Unlimited Vacation Time(bbarrows.com)
bbarrows.com
Unlimited Vacation Time
http://www.bbarrows.com/Programming/Jobs/Vacation/2013/01/26/vacation.html
56 comments
Have you worked at a company that offers unlimited vacation?
I do (it's a recent change for us). It works fine. People take time off when they want to (one of the guys on my team is on a 2-week vacation in Thailand right now). Yes, some people (including myself) do the illogical guilt thing on occasion. But if your manager isn't encouraging you to take time off periodically, he's doing a bad job as your manager.
Right now I'm planning a week and a half in Peru for this spring, and I'm toying with the idea of a southeast Asia trip this summer for a similar amount of time. I also took four days off beyond normal holiday days around the New Year. A week and a half ago I was very ill and stayed home for three days without having to worry about "taking a sick day" (not to mention that my colleagues thanked me for not coming in and getting them sick too).
If you work for a company that has "unlimited vacation" but makes people who use it feel stigmatized, quit and find a company that doesn't lie to you about its culture. They do exist.
It makes me sad that this "unlimited vacation doesn't work" comment is the top-voted one right now. It's absolutist and entirely nonsensical.
I do (it's a recent change for us). It works fine. People take time off when they want to (one of the guys on my team is on a 2-week vacation in Thailand right now). Yes, some people (including myself) do the illogical guilt thing on occasion. But if your manager isn't encouraging you to take time off periodically, he's doing a bad job as your manager.
Right now I'm planning a week and a half in Peru for this spring, and I'm toying with the idea of a southeast Asia trip this summer for a similar amount of time. I also took four days off beyond normal holiday days around the New Year. A week and a half ago I was very ill and stayed home for three days without having to worry about "taking a sick day" (not to mention that my colleagues thanked me for not coming in and getting them sick too).
If you work for a company that has "unlimited vacation" but makes people who use it feel stigmatized, quit and find a company that doesn't lie to you about its culture. They do exist.
It makes me sad that this "unlimited vacation doesn't work" comment is the top-voted one right now. It's absolutist and entirely nonsensical.
So we agree unlimited vacation really means "vacation at the mercy of your manager."
The problem with "quit and find a company that doesn't lie to you about its culture" is that you can't tell if they're lying until you've made the enormous investment of quitting your previous job and getting hired there.
Even if they're the good guys(tm), their investors can kick out the previous CEO, and management styles can change dramatically for the worse.
If you accept "unlimited vacation," you're negotiating a scenario where a non-trivial portion of your compensation is tied to the goodwill of your counter-party, whose inherent interests are opposed to yours, and where the costs of you "fixing" the situation are dramatic.
Caveat emptor.
The problem with "quit and find a company that doesn't lie to you about its culture" is that you can't tell if they're lying until you've made the enormous investment of quitting your previous job and getting hired there.
Even if they're the good guys(tm), their investors can kick out the previous CEO, and management styles can change dramatically for the worse.
If you accept "unlimited vacation," you're negotiating a scenario where a non-trivial portion of your compensation is tied to the goodwill of your counter-party, whose inherent interests are opposed to yours, and where the costs of you "fixing" the situation are dramatic.
Caveat emptor.
So we agree unlimited vacation really means "vacation at the mercy of your manager."
Vacation is always at the mercy of your manager, regardless if it's unlimited or not.
So ok, you clearly are flat-out cynical about all this stuff so... don't work for a company with unlimited vacation. It works just fine for some of us, who work for reasonable companies. That's a fact, regardless of your feelings on the matter.
Vacation is always at the mercy of your manager, regardless if it's unlimited or not.
So ok, you clearly are flat-out cynical about all this stuff so... don't work for a company with unlimited vacation. It works just fine for some of us, who work for reasonable companies. That's a fact, regardless of your feelings on the matter.
[deleted]
People take time off when they want to (one of the guys on my team is on a 2-week vacation
What if I wanted a 2 month vacation instead of a 2 week vacation? I've yet to hear of a place that would forbid you taking two weeks off once in a while. Using the word "unlimited" and then talking about days and weeks seems kind of counter-intuitive.
What if I wanted a 2 month vacation instead of a 2 week vacation? I've yet to hear of a place that would forbid you taking two weeks off once in a while. Using the word "unlimited" and then talking about days and weeks seems kind of counter-intuitive.
