3 ms·
Right, it seems relatively simple to calculate someone's salary to also include additional 5 weeks of pay per year so that if you have to pay it out it was alre
by snarf21 5y ago
Right, it seems relatively simple to calculate someone's salary to also include additional 5 weeks of pay per year so that if you have to pay it out it was already budgeted. Alternatively, you could do it in such a way that every two weeks you get paid for 11 days worth of work and all time off is unpaid. Essentially you are getting 26 paid vacation days and you can use them or keep the extra money. It seems like a win-win. Known costs that are over time and extra money for employees or extra time off for employees.
- dopidopHN 5y agoI always been baffle by that. My last job switch, 6 month ago, I explicitly asked to apply that calculation on my shinny new yearly salary. To go from 2 weeks off to say.. 5. ( I really means 6 … ) I got 2.5 and a lesson on budgeted HR cost and resource availability. At least there was a response. The funnier is : I had to care for a family member too. I took 3 weeks already and they just routinely approved the unpay part of it.
- ghaff 5y agoPart of the problem is that California doesn't let companies have use it or lose it policies. Companies need to pay out unused at the end of the year. And employees don't like accrual cap policies (i.e. stop earning after you hit some figure) that don't let them bank some amount over their annual accrual.
- sidlls 5y agoThe problem is that unlimited PTO is a loophole that companies use to avoid paying earned benefits. California’s regulations on this are poor because they don’t account for this, not because they’re a bad idea.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]