|
|
Post by busy on Jul 15, 2025 15:36:46 GMT
Most men I feel would say more pay. I think it would depend on how much they make to start with and how much longer they intend to work. For someone making $100k base salary who plans to work ten more years - taking 0.5% annual raise vs 2.0% annual only works out to a difference of about $60k over the ten years. Which isn't nothing but not an amount that's going to make a huge difference for most people (and obviously, more of that comes in the later years). But someone starting at $100k base who plans to work 20 more years - taking only 0.5% results in loss of about $320k over those 20 years. And if there are any bonuses that are tied to base, that's going to increase that even more. Someone who has 20 more years to work is also more likely to still have kids who are dependent on them, etc. so current money matters more. People who are closer to retirement, regardless of gender, are often at different places with their personal priorities and more time is more valuable than a little extra money when the kids are already out of the house, etc. And of course, people who are making less money to start with are more likely to want all the extra money they can get because it all makes a difference. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Jul 15, 2025 15:41:17 GMT
At my last corporate full time job I would have had to work there something like ten YEARS to get a third week of paid vacation and a lot of employees didn’t last that long. The employee turnover was bad because the culture there was pretty toxic. When I worked in a brick and mortar branch we also got paid holidays which was about another 7-8 days off. I transferred to a non traditional branch when I was going to college and we had to work most of those “holiday” days but would get an extra flex day to make up for it. I would have had to work there for a very long time to accrue four weeks of paid annual vacation so that colors my opinion.
I’ve been self employed in one way or another for almost the past 30 years. For five of those years, I didn’t get any time off at all. Being self employed like my DH currently is, when you don’t work you don’t get paid. Every time we make a conscious decision to take a vacation we are by nature choosing more days off vs. potentially more pay.
We typically take off the week of our anniversary in July. Business has been kind of slow lately so DH mused whether he should block out the week like we normally do or keep the calendar open, but then decided it doesn’t make sense to be “open” if it’s only going to be slow anyway? DH knows another contractor in his same line of work who takes the whole month of February off because it’s typically slow then too, and he would rather be soaking up sun in Arizona doing nothing than freezing his butt off here doing nothing because no one is making appointments. It’s all a trade off.
|
|
|
|
Post by Laurie on Jul 15, 2025 15:54:21 GMT
I would choose the extra time off. I treasure my days off and being home. I would love having even more days off....especially since I've become much more of a homebody as I've aged. A 2% increase in funds, would not be that much of an increase, nor would it be a significant difference or impact on my budget and finances. ![]() On a $100,000 (picked for ease of calculation) salary for 10 years it would be a $89,000 difference (2% vs 0.5%). |
|
|
|
Post by Laurie on Jul 15, 2025 15:58:45 GMT
At my current job it is our family owned business. I don't want employees thinking that I am taking a lot of time off while they are working. Also, I am constantly worrying if there are any problems, etc so it is not like I am really getting away. However, I was the same way at my previous job. It was also 4 weeks/year but can carry over but you couldn't have over 6 weeks banked. It was use it or lose it so my boss would force me to take a few days off. Idk I just don't like taking time off if I am not going on a trip. I get bored and feel lazy. I get it! When I was the president of a company, I had a generous leave policy - more than the rank & file staff - but I felt very uncomfortable taking time above what the rest of the team had. Financially, the company wasn't in a position to offer everyone the same leave package I had, so I while I did bump up everyone's leave to some degree, I still had more (board's decision, not mine). I just let my time in excess of what senior members of staff had go to waste. As A senior leader but not THE senior leader in a larger company, I don't hesitate to take all my time. There are more coverage options and the overall structure of the company is better and more equitable. The company I ran was an acquisition from a retiring owner who ran the place for decades as his own personal fiefdom, paying himself handsomely and underpaying and overworking all the staff, while leaving a ton of deferred maintenance - physical and technological - across everything. Soooo much had to be invested to get things up to snuff, including increasing employee wages and cross-training staff for coverage when people were out. I was able to give them raises but couldn't ALSO give them a bunch more leave at the same time. It was just a very complicated situation that required careful leadership and a good bit of sacrifice on my part. But we made a ton of progress and I'm super proud of where they all where when I left compared to when I started. Given that we have a lot of long time employees I would say more than half of our employees have 4 weeks. While I don't like taking a day off and doing nothing it is actually easier for me because I know I am just a few minutes away and can go in if needed. |