We actually did have on employee take a full month. He was one of our rock start developer/architects who had basically built the foundation for our current generation of product. There was a natural, "division" line for him to take some time off.
In general, though, your managers have a target that they manage to - and they negotiate you to that number. In our company, "Unlimited Vacation" means two weeks a years.
In general, though, your managers have a target that they manage to - and they negotiate you to that number. In our company, "Unlimited Vacation" means two weeks a years.
> In our company, "Unlimited Vacation" means two weeks a years.
So, that's significantly less than the minimum you're getting by law in, say, a European country. And it sounds like you have to negotiate (or be perceived as a prodigy) to even get that. Am I missing something here? Because it sounds just awful.
So, that's significantly less than the minimum you're getting by law in, say, a European country. And it sounds like you have to negotiate (or be perceived as a prodigy) to even get that. Am I missing something here? Because it sounds just awful.
Shhh! Americans are blissfully unaware that everyone in Europe is legally entitled to 2-3x more vacation than Americans get.
25 days of vacation is the biggest thing I miss about working in London :-p
25 days of vacation is the biggest thing I miss about working in London :-p
Most people can get the two weeks if they put minimal effort into arranging projects to create an opening. Maybe one in 25 takes 3 weeks. I only know of two people ( in 500) who took a months vacation.
Have you considered minimum vacation time?
In France we get 5 weeks minimum (some companies give more). If you don't take your vacations, that's not good for the company.
The accumulation of vacations is considered a debt in the accounting book, and if you leave they need to pay it cash.
In a previous job I remember seeing the accountant sermoning my boss (the CTO and cofounder) because we was not taking any vacations.
The accumulation of vacations is considered a debt in the accounting book, and if you leave they need to pay it cash.
In a previous job I remember seeing the accountant sermoning my boss (the CTO and cofounder) because we was not taking any vacations.
Another less likely employer benefit to be considered is that in roughly half of that U.S. states, employers must pay out accrued vacation time if there is a policy in place.
An example from California's vacation faq (http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_vacation.htm):
"For example, an employee who is entitled to three weeks of annual vacation (15 work days entitlement per year x 8 hours/day = 120 hours vacation entitlement per year) who quits on August 7, 2002 (the 219th day of the year) without having taken any vacation in 2002, who has no vacation carry-over from prior years, and whose final rate of pay is $13.00 per hour, would be entitled to $936.00 vacation pay upon separation"
An example from California's vacation faq (http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_vacation.htm):
"For example, an employee who is entitled to three weeks of annual vacation (15 work days entitlement per year x 8 hours/day = 120 hours vacation entitlement per year) who quits on August 7, 2002 (the 219th day of the year) without having taken any vacation in 2002, who has no vacation carry-over from prior years, and whose final rate of pay is $13.00 per hour, would be entitled to $936.00 vacation pay upon separation"
I've always assumed this is exactly why silicon valley companies have unlimited vacation policies. They know their employees won't take much vacation time, and this way they won't have to put the balance on the books.
I agree, but then there's a second order effect. If you know you're not going to get a payout when you leave a job, you're going to make damn sure you get a payout (in the form of vacation) while you're at the job.
I don't think that would work. When we set up our company handbook, we had to include an actual number of vacation days, even though we have an minimum-number-of-days policy. I think Trinet (HR-as-a-service) made us.
While I haven't researched this a ton, I've heard conflicting opinions about whether or not you must have a vacation policy in your handbook. This may also be a state-by-state requirement meaning TriNet optimizes for the blanket, you must have one, stance. Does anyone have a citation proving this one way or another?
In nearly every case (California is always special, as are a few other states), you aren't required to have a vacation policy at all, or any company policy for that matter. One of the main reasons you have company policies is to make administration easier, and more importantly, to protect you from legal troubles that result from discrimination. If you have a clear policy about vacation days and how they're paid out, and you adhere to it, it will be much harder for someone to claim it as evidence of discrimination than if you sort things out on a case-by-case basis, without any sort of policy as a guide.
Outsourcing partners will require it for similar reasons, but also because it makes their lives a lot easier when they handle it for you.
Outsourcing partners will require it for similar reasons, but also because it makes their lives a lot easier when they handle it for you.
