6 ms·

I am so opposed to these type of programs. All they do is benefit the company through removal of a liability in terms of PTO hours from the company books. The w

I am so opposed to these type of programs. All they do is benefit the company through removal of a liability in terms of PTO hours from the company books. The workers are very likely to face social pressures when taking time off when it's viewed as an approval bestowed by management and not an entitlement inherent to the agreement when you started working. I don't have any hard data to back this up, but my personal intuition suggests this will result in companies saving money because workers will take less time off and won't get paid out for remaining balances when they quit. This is a very worker-unfriendly policy and in a just system would be illegal.

supergeek133 4y ago
I think there was actually a harvard business review study or something that proved this accurate. It saves the corporation money, and actually makes people take less time off. Either because the 'forcing mechanism of use it or lose it' is gone OR the social pressure like you mentioned.
- nicholasjarnold 4y ago
  Yes, I recall reading the same thing many years ago too. IIRC the results were specific to the United States and it was posited that this might be due to differences in US employees views towards work. We tend to overwork ourselves whereas some of our EU or non-US counterparts don't do that as much.
  - supergeek133 4y ago
    Yes totally fair as well. Other countries also have rules for things like "every employee must be able to see a window" and whatnot.
- sershe 4y ago
  Is it only me (I am in MSFT) or does it force some people into board-game resources mindset instead? I have a bunch of accumulated vacation that will now be paid out, cause I would let it accumulate before when I didn't need it - it just sits there after all. I don't really need a little more money, but I do value extra time. Now I feel like someone is going to play captain in Puerto Rico and burn my stuff - I have to use it or it's gone, so I'm going to track it myself and make sure to try to take my N days ;)
542458 4y ago
I agree. It also makes it harder to compare companies because it moves an explicit benefit “X days PTO per year” to a vague one “well, it’s whatever days your manager feels like approving”. As a manager I’d also hate this - it’s another thing that I would have to keep track of and weigh. I don’t want to have to discuss with people about how much PTO is okay! That’s something somebody else should decide! If a company really wants to give people flexibility they would give X days of paid vacation plus as much unpaid as your manager will approve. Best of both worlds IMO. Addendum: The company I work for has a “once in a lifetime opportunity” policy where if you want to do something special, like climb Everest or take a cruise around the world or whatever, they’ll work with you to figure out how to make leave work for it. It’s not actually once in a lifetime either, the policy says once every five years or so. I like that idea a lot, even if I’ve never used it.
- notJim 4y ago
  > As a manager I’d also hate this - it’s another thing that I would have to keep track of and weigh. I don’t want to have to discuss with people about how much PTO is okay! That’s something somebody else should decide! It's so easy though, just default to yes. Is there a critical deadline coming up? Are they productive and focused at work? Then just always approve.
  - akamia 4y ago
    That's the approach I've taken and it has worked out really well. As long as they're getting their work done, I'm not concerned with how much time they're taking off.
    - badpun 4y ago
      How about 8 weeks per year? Or 10 weeks? Would that be fine?
      - itronitron 4y ago
        Absolutely, and as a result the manager gets glowing reviews and can also justify an increase in headcount which will improve their status in the organization.
jupp0r 4y ago
It depends on company/team culture. I've used a similar policy to take 40-50 days off per year and got great feedback on my leadership and contributions in the past. People on my team took similar amounts. Everybody was happy with the policy, except people who never took vacation and had months of PTO accured.
- jupp0r 4y ago
  As somebody else in the thread wrote, it's really hard to know what the culture is like when evaluating a new job, unless you are very upfront regarding your expectations with your future manager.
AdamJacobMuller 4y ago
While I agree with most of the rest of what you said, and I generally don't like these policies: > won't get paid out for remaining balances when they quit You can just change the company handbook to say that unused PTO is not paid out, I don't think any state (fact-check me) requires you to pay out unused PTO (you're required to follow a policy fairly, so you must pay it out if the handbook says you pay it out)
- lumost 4y ago
  MA requires PTO up to some number of days to be paid out.
  - AdamJacobMuller 4y ago
    I guess this still applies even with an "unlimited" policy though.
  - convolvatron 4y ago
    yeah, this isn't just generosity, this is a legal requirement that the 'all you can eat' policy is trying to avoid
- fatnoah 4y ago
  My previous company recently changed PTO policies, and the result was that it depended on your state. My memory is a little fuzzy, but it basically went something like: In some states, all PTO was immediately removed from the bank as of the change date and those folks immediately moved to unlimited. In MA, removing accrued PTO wasn't possible, but it was possible to rewrite policy to disallow carryover from one year to another, so people MA stayed on the normal plan until Jan 1, at which point they'd have 0 PTO due to nothing carrying over and they'd be moved to unlimited. In CA, neither option was allowed, so folks remained on the normal plan until Jan 1, and then were paid out for unused PTO and then moved to unlimited.
sabarn01 4y ago
I work at msft and have never had pressure to not take time off. In fact I have been reminded by my manager to do it because its tracked and you lose it at some point in time. Without the tracking people that generally don't take time will take less and people that take all there time will take more.
lumost 4y ago
+1 IMO these policies should be banned at the Federal level. I worked at a company with such a policy previously, I ended up only taking 3 weeks of vacation over the course of a 2 year stint. As it turned out, other coworkers would take 6+ weeks per year. There was no canonical guidance on appropriate PTO. In a large company, this will translate to some managers granting excess PTO for retention purposes - and other managers burning people out. It's also an effective ward against parents and others with responsibilities which do not align with whatever the delivery of the month is.