|
|
|
Post by littlemama on Jul 15, 2025 16:03:56 GMT
I would choose the extra time off. I treasure my days off and being home. I would love having even more days off....especially since I've become much more of a homebody as I've aged. A 2% increase in funds, would not be that much of an increase, nor would it be a significant difference or impact on my budget and finances. ![]() On a $100,000 (picked for ease of calculation) salary for 10 years it would be a $89,000 difference (2% vs 0.5%). I took it to mean if you chose the days plus .5%, that you would then go back to regular raises the next uear and keep the days. I think some clarification is needed here. |
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 15, 2025 16:05:40 GMT
I'd likely take the money and just enjoy the days off I had
|
|
|
|
Post by ScrapbookMyLife on Jul 15, 2025 16:09:26 GMT
I would choose the extra time off. I treasure my days off and being home. I would love having even more days off....especially since I've become much more of a homebody as I've aged. A 2% increase in funds, would not be that much of an increase, nor would it be a significant difference or impact on my budget and finances. ![]() On a $100,000 (picked for ease of calculation) salary for 10 years it would be a $89,000 difference (2% vs 0.5%). Please correct me if I am wrong. I used my calculator and got these figures: I calculate 2% of $100,000 yearly as $2,000.00 a year. $2000.00 extra per year is approximately $166.00 extra a month. An extra $2,000.00 per year for 10 years is $20,000 in 10 years. |
|
|
|
Post by JustCallMeMommy on Jul 15, 2025 16:17:38 GMT
I have enough days now that I would take more money, but when I was in another job when I was younger with less time off, I chose to "buy" an extra week of vacation. We could do this on an as-needed basis. I've also negotiated extra time off when starting a job before.
|
|
seaexplore
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,366
Apr 25, 2015 23:57:30 GMT
|
Post by seaexplore on Jul 15, 2025 16:19:20 GMT
On a $100,000 (picked for ease of calculation) salary for 10 years it would be a $89,000 difference (2% vs 0.5%). Please correct me if I am wrong. I used my calculator and got these figures: I calculate 2% of $100,000 yearly as $2,000.00 a year. $2000.00 extra per year is approximately $166.00 extra a month. An extra $2,000.00 per year for 10 years is $20,000 in 10 years. But it compounds off the previous years increase. No? |
|
|
|
Post by Laurie on Jul 15, 2025 16:42:06 GMT
On a $100,000 (picked for ease of calculation) salary for 10 years it would be a $89,000 difference (2% vs 0.5%). Please correct me if I am wrong. I used my calculator and got these figures: I calculate 2% of $100,000 yearly as $2,000.00 a year. $2000.00 extra per year is approximately $166.00 extra a month. An extra $2,000.00 per year for 10 years is $20,000 in 10 years. It will compound each year, similar to compound interest. 2% 0.50% Difference $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $102,000.00 $100,500.00 -$1,500.00 $104,040.00 $101,002.50 -$3,037.50 $106,120.80 $101,507.51 -$4,613.29 $108,243.22 $102,015.05 -$6,228.17 $110,408.08 $102,525.13 -$7,882.96 $112,616.24 $103,037.75 -$9,578.49 $114,868.57 $103,552.94 -$11,315.63 $117,165.94 $104,070.70 -$13,095.23 $119,509.26 $104,591.06 -$14,918.20 $121,899.44 $105,114.01 -$16,785.43 Total Difference: -$88,954.89 |
|
|
|
Post by busy on Jul 15, 2025 17:29:42 GMT
On a $100,000 (picked for ease of calculation) salary for 10 years it would be a $89,000 difference (2% vs 0.5%). Please correct me if I am wrong. I used my calculator and got these figures: I calculate 2% of $100,000 yearly as $2,000.00 a year. $2000.00 extra per year is approximately $166.00 extra a month. An extra $2,000.00 per year for 10 years is $20,000 in 10 years. It took it to mean that's the annual increase, so an additional 1.5% to $101.5k in year one, then 1.5% of 101.5K in year two, and so on. The longer you have left to work, the more compounding effect it will be. |
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,610 
|
Post by katybee on Jul 15, 2025 17:36:57 GMT
Ugh….I’m halfway through my summer break and I’m already BORED. Give me the money….