What I think is a more interesting ideas is this: minimum vacation time. You must take at least X vacation days / weeks per year. I think that would be the best of both worlds and avoids the psychology wherein no vacation is had, which is toxic
FDIC says it is also a good internal control policy - force people to take a 2 week vacation as a means to mitigate fraud.
http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/1995/fil9552.html
http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/1995/fil9552.html
It is also good for resilience and disaster planning.
>>avoids the psychology wherein no vacation is had, which is toxic
Define vacations, if its synonymous with going away(traveling) to some other place, I would say vacations are first world luxuries. Especially in the US, its easier for your guys because the basic thing required to travel namely food, travel prices and hotel accommodation are relatively cheaper. Also international travel is easy since you almost get Visa to any where if you are a US citizen. And for most US citizens dollar having a higher exchange rate is huge plus.
In most middle class families in India, you would be shrugged as a spent thrift for spending a lot of money while your peer is saving money to buy his own house.
Define vacations, if its synonymous with going away(traveling) to some other place, I would say vacations are first world luxuries. Especially in the US, its easier for your guys because the basic thing required to travel namely food, travel prices and hotel accommodation are relatively cheaper. Also international travel is easy since you almost get Visa to any where if you are a US citizen. And for most US citizens dollar having a higher exchange rate is huge plus.
In most middle class families in India, you would be shrugged as a spent thrift for spending a lot of money while your peer is saving money to buy his own house.
I guess for the purposes of this discussion, we can define vacation as just spending time off the job. You do not have to travel anywhere. Staying home with the kids is fine.
If you are so poor (or run your own still fragile business), that you can not take afford to take a few days or weeks off, then this obviously doesn't apply to you.
If you are so poor (or run your own still fragile business), that you can not take afford to take a few days or weeks off, then this obviously doesn't apply to you.
This is a really good idea. I think it actually changes the psychology, because not taking vacation would now be the negative.
I switched from a job with 3 weeks of vacation (that would be 4 by now if I had stayed) to one with no policy. My take on it is I can take 3-4 weeks a year without feeling guilty.
I honestly think every responsible and competent adult (and I purposefully leave those terms imprecise) should have no vacation policy. Vacation should be a fact of life: take it when you need it, don't take it when you can't, and work as much as you need to to do a good job (again, imprecise).
I honestly think every responsible and competent adult (and I purposefully leave those terms imprecise) should have no vacation policy. Vacation should be a fact of life: take it when you need it, don't take it when you can't, and work as much as you need to to do a good job (again, imprecise).
You want to be an independent contractor. That is cool, but not what an employer is.
Do you think responsible adults should just pay employees whatever they need and can, and not agree on a number in advance? Why or why not?
Do you think responsible adults should just pay employees whatever they need and can, and not agree on a number in advance? Why or why not?
Are you paying for them to be there for a prescribed time or are you paying them to get the work done?
I agree. I've now worked for two companies with unlimited vacation policies, and there have been some stark differences. At my previous job, where there was previously an accrued vacation system that switched to an unlimited policy, no one felt good about taking vacation days. At my current employer, everyone from the founders on down advertise and celebrate their vacation. Same policy, different context.
From an hours-worked-metrics standpoint, the policy is a success at my previous employer and a failure at my current job.
From an employee-health and burnout-rate standpoint, the policy is a failure at my previous employer and a massive success here.
I can't advocate either policy over the other without that context, but I'm skeptical of the value of introducing unlimited vacation as a benefit over an existing accrued vacation policy that employees are generally happy with.
From an hours-worked-metrics standpoint, the policy is a success at my previous employer and a failure at my current job.
From an employee-health and burnout-rate standpoint, the policy is a failure at my previous employer and a massive success here.
I can't advocate either policy over the other without that context, but I'm skeptical of the value of introducing unlimited vacation as a benefit over an existing accrued vacation policy that employees are generally happy with.
I've been the beneficiary of vacation payouts somewhat regularly, which were in addition to bonuses paid based on overtime hours. I was also able to take advantage of a significant chunk of vacation I had built up when I left my previous company to help fund starting a new company.
