|
|
Post by AussieMeg on Jul 16, 2025 2:22:58 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 like to have more than the standard four weeks up my sleeve at any one time, just in case we want to go on an overseas trip, and I don't want to use all of my leave at once. In 2023 I took three weeks off to go to Thailand and Singapore. I still had another 2 or 3 weeks available after that. We are hoping to go OS again next year, maybe for three weeks. I don't understand why it's frowned upon, to use your leave. As I mentioned in another post, it's a cost to the business when people don't take their leave. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 16, 2025 2:37:12 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 like to have more than the standard four weeks up my sleeve at any one time, just in case we want to go on an overseas trip, and I don't want to use all of my leave at once. In 2023 I took three weeks off to go to Thailand and Singapore. I still had another 2 or 3 weeks available after that. We are hoping to go OS again next year, maybe for three weeks. I don't understand why it's frowned upon, to use your leave. As I mentioned in another post, it's a cost to the business when people don't take their leave. Not here. Most companies don't let you roll your leave over, so it's use it or lose it. And you can't produce more billions for the company's shareholders if you're sitting on a beach somewhere, so even though the leave is technically yours, the people in charge have created a culture where you're looked at as a slacker if you actually take all of it. There is almost no world where the average corporate person would be allowed to take three consecutive weeks off for anything other than a medical emergency. America is a weird place. (I don't think my husband has ever had a vacation since we've been married where he didn't have to take calls or answer emails or attend a zoom meeting - including when we were in Australia and he had to do those things in the middle of the night.) |
|
|
|
Post by katlady on Jul 16, 2025 3:41:35 GMT
I like to have more than the standard four weeks up my sleeve at any one time, just in case we want to go on an overseas trip, and I don't want to use all of my leave at once. In 2023 I took three weeks off to go to Thailand and Singapore. I still had another 2 or 3 weeks available after that. We are hoping to go OS again next year, maybe for three weeks. I don't understand why it's frowned upon, to use your leave. As I mentioned in another post, it's a cost to the business when people don't take their leave. Not here. Most companies don't let you roll your leave over, so it's use it or lose it. And you can't produce more billions for the company's shareholders if you're sitting on a beach somewhere, so even though the leave is technically yours, the people in charge have created a culture where you're looked at as a slacker if you actually take all of it. There is almost no world where the average corporate person would be allowed to take three consecutive weeks off for anything other than a medical emergency. America is a weird place. (I don't think my husband has ever had a vacation since we've been married where he didn't have to take calls or answer emails or attend a zoom meeting - including when we were in Australia and he had to do those things in the middle of the night.) We can accumulate and roll over vacation and sick time. I carry over around 7-8 weeks of vacation every year. That is the max my company allows. So, I have to use up all my current year's allotment, 5 weeks, every year or I lose it. If the work loads allows it, we can take 3 weeks off at a time. I've done it in the past. And we have no cap on the amount of sick time we can accumulate. I have just under 1,200 hours. So for long-term leave pay purposes, I picked the option that doesn't kick in until 6 months since I have a lot of sick time I can use. As a management level person, I do not have to clock in and out for doctor's appointment if I was in the office for at least 4 hours. I would schedule the kid's appointments late in the day, so that if I left the office around 1 or 2, I didn't have to use sick time. I am fortunate to work for a company with good benefits. It is why I stayed so long. |
|
paget
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,461
Jun 25, 2014 21:16:39 GMT
|
Post by paget on Jul 16, 2025 3:48:33 GMT
I would chose the extra days- and I feel like I already have good time off but I’d rather have more time than money at this point.
One of the best things about my job is there is zero hesitation to take time off, no matter your role. My supervisor regularly took 3 week
Vacations as did hers. I prefer to maximize my time off like combine a day or two with a long weekend and take more time off more frequently. I am very encouraging to my staff to take their time off. We can also accrue sick time as high as we want (and it gets paid out when you retire) and vacation can accrue to 300 hours and then you would lose so you need to stay under 300 for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scrapper100 on Jul 16, 2025 18:00:58 GMT
My husband can buy an extra week of vacation and always does. He had a lot more vacation at his old job and I don’t think he gets another week added until he has been with them for ten years. It’s less than he gets paid for the week so it’s a win win but even if not he wants the extra week. He got several more weeks off a year at his old job even with this eeek added on.
|
|
Anita
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,891 
Location: Kansas City -ish
|
Post by Anita on Jul 16, 2025 20:17:07 GMT
Time off, for sure. My company is pretty stingy with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Linda on Jul 16, 2025 20:48:36 GMT
given that I've been a homemaker for 25+ years - I would say I picked the less money/more time option.
