10 ms·

"Unpaid two weeks of matternity leave" are you nuts? Holy sh.. "vacation longer than three weeks requires the company to stop paying your salary" What? Why is

"Unpaid two weeks of matternity leave" are you nuts? Holy sh.. "vacation longer than three weeks requires the company to stop paying your salary" What? Why is it called vacation then, I cannot comprehend this at all, heh. Don't tell them some EU companies even give unlimited PAID vacation, lol. Never experienced this myself, because I usually have "only" 5 weeks paids vacation, but unlimited HO. Of course in practice this means I have main job and also doing self-employed contracts, if work in my main job is done.

comprev 2y ago
Unlimited paid vacation days are for the employers benefit not employee.
- sethammons 2y ago
  For those who may not yet know why: US companies must pay out vacation time when employment terminates, meaning unpaid vacation affects liabilities and thus the balance sheet and thus stock price.
  - cr1895 2y ago
    >US companies must pay out vacation time when employment terminates Doesn't that depend on the state?
    - sethammons 2y ago
      It does; didn't realize that but it makes sense
    - paulddraper 2y ago
      It does, but I've never seen any company that doesn't pay for accrued time.
      - lolinder 2y ago
        That's a choice the company makes in most states, though, meaning they can just as easily choose not to as choose unlimited vacation.
      - mark-r 2y ago
        As I understand it, the company merely needs to be consistent. Either they pay everybody for their accrued time, or they pay nobody.
withinboredom 2y ago
> are you nuts? There's a new law still in committee: https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4226&session125&summary=B https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4226... > What? Why is it called vacation then Having more than two weeks off in a year is pretty strange. I worked at a place with "unlimited vacation" once, and you weren't allowed to take off more than two weeks at a time until someone took off two weeks every three weeks ... and that ended that policy. They made it about 4 months before getting fired though.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  > Having more than two weeks off in a year is pretty strange. I mean, not that strange: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_b...
  - tialaramex 2y ago
    Yeah, I took July off this year and last year. Obviously that needs some up-front notice to ensure there's cover, but I tell my manager in the spring and it's fine. Americans are very, very strange and the fact they think they're normal is part of that.
    - elteto 2y ago
      Americans are not “strange”, whatever that means. The US has overall worse protections than the EU, that’s it. It sucks, we all know that. There’s no need to appeal to some weirdness argument.
      - pintxo 2y ago
        I guess people in Europe find it strange that people in the US are willing to accept the status quo there?
        HelloMcFly 2y ago
userbinator 2y ago
The basic principle is --- you work, you get paid. If you're not working, you're not getting paid. Anything additional is a bonus at the discretion of the employer.
- fhd2 2y ago
  That's where I suppose the US and EU truly differ. The US generally goes for the "the market will solve it" approach. If you're a bad employer, nobody wants to work there, the company goes down and the competition wins. It's a beautiful theory IMHO. The EU approach is sort of the same, but to add regulation on top to steer the market towards specific goals, like having a strong middle class. If, for example, a company doesn't suffer from being nasty to their employees (e.g. because they're a monopolist), regulation will be put in place to create that dynamic. I personally find this approach more feasible, but regulation can be worked around and sometimes backfire, it's not easy to get right. Back to your point: It comes down to how much you get paid. If you work full time and can't afford vacation or sickness, is that OK? If you think that's OK, we just disagree I suppose. There's a power imbalance between employers and employees that favours the employers. They have more money, expertise, legal counsel, negotiation power etc. Given the chance, they will pay as little as they can for labour, crush competition etc. I don't believe that's good for a country in the long run. If you think it's not OK, something has to happen. Paying people more so they can save up money to deal with this is one approach. Assuming the risk of them not working (with paid vacation and sick days) is another one. In the EU, we tend to go down the latter route. I guess you could see it as patronising, but there is beauty in sharing and distributing personal risks. I'm personally fine with both solutions. I'm running a consultancy right now, so I've decided to take the first route, assume and manage my own risks.
  - playingalong 2y ago
    I am not sure all these rules are for stronger middle class. I have always thought these are for low-paid workers at a warehouse, cleaning the streets, or alike. They are way more replaceable than some specialist. Yet the state offers protection for their time off which they deserve.
sethammons 2y ago
I have "unlimited" vacation here in the states. If you go over three weeks, they still require special paperwork, but they allow it if you are tenured enough. What unlimited means is "as long as your manager is decent, you will maybe get your days off" vs accrued vacation where you may be forced to take vacation to not lose it.