In my case, I would probably not benefit dollar for dollar from an unlimited vacation policy. I would either take less vacation or not benefit from the payouts. That's not to say that unlimited vacation is a bad policy. It might be a great policy, and I'm sure it depends on the details of how it is implemented and the culture of the company where it is implemented; however, it is certainly possible that the practical outcome is more of a net benefit for the company rather than the employees.
Since many startups these days are advertising unlimited vacation, I'd love to hear from both founders and employees about some of the practical ways in which this policy plays out.
In my case, I would probably not benefit dollar for dollar from an unlimited vacation policy. I would either take less vacation or not benefit from the payouts. That's not to say that unlimited vacation is a bad policy. It might be a great policy, and I'm sure it depends on the details of how it is implemented and the culture of the company where it is implemented; however, it is certainly possible that the practical outcome is more of a net benefit for the company rather than the employees.
Since many startups these days are advertising unlimited vacation, I'd love to hear from both founders and employees about some of the practical ways in which this policy plays out.
We've talked about this a fair bit at 42Floors. The consensus is that the more senior people need to make an example of themselves by liberally taking vacation. If they set the example, then everyone else will take vacation.
At a previous startup, we had pretty much unlimited vacation time, and the result was that no one took any. So clearly this doesn't work unless you make a point of encouraging people to actually take advantage. We thought about setting a minimum vacation policy where you have to take at least a certain amount, but some people didn't like the idea of being forced to take vacation.
Since I haven't taken any significant vacation since I started (6 months ago), I recently made a deal with Jason (the CEO) that I need to plan a significant vacation by the end of February. Suggestions welcome...
At a previous startup, we had pretty much unlimited vacation time, and the result was that no one took any. So clearly this doesn't work unless you make a point of encouraging people to actually take advantage. We thought about setting a minimum vacation policy where you have to take at least a certain amount, but some people didn't like the idea of being forced to take vacation.
Since I haven't taken any significant vacation since I started (6 months ago), I recently made a deal with Jason (the CEO) that I need to plan a significant vacation by the end of February. Suggestions welcome...
What I think is more important than vacation time is the ability to take time off for a doc appt., dentist appt., go see the kids play at school, take a walk around, because you're sick.
Also, freedom from incompatible work environments would be nice. It is way too noisy where I work. At the very least they should provide nice ($300-400) noise cancellation headphones without me having to beg.
Also, freedom from incompatible work environments would be nice. It is way too noisy where I work. At the very least they should provide nice ($300-400) noise cancellation headphones without me having to beg.
In the US you're legally entitled to time off for doctor's appointments.
I totally agree with you! It's hard enough to get away with taking vacation when it's quantified. Also, I notice that a lot places offering unlimited vacation tend to be younger companies that are growing which makes it that much harder to "get away" without disruption.
If you feel guilty or pressured when taking vacation then perhaps you need to find a better company. The mind and body need breaks.
Absolutely agree. I worked pretty much non-stop for a 2 month period (being in grad school as well as a full-time SWE) last year. When I finally took a break (holiday shut down) I was surprised do discover how exhausted I truly was.
I notice when I'm offered a certain amount of vacation but feel pressure not to use it, I'm much more likely to use it. The hypocrisy gets to me, and I think, "If you don't want me to use it, don't offer it!" If a boss can't plan around his employees taking the offered vacation, then he's probably not doing his job very well.
I've been working overseas for over 4 years, and I'm only now getting used to the amount of vacation time we get. We are actually encouraged to use all of our vacation time. --It works out like this:
By law we get 5 weeks of vacation a year. My employer throws in an extra week as a perk, but that week gets used last, and can't roll over - basically use all 6 weeks or lose one. And then you can roll over up to 2 weeks if you don't use it all. So in practice, this means that you'll take at least 3 weeks, and almost everyone takes the full 6 weeks, unless they're planning something for the next year and know that they'll want an extra two weeks.
By law we get 5 weeks of vacation a year. My employer throws in an extra week as a perk, but that week gets used last, and can't roll over - basically use all 6 weeks or lose one. And then you can roll over up to 2 weeks if you don't use it all. So in practice, this means that you'll take at least 3 weeks, and almost everyone takes the full 6 weeks, unless they're planning something for the next year and know that they'll want an extra two weeks.
