3 ms·

Part of why I left my last job was due to its “unlimited PTO” policy feeling more like a “you don’t -actually- have any days we really owe you so you’ll catch s

Part of why I left my last job was due to its “unlimited PTO” policy feeling more like a “you don’t -actually- have any days we really owe you so you’ll catch shade every time you take time off” policy. I now work for a place where I have a set amount of PTO that accrues so I feel more entitled to using it without feeling bad about it because if I don’t then it’s gone. Unlimited PTO is one of those things that sounds great to potential employees who have never experienced it. Until you get in and realize you end up taking way less time off than if you just had 15 set days or whatever.

rdtsc 8y ago
> “you don’t -actually- have any days we really owe you so you’ll catch shade every time you take time off” That's the idea behind it. It's a huge red flag for me. But it looks fantastic on paper. The problem is you don't know how you'll be judged if you do take the time off. They'll never come and say "hey it looks like you took 5 weeks off this year". They'll just say "it looks like you're not realizing your full potential". So it allows for a lot more sinister manipulation and control. It could even be coming from peers, managers, HR it doesn't matter. "Gee, so and so in on vacation... while we are slaving here at 8pm at night. - Haha. Of course he is, eye roll..." kind of stuff. And maybe the employee was having a family crisis and needed to spend time with their loved ones but it's not something they'll broadcast but people will imply various things and assume not the very best of intentions. If the company is so darn generous, just give everyone 6 weeks off and make everyone take it.
- finaliteration 8y ago
  > The problem is you don't know how you'll be judged if you do take the time off. Exactly. It can also be incredibly inequitable. My previous job had a rule about not “abusing” the policy, but no one ever defined what abuse looked like. One of the final straws for me was hearing from someone from another department that they had taken 5 weeks off over the last 12 months whereas I worked over several holiday weekends and spent time away from family due to the pressure of “needing” to get something done.
- ghaff 8y ago
  Yeah. I'm not opposed to the idea in principle. "Managing" my time off around business travel, projects on a deadline, etc. can be a real PITA. (And, to be clear, I've taken essentially my full earned vacation--or have been paid for unused time when I've left--through my entire career.) But, IMO, any company with this policy needs to establish some guidelines and management from the top down needs to walk the walk to show that they really expect employees to take 4-6 weeks off (or whatever) and stay home if they're sick. Otherwise, it's just about keeping liabilities off the books.
  - Domenic_S 8y ago
    Manager at BigCo here, that's exactly what I do in my "welcome to the team/company" email. We call it "untracked", not "unlimited" vacation, and I make that distinction clear also.
    - ghaff 8y ago
      Untracked is a MUCH better term (especially paired with some general guidelines). Thank you for that.

rdtsc 8y ago

> “you don’t -actually- have any days we really owe you so you’ll catch shade every time you take time off” That's the idea behind it. It's a huge red flag for me. But it looks fantastic on paper. The problem is you don't know how you'll be judged if you do take the time off. They'll never come and say "hey it looks like you took 5 weeks off this year". They'll just say "it looks like you're not realizing your full potential". So it allows for a lot more sinister manipulation and control. It could even be coming from peers, managers, HR it doesn't matter. "Gee, so and so in on vacation... while we are slaving here at 8pm at night. - Haha. Of course he is, eye roll..." kind of stuff. And maybe the employee was having a family crisis and needed to spend time with their loved ones but it's not something they'll broadcast but people will imply various things and assume not the very best of intentions. If the company is so darn generous, just give everyone 6 weeks off and make everyone take it.

finaliteration 8y ago
> The problem is you don't know how you'll be judged if you do take the time off. Exactly. It can also be incredibly inequitable. My previous job had a rule about not “abusing” the policy, but no one ever defined what abuse looked like. One of the final straws for me was hearing from someone from another department that they had taken 5 weeks off over the last 12 months whereas I worked over several holiday weekends and spent time away from family due to the pressure of “needing” to get something done.
ghaff 8y ago
Yeah. I'm not opposed to the idea in principle. "Managing" my time off around business travel, projects on a deadline, etc. can be a real PITA. (And, to be clear, I've taken essentially my full earned vacation--or have been paid for unused time when I've left--through my entire career.) But, IMO, any company with this policy needs to establish some guidelines and management from the top down needs to walk the walk to show that they really expect employees to take 4-6 weeks off (or whatever) and stay home if they're sick. Otherwise, it's just about keeping liabilities off the books.
- Domenic_S 8y ago
  Manager at BigCo here, that's exactly what I do in my "welcome to the team/company" email. We call it "untracked", not "unlimited" vacation, and I make that distinction clear also.
  - ghaff 8y ago
    Untracked is a MUCH better term (especially paired with some general guidelines). Thank you for that.