- withinboredom 2y ago
  > accrued vacation where you may be forced to take vacation to not lose it. I don't look at it that way. If you have accrued vacation, you "earned" your vacation and they can't take it away from you without compensation. Thus, you are guaranteed your days off. If they fire you, they should even have to pay you your salary for those vacation days. "Unlimited" vacation just gives all the control to your employer: the right to deny you vacation, the right to dictate how long your vacation is, etc.
  - thaumasiotes 2y ago
    > If they fire you, they should even have to pay you your salary for those vacation days. This is required in the US. That's the point of unlimited vacation - since it doesn't accrue, the company doesn't have to pay it out when you leave.
    - hiatus 2y ago
      It is not required in the US as it varies by state.
      - mrkstu 2y ago
        Enough states require it that most companies large enough to be multistate in employment go ahead and standardize it into their policies.
        hiatus 2y ago
        Apparently 27 states require it, but New York does which makes it more likely a large employer would.
polski-g 2y ago
[flagged]
- ldoughty 2y ago
  He is not. > FMLA applies to all public agencies, all public and private elementary and secondary schools, and companies with 50 or more employees. Source: https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/benefits-leave/fmla https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/benefits-leave/fmla
- pimterry 2y ago
  FMLA has a 50 employee minimum limit, as they noted above. If there aren't 50 employees within a 75-mile radius, you aren't FMLA eligible (there's quite a few other conditions too, and it's still unpaid regardless): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_of_1993 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_o...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- brendoelfrendo 2y ago
  As they said in their comment, FMLA only kicks in for employers with more than 50 employees(technically, 50 employees within a 75 mile radius). States can implement their own laws to extend maternity leave to all employers, but most don't.
Forgeties79 2y ago
We really do not care about caregivers - or kids for that matter - in the US. It’s sad. A lot of talk about “family” and how wonderful kids are yet many companies and politicians fight tooth and nail to make sure people don’t spend time with newborns and otherwise don’t have access to childcare. I don’t have to tell parents in this thread about the “July to August gulf” when all the summer camps end and school is a few weeks away. I am not the only one reading this burning precious PTO just to take care of my kids right now.
- beaglesss 2y ago
  Sure. It's great when people have kids, but the whole scam run by society is to offload most the costs on the parent then tax the shit out the kid once they're raised, effectively creating a massive wealth transfer system away from working families. Much of the societal issues of how they deal with parents traces back to tragedy of the commons IMO since the kids are future tax stock.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
mensetmanusman 2y ago
My brother in New Zealand only got two weeks off no pay for their baby.
- airstrike 2y ago
  Paternity != maternity but that's still awfully short IMHO.
ghaff 2y ago
>"vacation longer than three weeks requires the company to stop paying your salary" This is nonsense in general. I've taken month-long vacations and never had to do anything special so long as I had the time and, obviously, told my manager.
WrongAssumption 2y ago
Unlimited vacation was actually pioneered in the U.S., and spread from there. Most famously popularized by Netflix in its early days, but popular in law firms before that. https://www.reddit.com/r/ExperiencedDevs/comments/nq2ph2/i_researched_the_origin_of_unlimited_pto_at/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ExperiencedDevs/comments/nq2ph2/i_r...
- chii 2y ago
  It's not actually unlimited. In fact, by not providing a fixed amount, and calling it unlimited, it lets managers put peer pressure onto people into taking less vacations than if they'd made a fixed amount!
  - zarzavat 2y ago
    It should be called unknown vacation. There’s a limit, you just don’t know where it is. I assume if you took the UK legal minimum of 5.6 weeks for example, you would get fired.
  - kcarter80 2y ago
    It is unlimited if the employee is talented and good at advocating for themselves. It isn't if they are meek or mid. In general: it's good to let your employer know that you value your time. If you don't suck, they'll respect you more, not less.
  - marpstar 2y ago
    To add to that: it also can't be "banked" (and thereby paid out after departure). Companies give free PTO because real "paid time off" has to be tracked as a liability on their books; if you haven't "earned" anything and they don't "credit" you, you aren't "owed" you anything when you leave/are terminated.
    - 1over137 2y ago
      What does PTO mean here?
ponector 2y ago
Unlimited vacation is a marketing bullshit. Can I work for 3 months there and go for vacation for another 9 months? Not really. Then it not unlimited. To have it really unlimited you need a special position, like be a relative of CEO. But in that case you can have the same even with limited vacation policy.
- mmmm2 2y ago
  Yeah, it's just a scam so companies don't have to keep vacation on their books. It just means if you give your boss enough notice, maybe you'll get some time off, as long as your project is progressing well.