|
|
|
|
Post by lisae on Jul 15, 2025 19:13:15 GMT
Personally I would choose the time off. You do what benefits you the most. The percentage increase will reset your base salary. So if they are perhaps going to offer this again next year, you could take the money and move your salary up a bit. Then if you want the time off, perhaps choose that option another year.
|
|
RedSquirrelUK
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,077
Location: The UK's beautiful West Country
|
Post by RedSquirrelUK on Jul 15, 2025 20:54:28 GMT
My pay is pitiful, only slightly above the living wage. I would choose the time off.
|
|
AllieC
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,129
|
Post by AllieC on Jul 15, 2025 23:25:19 GMT
Honestly, it depends on a few factors. Are those 6 extra days just for one year, or will you get 26 days every year going forward? How difficult is it to use (and enjoy) your current 20 days? If you already get grief about taking 20 days off, what good are an extra 6? How does your company treat people who have a healthy work/life balance? I just read a news article about how managers recognize people need a healthy balance, but they are less likely to promote people who enforce boundaries, as they are "less committed" to work. Are you at a point in your career where that bias would have long term impact on your overall financial wellbeing? If you are nearing retirement, that bias wouldn't compound as much as it would if you were in your 20s. Then again, you are in Australia, so it may not happen there. In general though, I would take the extra days, as time is the only resource you can't make more of. Fortunately in Australia the great majority of employers see taking leave as just part of business operations. In 45 years of working I've never had leave declined (with the caveat that we know that everyone can't take leave at the same time so work that out) and we are encouraged to use our leave each year. Mostly employers see as it is better to have well rested employees that don't burn out and it is not seen as being less committed to take your leave. I think we must have a much better work/life balance here. |
|
|
|
Post by AussieMeg on Jul 15, 2025 23:27:32 GMT
We have an information session later today, so I know more after that. Are those 6 extra days just for one year, or will you get 26 days every year going forward? How difficult is it to use (and enjoy) your current 20 days? If you already get grief about taking 20 days off, what good are an extra 6? At this stage I believe it will be ongoing, 6 extra days every year. At least for 2026 and 2027. It is not difficult to take our 20 days of annual leave. In fact, it is written into our KPIs that we must take at least 20 days every year. I had 38 days accrued earlier this year, and I was told I had to take a total of 25 days before the end of the financial year. I had to squeeze three days of leave into June! I just did the rough math on our leave/days off for my company…which I think is generous . I get about 36 days off a year…but that includes sick time, holidays, and vacation time. We do combined time off and it is all put into one ‘bucket’ and you can use it as you please. Wow, I haven't heard of combining leave into a bucket like that. Interesting! This is the leave we get: 20 days annual leave 5 days sick/carers leave without a certificate 5 days sick/carers leave with a certificate Long service leave that starts accruing after 10 (or is it 7.5?) years employment This is how much leave I have owing, after 26 years of working here: Annual leave - 35 days Sick/carers leave - 215 days Long Service Leave - 160 days Do you have a pension plan, AussieMeg ? Many of those depend on your average salary the final five years of employment. If you cut your salary now, will it affect that amount? As someone who is very close to retirement, and my pension is based on my highest three years of pay, I'd take the extra money. Yes, my superannuation plan is calculated on the FAS (final average salary) of the last three years of employment. So it's in my best interests to be earning as much as I can leading up to retirement. When you return from vacation now are you able to keep up with your work, or do you end up putting in extra hours to catch up? Is taking the extra time off worth that extra unpaid time? That's a very good point! It takes me ages to catch up on emails alone when I get back. And we sometimes joke with each other that it's hardly worth taking time off with all the extra hours we have to put in to catch up. But is there any opportunity to earn raises beyond the 0.5% or 2.0%? I'm assuming that is what we'd call in the US a cost-of-living adjustment (ha, not even close to reality) but what about merit-based increases? Yes it's a merit based increase, on a rating basis of 1 - 5. Most people would get a rating 3 (meets expectations). You'd have to be doing waaaaaay more than your job entails to get a 4 or 5. Well, this year, I would take the extra 6 days off as those would be permanent, correct? And then next year Id go back to my normal raise. My understanding is that it will be ongoing. So every year you can choose whether to take 0.5% pay increase and 6 extra days, or a 2% pay increase and stay with only 20 days. |