Like most things in business, the problem isn't with the policy, it's with management. If you create a culture that frowns upon employees taking vacation time, it won't matter if you give them unlimited vacation or only two weeks, nobody will take it. And if you create a culture that values rested, refreshed, happy employees, the total number of days isn't nearly as important.
With that said, when unlimited vacation time is implemented well, it can be amazing for both the company and employees for a number of reasons:
1) You don't worry as much about things like sick days or one-off PTO. Work doesn't always follow a 9-5 schedule, so if you end up working 60 hours in four days, you can just take Friday off - it feels like less of a big deal if you don't have to worry about 'losing a day.'
2) Do you need to leave early to make a flight? Don't worry about entering it into the system, just do it.
3) If people are legitimately sick, they won't come to the office and infect everyone out of fear of 'using a sick day.'
4) Holidays get a lot easier. Do you not mind working between Christmas and New Years, but want to take time off for Eid/Rosh Hashanah/Diwali/Festivus/whatever? All of a sudden it's not a big deal. It's also great for parents, who don't have to worry as much about child care if their kids have random day off of school.
5) You can take a 'big trip' without losing all your days. The consecutive days, rather than the one-off long weekends, are the bigger issue for a company. I've actually found it easier to take a long trip when I didn't have to worry about losing all my days.
Companies are nervous about this arrangement because they worry employees will abuse it, but again, that's a management issue. You have unlimited vacation time as long as you are getting your work done. If you're taking so much time the work isn't getting done, then the issue isn't vacation time, it's a performance problem, the same as if you showed up every day and just played on facebook.
Because the management piece of it is so important, there are also things companies can do to make a system like this work better:
1) Create a mandatory 'real vacation' by requiring employees to take at least a week off, in a row, once a year. If employees feel like they can never take time off, they'll get burnt out and you'll lose great people. If you make a vacation mandatory, people will feel more comfortable taking the time, and the company will reap the rewards of happier, clearer thinking people. Plus, many people, especially in creative or professional jobs, get inspired when they're able to step away from the day to day for a little bit.
2) Make telecommuting easy, so that employees can still check in even if they're not in the office. Sometimes, people only really need a half day, but don't mind sitting on e-mail in the morning. Or they have their kids around all day and would love to get the opportunity to talk to some adults. The important thing here is to be flexible, and make sure that telecommuting doesn't become "we can make you work wherever, whenever, even on vacation."
3) Have real performance management. This isn't about annual reviews, it's about managers that provide ongoing, regular feedback about how employees are doing against the company's goals, help them understand when they're falling short, and work non-performers out of the organization. Top performers will get turned off by anyone abusing the policy, even more than management.
With that said, when unlimited vacation time is implemented well, it can be amazing for both the company and employees for a number of reasons:
1) You don't worry as much about things like sick days or one-off PTO. Work doesn't always follow a 9-5 schedule, so if you end up working 60 hours in four days, you can just take Friday off - it feels like less of a big deal if you don't have to worry about 'losing a day.'
2) Do you need to leave early to make a flight? Don't worry about entering it into the system, just do it.
3) If people are legitimately sick, they won't come to the office and infect everyone out of fear of 'using a sick day.'
4) Holidays get a lot easier. Do you not mind working between Christmas and New Years, but want to take time off for Eid/Rosh Hashanah/Diwali/Festivus/whatever? All of a sudden it's not a big deal. It's also great for parents, who don't have to worry as much about child care if their kids have random day off of school.
5) You can take a 'big trip' without losing all your days. The consecutive days, rather than the one-off long weekends, are the bigger issue for a company. I've actually found it easier to take a long trip when I didn't have to worry about losing all my days.
Companies are nervous about this arrangement because they worry employees will abuse it, but again, that's a management issue. You have unlimited vacation time as long as you are getting your work done. If you're taking so much time the work isn't getting done, then the issue isn't vacation time, it's a performance problem, the same as if you showed up every day and just played on facebook.
Because the management piece of it is so important, there are also things companies can do to make a system like this work better:
1) Create a mandatory 'real vacation' by requiring employees to take at least a week off, in a row, once a year. If employees feel like they can never take time off, they'll get burnt out and you'll lose great people. If you make a vacation mandatory, people will feel more comfortable taking the time, and the company will reap the rewards of happier, clearer thinking people. Plus, many people, especially in creative or professional jobs, get inspired when they're able to step away from the day to day for a little bit.