comprev 2y ago

Unlimited paid vacation days are for the employers benefit not employee.

sethammons 2y ago
For those who may not yet know why: US companies must pay out vacation time when employment terminates, meaning unpaid vacation affects liabilities and thus the balance sheet and thus stock price.
- cr1895 2y ago
  >US companies must pay out vacation time when employment terminates Doesn't that depend on the state?
  - sethammons 2y ago
    It does; didn't realize that but it makes sense
  - paulddraper 2y ago
    It does, but I've never seen any company that doesn't pay for accrued time.
    - lolinder 2y ago
      That's a choice the company makes in most states, though, meaning they can just as easily choose not to as choose unlimited vacation.
    - mark-r 2y ago
      As I understand it, the company merely needs to be consistent. Either they pay everybody for their accrued time, or they pay nobody.

withinboredom 2y ago

> are you nuts? There's a new law still in committee: https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4226&session125&summary=B https://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=4226... > What? Why is it called vacation then Having more than two weeks off in a year is pretty strange. I worked at a place with "unlimited vacation" once, and you weren't allowed to take off more than two weeks at a time until someone took off two weeks every three weeks ... and that ended that policy. They made it about 4 months before getting fired though.

rsynnott 2y ago
> Having more than two weeks off in a year is pretty strange. I mean, not that strange: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_b...
- tialaramex 2y ago
  Yeah, I took July off this year and last year. Obviously that needs some up-front notice to ensure there's cover, but I tell my manager in the spring and it's fine. Americans are very, very strange and the fact they think they're normal is part of that.
  - elteto 2y ago
    Americans are not “strange”, whatever that means. The US has overall worse protections than the EU, that’s it. It sucks, we all know that. There’s no need to appeal to some weirdness argument.
    - pintxo 2y ago
      I guess people in Europe find it strange that people in the US are willing to accept the status quo there?
      - HelloMcFly 2y ago

userbinator 2y ago

The basic principle is --- you work, you get paid. If you're not working, you're not getting paid. Anything additional is a bonus at the discretion of the employer.

fhd2 2y ago
That's where I suppose the US and EU truly differ. The US generally goes for the "the market will solve it" approach. If you're a bad employer, nobody wants to work there, the company goes down and the competition wins. It's a beautiful theory IMHO. The EU approach is sort of the same, but to add regulation on top to steer the market towards specific goals, like having a strong middle class. If, for example, a company doesn't suffer from being nasty to their employees (e.g. because they're a monopolist), regulation will be put in place to create that dynamic. I personally find this approach more feasible, but regulation can be worked around and sometimes backfire, it's not easy to get right. Back to your point: It comes down to how much you get paid. If you work full time and can't afford vacation or sickness, is that OK? If you think that's OK, we just disagree I suppose. There's a power imbalance between employers and employees that favours the employers. They have more money, expertise, legal counsel, negotiation power etc. Given the chance, they will pay as little as they can for labour, crush competition etc. I don't believe that's good for a country in the long run. If you think it's not OK, something has to happen. Paying people more so they can save up money to deal with this is one approach. Assuming the risk of them not working (with paid vacation and sick days) is another one. In the EU, we tend to go down the latter route. I guess you could see it as patronising, but there is beauty in sharing and distributing personal risks. I'm personally fine with both solutions. I'm running a consultancy right now, so I've decided to take the first route, assume and manage my own risks.
- playingalong 2y ago
  I am not sure all these rules are for stronger middle class. I have always thought these are for low-paid workers at a warehouse, cleaning the streets, or alike. They are way more replaceable than some specialist. Yet the state offers protection for their time off which they deserve.

sethammons 2y ago

I have "unlimited" vacation here in the states. If you go over three weeks, they still require special paperwork, but they allow it if you are tenured enough. What unlimited means is "as long as your manager is decent, you will maybe get your days off" vs accrued vacation where you may be forced to take vacation to not lose it.