- mmiyer 4y ago
  I think we first mandatory PTO at the federal level before we can ban "unlimited" PTO.
  - Someone1234 4y ago
    We can do both at the same time.
- SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
  I'm sympathetic to your frustration, but this seems like an argument you could make about all kinds of things. If you work at a company with unlimited snacks, some people will munch all day and get most of their calories for free, while parents and people on diets have to eat elsewhere and will only have snacks once in a while. If you work at a company with unlimited breaks, some people will take 10 breaks a day while others will be pressured by their manager to take only 1 or 2. It can't be the solution to say companies have to strictly regiment every employee interaction so they can make sure it's fair.
  - lumost 4y ago
    You can have minimums and optional maximums. We have minimum breaks in most states, companies should be obliged to have a specific minimum in their PTO - otherwise it can easily be false advertising.
fatnoah 4y ago
I'm the weirdo that actually loves this. I always feel compelled to hoard limited resources, including vacation hours. I'd estimate that I take 100%-200% more time off when I have "unlimited" PTO. When I'm working against a bank of hours, I tend to never use the full amount, just in case I might need it. With unlimited PTO, I'm much more likely to take random days off that I need, in addition to the week or two here and there for family vacations.
- arsome 4y ago
  I think limited rollover is a preferable solution if companies need to get PTO off the books - if you can only bank 4 weeks of vacation the maximizing strategy for people like you and I will be to bank it and then take the rest.
notJim 4y ago
If the company has good work life balance, it's great. We have unlimited vacation where I work and it's actually fantastic. Most people take 4-6 weeks off. Personally I take 8 some years. It's so much more relaxing to not have to track time off or worry about allocating enough for periods like the holidays in addition to vacation. I've never had more than 20 PTO days at a company I worked, and often had 15 to start, so this is way more vacation than typical.
- mfer 4y ago
  This highlights an implementation detail. Some companies do unlimited vacation like this. It's a perk. Other companies use this to be restrictive on the vacation people take. It keeps more people working more days. This speaks a lot to company culture.
  - veonik 4y ago
    It can be hard to figure out which is which for the company before getting hired though. Asking about programs that encourage PTO is a good way that I've found to suss out these types of details. My current job offers a few "extra" things on top of unlimited PTO like during the summer, a $100 bonus if you post a pic of some activity you did on PTO (literally anything, and can even opt out of sharing if you are so inclined) or more recently, a "competition" for the best use of PTO. I think someone reading a book in a hammock won.
    - goldcd 4y ago
      You could ask what's the average PTO taken. HR should know this and if they need to check, take it as a bad sign.
    - notJim 4y ago
      I always ask about work-life balance when I get an offer. Companies so far have been pretty honest about it. There's really no point in hiring someone who is not going to fit with the work culture.
  - goldcd 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ed312 4y ago
The concerns are valid, but I find setting a "suggested minimum" amount of PTO (in my case, I suggest 1 week/quarter on average) and _actually taking time off yourself_ helps model better work/life balance. If you have "unlimited PTO" but the high status people never take PTO, you effectively have no PTO at all.
aaron465 4y ago
It depends, you just need the right culture and management which respects and trusts the employees. I love it, and my manager has never rejected a PTO request, it’s just a formality. I took more than the UK standard 25 days in my first year and we haven’t talked about PTO once. In fact, sometimes people say stuff like “oh I’m gonna go to $place for two weeks and I’ll just work in the daytime and vacation in the evenings and weekend” and management will actively encourage just taking the time off and enjoying it, coming back refreshed instead.
gamblor956 4y ago
It depends very heavily on the company management. At both my current and last employer, we had unlimited PTO and employees were encouraged to use it, the only requirement being that they get their work done. At my last employer, most people took 8-10 weeks off/year in the U.S. office and 12-16 weeks off in our European offices. At my current employer, people average 4-8 weeks and people who don't take at least 4 weeks off a year are gently encouraged to spend more time away from work. In both cases, PTO is not discretionary except where the employee's job specifically involves working on-site for a specific project or event and PTO would overlap with that period.
davidelettieri 4y ago
In Italy it is required by law to take PTO if you have a "permanent" work contract. You can monetize part of the PTO but the biggest part must be used within a certain time limit. I think it's a good thing but we pay it with our lower average salaries.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> All they do is benefit the company through removal of a liability in terms of PTO hours from the company books. They also facilitate hard to identify discrimination, including on prohibited bases, and enable social pressure to reduce total time off taken. And none of those effects are accidental.
lr1970 4y ago
We are getting back to labor rights of 19-th century with no guaranteed vacation time. Then it was between you and your manager or company owner of how much PTO time you get (if any), and 21-st century feels the same.
zaphar 4y ago
Our company has discretionary time off. I can't speak for other managers in the company but in my own role as manager I actually lecture my people if they don't take enough time off. I don't know if my frequent encouragement on the matter is the cause but it seems to be that no one is viewed poorly by their peers for taking time off. This is just one anecdotal example though so it's hardly proof that these programs work. I'll just say that if the managers set the culture appropriately then it can work.