|
|
|
Post by AussieMeg on Jul 15, 2025 23:33:27 GMT
How difficult is it to use (and enjoy) your current 20 days? If you already get grief about taking 20 days off, what good are an extra 6? How does your company treat people who have a healthy work/life balance? Fortunately in Australia the great majority of employers see taking leave as just part of business operations. In 45 years of working I've never had leave declined (with the caveat that we know that everyone can't take leave at the same time so work that out) and we are encouraged to use our leave each year. Mostly employers see as it is better to have well rested employees that don't burn out and it is not seen as being less committed to take your leave. I think we must have a much better work/life balance here. Not only that, (and probably more importantly from a business perspective  ) it is a big cost to the company to have employees with a lot of leave owing. Money has to be set aside in a 'pool' to cover everyone's annual leave. And the longer people sit on their leave, the more the company has to pay. I have 15 days of leave that I should have taken last financial year, and now the company has to pay me more (after my 2% pay increase) to take it this financial year. |
|
|
|
Post by busy on Jul 15, 2025 23:39:54 GMT
This is how much leave I have owing, after 26 years of working here: Annual leave - 35 days Sick/carers leave - 215 days Long Service Leave - 160 days Holy cow! Are there no limits on what you can accrue for any kind of leave? If your sick/carers leave and long service leave have similar balances when you leave/retire, I'm assuming they will have to pay that all out to you? A year and a half (ish) salary would be a nice lump sum. |
|
compeateropeator
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,898
Member is Online
|
Post by compeateropeator on Jul 15, 2025 23:45:56 GMT
Probably most companies do it separate but I work in healthcare, so in essence there aren’t really any holidays that everyone can take and that is why that is included. If you are off on the holiday you use CTO and if you have to work you get holiday pay.
For sick time/ illness - We need to use 5 (I think, it might be 7) days of CTO and then it moves into a short term/long term disability so you get 60% of you pay…you can supplement that with CTO hours if you have them. However You do not earn/accumulate more hours while you are out on short or long term disability.
I do not think our system is considered normal for most companies, but for healthcare I don’t think we are way out there as far as policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by AussieMeg on Jul 15, 2025 23:52:06 GMT
This is how much leave I have owing, after 26 years of working here: Annual leave - 35 days Sick/carers leave - 215 days Long Service Leave - 160 days Holy cow! Are there no limits on what you can accrue for any kind of leave? If your sick/carers leave and long service leave have similar balances when you leave/retire, I'm assuming they will have to pay that all out to you? A year and a half (ish) salary would be a nice lump sum. Our sick leave accrues, but we do NOT get it paid out when we leave/retire. 20 days of annual leave is supposed to be taken every year, and they pressure us to take it. You do get paid out for any intake annual leave. Long Service leave accrues and there is no push to take it. Most people let it accrue, then take it just before retirement. So let's just say that I want to retire at the age of 68. By then I will have accrued 10.5 months of LSL. So I will take 10.5 months of fully paid LSL starting at the age of 67 years and 2 months (10.5 months before I plan to retire). When that has run out, I will officially retire. Of course, I'm still accruing more annual leave in that time, so I will still have a month or so up my sleeve. When I had my first child, I'd been at my previous job for 12 years. I had also accrued two years worth of annual leave. So I ended up have 8 months of maternity leave fully paid: 2 months annual leave 3 months paid maternity leave 3 months long service leave It was so good! |
