, probably more productive employees and it will help cut down on employees making themselves critical choke points. Something to think about the next time you read the phrase "war for talent".

maxxxxx 9y ago
From me experience at least in the US there is a moral component to more vacation. The managers I have dealt with acted a little as if wanting more vacation is a moral failing of the person.
- lotsofpulp 9y ago
  That's just because the manager is then responsible for the work when people take vacation, so dissuading it as much as possible saves them time and stress personally. Vacation is a big problem of you're running with just enough people to operate the business, which most are people are one of the most expensive parts of the business. Unless you're not doing anything time sensitive, mission critical, or customer facing, then being on vacation means someone is stretched to cover you.
  - maxxxxx 9y ago
    Thinking that everything is time sensitive is often an illusion or management failure in my view. You can't be constantly on the critical path.
- crdoconnor 9y ago
  It's not real. I've gotten that when asking for more money too. Running a guilt trip on employees or potential employees is a pretty standard tool of psychological manipulation and intimidation. A manager whose bonus is on the line and who knows that they have no chance of getting an increase in holiday allowance approved is quite likely to do that.

maxxxxx 9y ago

I would love that. I have offered a pay cut in exchange for more vacation but management couldn't even compute the suggestion. It's a foreign concept to them.