At this point in our lives, DH would, I'm pretty sure, choose time over money for himself. BUT he has 4 weeks annual leave and pretty much unlimited sick time - he's salaried and as long as his work gets done, no one is really counting minutes at the desk. When he had eye surgery earlier this year, he had short-term disability pay when he was out 6 weeks (original plan had been 4). We're also mostly empty-nesters - our youngest is still at home as a commuter college student and while we're covering gas/car expenses and giving her a small weekly allowance, her tuition and fees are covered by scholarships - so there's not a lot of 'kid' expenses anymore. We have a mortgage but no other debt. We're not flush with money (DD is a commuter for financial reasons) but we're not struggling either.
Back in the day when we had 3 kids at home and were living paycheque to paycheque? Money for sure - we couldn't afford vacations or savings etc... so every extra penny was a help.
|
|
|
|
Post by sassyangel on Jul 16, 2025 21:37:49 GMT
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. When they changed us to combined PTO buckets (after a merger), I had 400-ish hours of sick leave accrued - and lost it all. |
|
compeateropeator
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,898
Member is Online
|
Post by compeateropeator on Jul 16, 2025 21:59:17 GMT
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. When they changed us to combined PTO buckets (after a merger), I had 400-ish hours of sick leave accrued - and lost it all. That totally sucks and doesn’t deserve a like from me. They should have at least grandfathered those accumulated hours you had somehow and just used the new policy going forward. I am so sorry! |
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,556
|
Post by cycworker on Jul 16, 2025 23:29:28 GMT
It's so hard to say... I think given that my job is that of an elected official, I'm in a wee bit of a rock & a hard place. if you take the money, people would be upset. If you took more time off, people would be upset.
In my previous jobs, I'd have taken the time off because of the toxicity in the workplace. Now, at my age, I'd rather have the money & the increase in pension that goes with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by chaosisapony on Jul 17, 2025 2:30:02 GMT
I'd take the time off. A 2% increase isn't very high. I think 6 extra days off per year is worth sacrificing 1.5% for. There are times in my life when I would have felt differently but I'm pretty comfortable now where I'd rather have more time to myself.
|
|
anniebeth24
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,033
|
Post by anniebeth24 on Jul 17, 2025 11:13:38 GMT
I'd take the days off. My company has combined sick/vacation/personal days and a shutdown over Christmas, which requires you to use 6 days of your PTO. I'd like more availability to take time off at other times of the year.
DH was promoted a couple of years ago to a level that gives him unlimited PTO. He used to get 5 weeks and always sold one back because I didn't get as much time off. So, in being promoted, he lost that advantage. He does track his time off and aims to take around 4-5 weeks.
|
|
|
|
Post by lisacharlotte on Jul 17, 2025 18:09:23 GMT
My job before retiring I was paid hourly. I accrued PTO, which covered all time off including sick/holidays. I was smart about flexing my hours so I didn't cut into my PTO once I knew I was going to retire. It was nice to get that extra money from cashing out my PTO when I retired.
|
|
|
|
Post by needmysanity on Jul 18, 2025 18:45:13 GMT
I would opt for the more pay. I get a lot of time off and wouldn't have used it all this year except for knee replacement surgery.
|
|
AllieC
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,129
|
Post by AllieC on Jul 21, 2025 1:10:17 GMT
It's absolutely mind blowing to me that you lose your vacation leave if you don't take it and companies frown upon you taking it. Everyone at my work from the CEO down takes chunks of time every year and the place doesn't fall apart. That's what having well trained employees is for. When people here say they are going on leave to go overseas etc (or just do nothing) everyone is happy for them, I have never in my whole working career had any employer that has seen it as the employee not being committed etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by gillyp on Jul 21, 2025 15:12:00 GMT
Everywhere I've worked had a leave year in which all leave had to be taken in that year or lost, because the leave year resets each January. However, if you resigned in the year, you would receive the leave due as leave before you left or pay in lieu.
|
|
|
|
Post by 950nancy on Jul 21, 2025 16:21:05 GMT
As a retired teacher, I'd have to say more pay. When I worked in business, I'd say more days off.
I currently work 158 days a year 3.5 hours a day. Pay is good. I think I have the right job.
|
|