supergeek133 4y ago

I think there was actually a harvard business review study or something that proved this accurate. It saves the corporation money, and actually makes people take less time off. Either because the 'forcing mechanism of use it or lose it' is gone OR the social pressure like you mentioned.

nicholasjarnold 4y ago
Yes, I recall reading the same thing many years ago too. IIRC the results were specific to the United States and it was posited that this might be due to differences in US employees views towards work. We tend to overwork ourselves whereas some of our EU or non-US counterparts don't do that as much.
- supergeek133 4y ago
  Yes totally fair as well. Other countries also have rules for things like "every employee must be able to see a window" and whatnot.
sershe 4y ago
Is it only me (I am in MSFT) or does it force some people into board-game resources mindset instead? I have a bunch of accumulated vacation that will now be paid out, cause I would let it accumulate before when I didn't need it - it just sits there after all. I don't really need a little more money, but I do value extra time. Now I feel like someone is going to play captain in Puerto Rico and burn my stuff - I have to use it or it's gone, so I'm going to track it myself and make sure to try to take my N days ;)

542458 4y ago

I agree. It also makes it harder to compare companies because it moves an explicit benefit “X days PTO per year” to a vague one “well, it’s whatever days your manager feels like approving”. As a manager I’d also hate this - it’s another thing that I would have to keep track of and weigh. I don’t want to have to discuss with people about how much PTO is okay! That’s something somebody else should decide! If a company really wants to give people flexibility they would give X days of paid vacation plus as much unpaid as your manager will approve. Best of both worlds IMO. Addendum: The company I work for has a “once in a lifetime opportunity” policy where if you want to do something special, like climb Everest or take a cruise around the world or whatever, they’ll work with you to figure out how to make leave work for it. It’s not actually once in a lifetime either, the policy says once every five years or so. I like that idea a lot, even if I’ve never used it.