2) Make telecommuting easy, so that employees can still check in even if they're not in the office. Sometimes, people only really need a half day, but don't mind sitting on e-mail in the morning. Or they have their kids around all day and would love to get the opportunity to talk to some adults. The important thing here is to be flexible, and make sure that telecommuting doesn't become "we can make you work wherever, whenever, even on vacation."
3) Have real performance management. This isn't about annual reviews, it's about managers that provide ongoing, regular feedback about how employees are doing against the company's goals, help them understand when they're falling short, and work non-performers out of the organization. Top performers will get turned off by anyone abusing the policy, even more than management.
Create a mandatory 'real vacation' by requiring employees to take at least a week off, in a row, once a year
Great idea, but I would argue a week isn't enough. Require employees to take a minimum 2 or 3 weeks off per year, not necessarily contiguously.
Although, I can also see this as a bad thing. It might create the impression in people's mind that "the company thinks that X weeks is the right amount for everyone to take off", which might make people hesitant to take more, even if doing so could greatly benefit their state of mind.
Great idea, but I would argue a week isn't enough. Require employees to take a minimum 2 or 3 weeks off per year, not necessarily contiguously.
Although, I can also see this as a bad thing. It might create the impression in people's mind that "the company thinks that X weeks is the right amount for everyone to take off", which might make people hesitant to take more, even if doing so could greatly benefit their state of mind.
Do you work for a company with unlimited vacation? While we have 'unlimited vacation', our sick policies went from no tracking to a limited number of sick days per year.
After being on it for a year, I would prefer to go back to the 'guaranteed 12 days a year'
After being on it for a year, I would prefer to go back to the 'guaranteed 12 days a year'
That seems like an odd thing to do when employees have unlimited vacation time. "Oh, I'm out of sick days? I'll just take a vacation day then."
Vacation needs to be negotiated in advance with your manager, and you need to make sure all your projects are taken care of. In theory, your manager can't deny you a sick day, and they don't need to be negotiated.
I own my own company now, but I've worked at both companies with unlimited vacation and those with a set number of days. Allowing unlimited vacation but tracking sick days seems strange - how do you define the difference, and why do they care?
I've also found that once you're in a system, change makes it worse even if it's too a better system. If you go from unlimited to a set amount, you feel like someone has now capped your time and is watching you (even if the cap is so high you would never hit it). If you had a set number of days and they switch to unlimited, you feel like now you don't have a guaranteed amount of vacation. The loss aversion is really strong.
I've also found that once you're in a system, change makes it worse even if it's too a better system. If you go from unlimited to a set amount, you feel like someone has now capped your time and is watching you (even if the cap is so high you would never hit it). If you had a set number of days and they switch to unlimited, you feel like now you don't have a guaranteed amount of vacation. The loss aversion is really strong.
We went from "Unlimited Sick Days" to a set amount, and the general reaction was, "How on earth could anybody require so many sick days." (Answer, the number is the dividing line between, "Sick Days" and "Short term disability")
On the flip side, when you have a set amount of vacation, there is a nice "target" for you to take, with a hard number appearing on your paycheck every two weeks reminding you.
On the flip side, when you have a set amount of vacation, there is a nice "target" for you to take, with a hard number appearing on your paycheck every two weeks reminding you.
Can you explain why people are afraid to take a sick day?
I'm not from the USA, so this might be a cultural thing or things just work different where I'm from.
Also, since I'm moving there, does this apply to the UK?
I'm not from the USA, so this might be a cultural thing or things just work different where I'm from.
Also, since I'm moving there, does this apply to the UK?
It doesn't apply to the UK. If you're sick, be sick. You'll be paid, too.
A few caveats:
1. The above is for permanent positions. If you're a contractor the rules are different.
2. The above is true once you're through probation, which might be the first six months.
3. I have no idea what it's like in startups. I've only ever worked for big companies or the government.
But in general, sick leave is a benefit like a company car or flexible working. If it's in your contract, no one will mind you using it.
A point about holiday leave, too. In the UK, it's usual to take holidays. Everyone does, and then we talk about them in the office afterwards. It's considered part of being a rounded human being. Most holiday entitlements don't roll over, either, so if you don't use your 30 days (for example), you lose the remainder. This means there's a bit of a scramble to get them used up before rollover day. Everyone does this, and you'll be looked upon as a bit peculiar if you don't use the holidays you're entitled to.