|
|
|
Post by littlemama on Jul 16, 2025 0:02:28 GMT
If I had as much time saved up as Meg does, Id take the raise. 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by sassyangel on Jul 16, 2025 0:11:33 GMT
Holy cow! Are there no limits on what you can accrue for any kind of leave? If your sick/carers leave and long service leave have similar balances when you leave/retire, I'm assuming they will have to pay that all out to you? A year and a half (ish) salary would be a nice lump sum. Our sick leave accrues, but we do NOT get it paid out when we leave/retire. 20 days of annual leave is supposed to be taken every year, and they pressure us to take it. You do get paid out for any intake annual leave. Long Service leave accrues and there is no push to take it. Most people let it accrue, then take it just before retirement. So let's just say that I want to retire at the age of 68. By then I will have accrued 10.5 months of LSL. So I will take 10.5 months of fully paid LSL starting at the age of 67 years and 2 months (10.5 months before I plan to retire). When that has run out, I will officially retire. Of course, I'm still accruing more annual leave in that time, so I will still have a month or so up my sleeve. When I had my first child, I'd been at my previous job for 12 years. I had also accrued two years worth of annual leave. So I ended up have 8 months of maternity leave fully paid: 2 months annual leave 3 months paid maternity leave 3 months long service leave It was so good! Ive been at my job in the US 20 years this year - i misssssss long service leave. 😏 |
|
|
|
Post by sassyangel on Jul 16, 2025 0:19:10 GMT
Fortunately in Australia the great majority of employers see taking leave as just part of business operations. In 45 years of working I've never had leave declined (with the caveat that we know that everyone can't take leave at the same time so work that out) and we are encouraged to use our leave each year. Mostly employers see as it is better to have well rested employees that don't burn out and it is not seen as being less committed to take your leave. I think we must have a much better work/life balance here. Not only that, (and probably more importantly from a business perspective ) it is a big cost to the company to have employees with a lot of leave owing. Money has to be set aside in a 'pool' to cover everyone's annual leave. And the longer people sit on their leave, the more the company has to pay. I have 15 days of leave that I should have taken last financial year, and now the company has to pay me more (after my 2% pay increase) to take it this financial year. I hate combined PTO/sick buckets. I get a lot of leave every year because I’ve been in my job almost 20 years. But i have to be careful how i use it - because what if i get unexpectedly sick in November/December? We can only carry over a week of leave to the next calendar year, and if something happens where i need more than 1 week in December, I’m screwed. |
|
|
|
Post by fruitysuet on Jul 16, 2025 0:31:01 GMT
If the differential between the pay increase was higher, I'd definitely take the higher pay increase. I calculated on my current (not great) salary and, taking account of the extra tax/NI which would become due, I'd be less than £400 pa better off, so in that case I'd go for 6 extra days annual leave.
If I would be more than £500 pa better off, the decision would take more thinking about. A 2% pay increase is poor though. We don't get a huge increase where I work - last year it was 4.5%, this year it's 4%. At 4% (3.5% differential if taking the extra days) the take home would be an increase of around £800 so for that I would go for the higher pay increase.
I do get 25 days plus the 8 statutory bank holidays though. Perhaps if I only had 20 days there would be a bigger incentive to take more days regardless.
ETA I have no mortgage since the divorce as I downsized at less than my share of the proceeds of the marital home. I have two adult dependent children at home though, so that adds to my living costs, but there's no childcare or school activities etc to budget for. My bills are covered with my wages with a little extra every month. I would like to have more to save for retirement though. I'm 60 and it's getting way closer (current retirement age in the UK is 67). I have a WFH admin position so it's not strenuous, although it can be stressful at times.
Another ETA, the company I work for does have a 'buy more' holiday policy - I think you can buy upto 5 days more in the year. Not sure of the costs, or how it works, presumably it is linked to salary.