notJim 4y ago
> As a manager I’d also hate this - it’s another thing that I would have to keep track of and weigh. I don’t want to have to discuss with people about how much PTO is okay! That’s something somebody else should decide! It's so easy though, just default to yes. Is there a critical deadline coming up? Are they productive and focused at work? Then just always approve.
- akamia 4y ago
  That's the approach I've taken and it has worked out really well. As long as they're getting their work done, I'm not concerned with how much time they're taking off.
  - badpun 4y ago
    How about 8 weeks per year? Or 10 weeks? Would that be fine?
    - itronitron 4y ago
      Absolutely, and as a result the manager gets glowing reviews and can also justify an increase in headcount which will improve their status in the organization.

jupp0r 4y ago

It depends on company/team culture. I've used a similar policy to take 40-50 days off per year and got great feedback on my leadership and contributions in the past. People on my team took similar amounts. Everybody was happy with the policy, except people who never took vacation and had months of PTO accured.

jupp0r 4y ago
As somebody else in the thread wrote, it's really hard to know what the culture is like when evaluating a new job, unless you are very upfront regarding your expectations with your future manager.

AdamJacobMuller 4y ago

While I agree with most of the rest of what you said, and I generally don't like these policies: > won't get paid out for remaining balances when they quit You can just change the company handbook to say that unused PTO is not paid out, I don't think any state (fact-check me) requires you to pay out unused PTO (you're required to follow a policy fairly, so you must pay it out if the handbook says you pay it out)

lumost 4y ago
MA requires PTO up to some number of days to be paid out.
- AdamJacobMuller 4y ago
  I guess this still applies even with an "unlimited" policy though.
- convolvatron 4y ago
  yeah, this isn't just generosity, this is a legal requirement that the 'all you can eat' policy is trying to avoid
fatnoah 4y ago
My previous company recently changed PTO policies, and the result was that it depended on your state. My memory is a little fuzzy, but it basically went something like: In some states, all PTO was immediately removed from the bank as of the change date and those folks immediately moved to unlimited. In MA, removing accrued PTO wasn't possible, but it was possible to rewrite policy to disallow carryover from one year to another, so people MA stayed on the normal plan until Jan 1, at which point they'd have 0 PTO due to nothing carrying over and they'd be moved to unlimited. In CA, neither option was allowed, so folks remained on the normal plan until Jan 1, and then were paid out for unused PTO and then moved to unlimited.

sabarn01 4y ago

I work at msft and have never had pressure to not take time off. In fact I have been reminded by my manager to do it because its tracked and you lose it at some point in time. Without the tracking people that generally don't take time will take less and people that take all there time will take more.

lumost 4y ago

+1 IMO these policies should be banned at the Federal level. I worked at a company with such a policy previously, I ended up only taking 3 weeks of vacation over the course of a 2 year stint. As it turned out, other coworkers would take 6+ weeks per year. There was no canonical guidance on appropriate PTO. In a large company, this will translate to some managers granting excess PTO for retention purposes - and other managers burning people out. It's also an effective ward against parents and others with responsibilities which do not align with whatever the delivery of the month is.

mmiyer 4y ago
I think we first mandatory PTO at the federal level before we can ban "unlimited" PTO.
- Someone1234 4y ago
  We can do both at the same time.
SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
I'm sympathetic to your frustration, but this seems like an argument you could make about all kinds of things. If you work at a company with unlimited snacks, some people will munch all day and get most of their calories for free, while parents and people on diets have to eat elsewhere and will only have snacks once in a while. If you work at a company with unlimited breaks, some people will take 10 breaks a day while others will be pressured by their manager to take only 1 or 2. It can't be the solution to say companies have to strictly regiment every employee interaction so they can make sure it's fair.
- lumost 4y ago
  You can have minimums and optional maximums. We have minimum breaks in most states, companies should be obliged to have a specific minimum in their PTO - otherwise it can easily be false advertising.