A few caveats:
1. The above is for permanent positions. If you're a contractor the rules are different.
2. The above is true once you're through probation, which might be the first six months.
3. I have no idea what it's like in startups. I've only ever worked for big companies or the government.
But in general, sick leave is a benefit like a company car or flexible working. If it's in your contract, no one will mind you using it.
A point about holiday leave, too. In the UK, it's usual to take holidays. Everyone does, and then we talk about them in the office afterwards. It's considered part of being a rounded human being. Most holiday entitlements don't roll over, either, so if you don't use your 30 days (for example), you lose the remainder. This means there's a bit of a scramble to get them used up before rollover day. Everyone does this, and you'll be looked upon as a bit peculiar if you don't use the holidays you're entitled to.
A lot of companies in the US either give you a fixed amount of sick days – they won't fire you if you go over, but you won't get paid – or they consider paid time off and sick days to be equivalent, and so if you're sick for a week, you're seriously eating into your vacation time unless you can afford to go on an unpaid leave (and your supervisor lets you).
Dunno about the UK.
Dunno about the UK.
Some companies, (I think Cisco is one) - gives you a "bucket" of days to use how you wish, Sick Day, Vacation Day, whatever. So, using up a sick day just means one less vacation day.
Back when we were doing our startup, we had a month's worth of vacation hard-coded into our employment contracts. Everyone got the same amount. This gave people a good measuring stick of what we expected under normal conditions. We didn't enforce the limit though, so people could take more if they wanted to (which happened very rarely). We also encouraged people to take time off, especially when they seemed burned out.
This worked amazingly well. It was one of the very few things we did right.
This worked amazingly well. It was one of the very few things we did right.
My company previously had 12 days of vacation a year, they switched to "unlimited vacation" - most people, myself included, take about a week a year now.
Unlimited Vacation policies borrow from the Unlimited Sick Time. Most companies used to be explicit about sick days. "You get 6 per year." Then a few companies started with a more enlightened policy of, "We don't count, we trust you." Perhaps the early adopters of this policy viewed it as a trust issue. Then the data started coming in... On average people took a lot fewer than 6 when nobody was counting. The policy then turned in to a cost savings plan, and everyone started doing it.
The "You get as much vacation as you want" seems to be going that direction too. The early adopters were enlightened, thinking, "The value of showing trust to an engineer will more than pay for the rare abuse." It does save money, and now the cost cutters are seeing it too.
I've worked in several places where you get a month of vacation, and never get to use it all because you're too busy. Changing that to unlimited does not help much.
Some things that do help: - Mandate everyone takes a 2 week continuous vacation. This is done by banks for compliance reasons. (Harder to hide fraud if you're out 2 weeks in a row.) It is very beneficial, because this forces you to take at least 2 weeks of your allocated 4. - Allow paid sabbaticals. "After X years, you can take 2X weeks off for a continuous sabbatical that we pay for, and we'll pick up half of any coursework or travel costs." - Lead by example. This is VERY tough, because most good leaders like to lead by example showing that they're not above working hard. They can also lead by example taking their vacation.
In the end, none of this is altruistic. It's a way to keep talent motivated and feeling valued when they have lots of options. If you stiff a good engineer 2 weeks of vacation, they can always make it up by taking 2 weeks off before starting another job. :-)
The "You get as much vacation as you want" seems to be going that direction too. The early adopters were enlightened, thinking, "The value of showing trust to an engineer will more than pay for the rare abuse." It does save money, and now the cost cutters are seeing it too.
I've worked in several places where you get a month of vacation, and never get to use it all because you're too busy. Changing that to unlimited does not help much.
Some things that do help: - Mandate everyone takes a 2 week continuous vacation. This is done by banks for compliance reasons. (Harder to hide fraud if you're out 2 weeks in a row.) It is very beneficial, because this forces you to take at least 2 weeks of your allocated 4. - Allow paid sabbaticals. "After X years, you can take 2X weeks off for a continuous sabbatical that we pay for, and we'll pick up half of any coursework or travel costs." - Lead by example. This is VERY tough, because most good leaders like to lead by example showing that they're not above working hard. They can also lead by example taking their vacation.