withinboredom 2y ago
> accrued vacation where you may be forced to take vacation to not lose it. I don't look at it that way. If you have accrued vacation, you "earned" your vacation and they can't take it away from you without compensation. Thus, you are guaranteed your days off. If they fire you, they should even have to pay you your salary for those vacation days. "Unlimited" vacation just gives all the control to your employer: the right to deny you vacation, the right to dictate how long your vacation is, etc.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago
  > If they fire you, they should even have to pay you your salary for those vacation days. This is required in the US. That's the point of unlimited vacation - since it doesn't accrue, the company doesn't have to pay it out when you leave.
  - hiatus 2y ago
    It is not required in the US as it varies by state.
    - mrkstu 2y ago
      Enough states require it that most companies large enough to be multistate in employment go ahead and standardize it into their policies.
      - hiatus 2y ago
        Apparently 27 states require it, but New York does which makes it more likely a large employer would.

polski-g 2y ago

[flagged]

ldoughty 2y ago
He is not. > FMLA applies to all public agencies, all public and private elementary and secondary schools, and companies with 50 or more employees. Source: https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/benefits-leave/fmla https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/benefits-leave/fmla
pimterry 2y ago
FMLA has a 50 employee minimum limit, as they noted above. If there aren't 50 employees within a 75-mile radius, you aren't FMLA eligible (there's quite a few other conditions too, and it's still unpaid regardless): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_of_1993 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_o...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
brendoelfrendo 2y ago
As they said in their comment, FMLA only kicks in for employers with more than 50 employees(technically, 50 employees within a 75 mile radius). States can implement their own laws to extend maternity leave to all employers, but most don't.

Forgeties79 2y ago

We really do not care about caregivers - or kids for that matter - in the US. It’s sad. A lot of talk about “family” and how wonderful kids are yet many companies and politicians fight tooth and nail to make sure people don’t spend time with newborns and otherwise don’t have access to childcare. I don’t have to tell parents in this thread about the “July to August gulf” when all the summer camps end and school is a few weeks away. I am not the only one reading this burning precious PTO just to take care of my kids right now.

beaglesss 2y ago
Sure. It's great when people have kids, but the whole scam run by society is to offload most the costs on the parent then tax the shit out the kid once they're raised, effectively creating a massive wealth transfer system away from working families. Much of the societal issues of how they deal with parents traces back to tragedy of the commons IMO since the kids are future tax stock.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

mensetmanusman 2y ago

My brother in New Zealand only got two weeks off no pay for their baby.

airstrike 2y ago
Paternity != maternity but that's still awfully short IMHO.

ghaff 2y ago

>"vacation longer than three weeks requires the company to stop paying your salary" This is nonsense in general. I've taken month-long vacations and never had to do anything special so long as I had the time and, obviously, told my manager.

WrongAssumption 2y ago

Unlimited vacation was actually pioneered in the U.S., and spread from there. Most famously popularized by Netflix in its early days, but popular in law firms before that. https://www.reddit.com/r/ExperiencedDevs/comments/nq2ph2/i_researched_the_origin_of_unlimited_pto_at/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ExperiencedDevs/comments/nq2ph2/i_r...

chii 2y ago
It's not actually unlimited. In fact, by not providing a fixed amount, and calling it unlimited, it lets managers put peer pressure onto people into taking less vacations than if they'd made a fixed amount!
- zarzavat 2y ago
  It should be called unknown vacation. There’s a limit, you just don’t know where it is. I assume if you took the UK legal minimum of 5.6 weeks for example, you would get fired.
- kcarter80 2y ago
  It is unlimited if the employee is talented and good at advocating for themselves. It isn't if they are meek or mid. In general: it's good to let your employer know that you value your time. If you don't suck, they'll respect you more, not less.
- marpstar 2y ago
  To add to that: it also can't be "banked" (and thereby paid out after departure). Companies give free PTO because real "paid time off" has to be tracked as a liability on their books; if you haven't "earned" anything and they don't "credit" you, you aren't "owed" you anything when you leave/are terminated.
  - 1over137 2y ago
    What does PTO mean here?

ponector 2y ago

Unlimited vacation is a marketing bullshit. Can I work for 3 months there and go for vacation for another 9 months? Not really. Then it not unlimited. To have it really unlimited you need a special position, like be a relative of CEO. But in that case you can have the same even with limited vacation policy.

mmmm2 2y ago
Yeah, it's just a scam so companies don't have to keep vacation on their books. It just means if you give your boss enough notice, maybe you'll get some time off, as long as your project is progressing well.