fatnoah 4y ago

I'm the weirdo that actually loves this. I always feel compelled to hoard limited resources, including vacation hours. I'd estimate that I take 100%-200% more time off when I have "unlimited" PTO. When I'm working against a bank of hours, I tend to never use the full amount, just in case I might need it. With unlimited PTO, I'm much more likely to take random days off that I need, in addition to the week or two here and there for family vacations.

arsome 4y ago
I think limited rollover is a preferable solution if companies need to get PTO off the books - if you can only bank 4 weeks of vacation the maximizing strategy for people like you and I will be to bank it and then take the rest.

notJim 4y ago

If the company has good work life balance, it's great. We have unlimited vacation where I work and it's actually fantastic. Most people take 4-6 weeks off. Personally I take 8 some years. It's so much more relaxing to not have to track time off or worry about allocating enough for periods like the holidays in addition to vacation. I've never had more than 20 PTO days at a company I worked, and often had 15 to start, so this is way more vacation than typical.

mfer 4y ago
This highlights an implementation detail. Some companies do unlimited vacation like this. It's a perk. Other companies use this to be restrictive on the vacation people take. It keeps more people working more days. This speaks a lot to company culture.
- veonik 4y ago
  It can be hard to figure out which is which for the company before getting hired though. Asking about programs that encourage PTO is a good way that I've found to suss out these types of details. My current job offers a few "extra" things on top of unlimited PTO like during the summer, a $100 bonus if you post a pic of some activity you did on PTO (literally anything, and can even opt out of sharing if you are so inclined) or more recently, a "competition" for the best use of PTO. I think someone reading a book in a hammock won.
  - goldcd 4y ago
    You could ask what's the average PTO taken. HR should know this and if they need to check, take it as a bad sign.
  - notJim 4y ago
    I always ask about work-life balance when I get an offer. Companies so far have been pretty honest about it. There's really no point in hiring someone who is not going to fit with the work culture.
- goldcd 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ed312 4y ago

The concerns are valid, but I find setting a "suggested minimum" amount of PTO (in my case, I suggest 1 week/quarter on average) and _actually taking time off yourself_ helps model better work/life balance. If you have "unlimited PTO" but the high status people never take PTO, you effectively have no PTO at all.

aaron465 4y ago

It depends, you just need the right culture and management which respects and trusts the employees. I love it, and my manager has never rejected a PTO request, it’s just a formality. I took more than the UK standard 25 days in my first year and we haven’t talked about PTO once. In fact, sometimes people say stuff like “oh I’m gonna go to $place for two weeks and I’ll just work in the daytime and vacation in the evenings and weekend” and management will actively encourage just taking the time off and enjoying it, coming back refreshed instead.

gamblor956 4y ago

It depends very heavily on the company management. At both my current and last employer, we had unlimited PTO and employees were encouraged to use it, the only requirement being that they get their work done. At my last employer, most people took 8-10 weeks off/year in the U.S. office and 12-16 weeks off in our European offices. At my current employer, people average 4-8 weeks and people who don't take at least 4 weeks off a year are gently encouraged to spend more time away from work. In both cases, PTO is not discretionary except where the employee's job specifically involves working on-site for a specific project or event and PTO would overlap with that period.

davidelettieri 4y ago

In Italy it is required by law to take PTO if you have a "permanent" work contract. You can monetize part of the PTO but the biggest part must be used within a certain time limit. I think it's a good thing but we pay it with our lower average salaries.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> All they do is benefit the company through removal of a liability in terms of PTO hours from the company books. They also facilitate hard to identify discrimination, including on prohibited bases, and enable social pressure to reduce total time off taken. And none of those effects are accidental.

lr1970 4y ago

We are getting back to labor rights of 19-th century with no guaranteed vacation time. Then it was between you and your manager or company owner of how much PTO time you get (if any), and 21-st century feels the same.

zaphar 4y ago

Our company has discretionary time off. I can't speak for other managers in the company but in my own role as manager I actually lecture my people if they don't take enough time off. I don't know if my frequent encouragement on the matter is the cause but it seems to be that no one is viewed poorly by their peers for taking time off. This is just one anecdotal example though so it's hardly proof that these programs work. I'll just say that if the managers set the culture appropriately then it can work.