In the end, none of this is altruistic. It's a way to keep talent motivated and feeling valued when they have lots of options. If you stiff a good engineer 2 weeks of vacation, they can always make it up by taking 2 weeks off before starting another job. :-)
When I had a few employees in Manhattan, my policy was "Sick days, holidays, vacation --just do what makes sense." It all worked out fine.
My office manager, whose main house was a couple hours outside NYC, took 3 and 4 day weekends at the slightest pretext, e.g. some Jewish holidays I've never heard of before or since. Once she even got it up to 5 days. On the other hand, the only time she took a solid week off was when I insisted she fly to her estranged mother's funeral. And she didn't get sick much.
My #2 office guy was Catholic, and didn't need the Jewish holidays. About the only time they overlapped on a day I wanted to be open was for Good Friday (which of course usually falls during Passover).
It all worked out fine.
Similarly, both there and especially in the Boston area where people drove to work, my policy was "Good heavens, don't start at 9:00 am and fight the worst of rush hour unless you really want to!" Some chose 8:00 am, some 10:00 am. I had more coverage, and it was all good.
My office manager, whose main house was a couple hours outside NYC, took 3 and 4 day weekends at the slightest pretext, e.g. some Jewish holidays I've never heard of before or since. Once she even got it up to 5 days. On the other hand, the only time she took a solid week off was when I insisted she fly to her estranged mother's funeral. And she didn't get sick much.
My #2 office guy was Catholic, and didn't need the Jewish holidays. About the only time they overlapped on a day I wanted to be open was for Good Friday (which of course usually falls during Passover).
It all worked out fine.
Similarly, both there and especially in the Boston area where people drove to work, my policy was "Good heavens, don't start at 9:00 am and fight the worst of rush hour unless you really want to!" Some chose 8:00 am, some 10:00 am. I had more coverage, and it was all good.
There's a huge discussion here on how what really matters is company culture, not policies on how much vacation time you're allowed.
My takeaway is to only work for companies where you already know somebody outside of work. The problem is that it's really hard to get a sense of a company's culture during the interview process, so unless you have a friend who's willing to tell the truth you can easily be deceived. I know some companies that claimed to have 40 hour work weeks but people frequently came in on weekends. More surprisingly, I knew some companies where they claimed to be workaholics but generally held 9-5 hours.
So find someone you trust to tell you the raw truth about the company-not the whitewashed sales pitch. "2 weeks of official vacation, but people actually take 5" is a lot better than "unlimited vacation, but no one takes any."
My takeaway is to only work for companies where you already know somebody outside of work. The problem is that it's really hard to get a sense of a company's culture during the interview process, so unless you have a friend who's willing to tell the truth you can easily be deceived. I know some companies that claimed to have 40 hour work weeks but people frequently came in on weekends. More surprisingly, I knew some companies where they claimed to be workaholics but generally held 9-5 hours.
So find someone you trust to tell you the raw truth about the company-not the whitewashed sales pitch. "2 weeks of official vacation, but people actually take 5" is a lot better than "unlimited vacation, but no one takes any."
At Levion, we're looking at implementing a stated vacation day policy, but as a matter of policy. So to avoid discouraging people from using say, 10 or 15 days of vacation, you are guaranteed those days. As a matter of policy, we probably won't track vacation days unless it feels excessive (and where you need to "buy" vacation days if you go over excessively). How does this sound?
I've found that it's sometimes the case that you will officially get offered a fixed amount of vacation time, but informally you can take more than it if you want.
The unwritten rule seems to be "you're working really hard to get a featured shipped, if you need extra vacation to decompress after, feel free".
The unwritten rule seems to be "you're working really hard to get a featured shipped, if you need extra vacation to decompress after, feel free".
I'd go on vacation for ever and see how long they keep paying me :-)
What does "as long as you're getting your work done" mean? There's no point in the year when nobody would be happier if you got something done sooner. There's never a time when taking vacation doesn't mean that some work you might have done doesn't get pushed to somebody else, or never done. The point of vacation is that you should be able to relax, but if you're worrying that you're screwing the company by not getting your work done, how can you relax?
Unlimited vacation sounds nice, but in practice it doesn't work.