|
|
|
|
Post by lisacharlotte on Jul 16, 2025 0:36:53 GMT
Depends on when you ask the question. When we were still building our retirement balances, more pay was always the answer. However, once we got older, more time off was preferable. My last job before I retired, I was there 16 years. I would have had to leave to make more money. But that would also require me to be the new person with lesser benefits and would have to build my reputation all over again. The last seven years at work I was essentially my own boss. I set my own schedule and nobody micromanaged what I did because I had built a reputation of reliability over the 16 years. That freedom to take off early with nobody telling me no was priceless. I once told my boss when I submitted PTO, I wasn't asking permission, I was letting them know I wouldn't be in the office. He didn't disagree. 😂
|
|
|
|
Post by katiekaty on Jul 16, 2025 0:42:49 GMT
OK I choose retirement!LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by fruitysuet on Jul 16, 2025 0:48:31 GMT
Your post points out another problem with American work culture, though. Why don’t you use all of your four weeks each year? I know in many places it’s frowned on to actually use your vacation. It’s sad, really. I always wonder at that too. I don't actually go away on holiday (vacation) and haven't had more than a couple of days away at a time for years. I tend to take the odd day off here and there and I've figured that I usually get post Christmas blahs, so I save a lot of my holidays to use between January and July* which gets me a lot of four day working weeks, especially when combined with the statutory bank holidays. * The company I was transferred over to last year has a system whereby annual leave runs according to birth month. I have an August birthday so my holiday year runs from August to July. I think it's a good system. The industry I work in has a lot of operational pressures and in the previous company which ran April to March, you'd get to March and pretty well everyone would be using all of their holidays up in the last few weeks. It was horrendous trying to get things resolved. I work in the gas industry so it's pretty crucial to keep a steady workforce year round so I think this is a good way to do that. We're not allowed to carry holidays forward either and towards the end of your holiday year you get reminders to use it or lose it. |
|
|
|
Post by fruitysuet on Jul 16, 2025 0:52:35 GMT
Depends on when you ask the question. When we were still building our retirement balances, more pay was always the answer. However, once we got older, more time off was preferable. My last job before I retired, I was there 16 years. I would have had to leave to make more money. But that would also require me to be the new person with lesser benefits and would have to build my reputation all over again. The last seven years at work I was essentially my own boss. I set my own schedule and nobody micromanaged what I did because I had built a reputation of reliability over the 16 years. That freedom to take off early with nobody telling me no was priceless. I once told my boss when I submitted PTO, I wasn't asking permission, I was letting them know I wouldn't be in the office. He didn't disagree. 😂 This is pretty much where I am as well. The flexibility of WFH and not being micromanaged because of my reputation/work ethics is a huge bonus. If I get a headache in the day, I can take some tablets, have a nap and then work an extra hour or so in the evening. Not having to take sick days for this type of thing or appointments is a huge benefit. Not only to me, but to my employer as well. My boss is extra accommodating in letting me work hours to suit. She's taken a promotion so I hope that my incoming boss is just as much so! |
|
compeateropeator
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,898
Member is Online
|
Post by compeateropeator on Jul 16, 2025 1:17:42 GMT
Not only that, (and probably more importantly from a business perspective ) it is a big cost to the company to have employees with a lot of leave owing. Money has to be set aside in a 'pool' to cover everyone's annual leave. And the longer people sit on their leave, the more the company has to pay. I have 15 days of leave that I should have taken last financial year, and now the company has to pay me more (after my 2% pay increase) to take it this financial year. I hate combined PTO/sick buckets. I get a lot of leave every year because I’ve been in my job almost 20 years. But i have to be careful how i use it - because what if i get unexpectedly sick in November/December? We can only carry over a week of leave to the next calendar year, and if something happens where i need more than 1 week in December, I’m screwed. At my employer we can accrue 1.5 times our annual allowance. I hve been here 23 years and I can keep up to 432 hours in my bank. Once I hit that I stop accruing it. But we get paid for all of it if we leave. A family member worked for our state. Their banks were separate but you were only paid for your vacation time when you left or retired. You got nothing for unused sick time. I know people who have retired with hundred and hundred of hours of sick time. |
|
christinec68
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,673
Location: New York, NY
|
Post by christinec68 on Jul 16, 2025 1:53:09 GMT
I would take the extra days off in a heartbeat.
|
|
) it is a big cost to the company to have employees with a lot of leave owing. Money has to be set aside in a 'pool' to cover everyone's annual leave. And the longer people sit on their leave, the more the company has to pay. I have 15 days of leave that I should have taken last financial year, and now the company has to pay me more (after my 2% pay increase) to take it this financial year. 
