Is an unlimited vacation policy really that great? (collect, reputation, career)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now, I don't know how the pay structure works. But companies that only allow a certain # of vacations usually will pay you for unused vac days when you leave the job. It's possible these companies that offer unlimited do not pay you for unused vac days.
a "unlimited vacation" policy means they treat you like adults and don't need to track your vacation. They expect you to act like adults and not take an inordinate amount while getting your work done. If you're the kind of person who would try to take advantage of it, then you are proving you can't be trusted.
You don't need to tell someone not to take half a year off. Its similar to a company saying they have no dress code, but still getting upset if someone shows up naked. You assume people act like adults and don't need to be told not to show up to work naked. Unlimited vacation policies are great in healthy companies where employees and the employer trust each other. They can be poor when that trust doesn't exist.
The problem is knowing how much vacation time is adequate, since the employer does not communicate that to the employee, leaving it as "unlimited". Of course it is not unlimited. Business communications should be clear in expectations with no room for misunderstandings. If employers do indeed want responsible people to take appropriate amounts of vacation, then they should communicate that in appropriate language. For instance, giving it a name such as a "responsible vacation policy" and not a misleading "unlimited vacation policy".
In some workplaces, there is so much neverending work that it is never a good time to take a vacation. That was the case in the jobs that I had. If my jobs had an "unlimited vacation policy" my colleagues and I would never had been able to take vacations due to our heavy workloads.
Whether it is intended or not, "unlimited vacation" companies don't have to pay out unused vacation time to existing or departing employees so that is to the employer's and not the employee's advantage. I think that the choice of the word "unlimited" says it all. Just a way to deceive.
This. This is exactly the reason why companies are now moving towards this nonsense. And I believe there was a study done that determined employees under such unlimited time off policies actually take LESS time off than those who are under a capped system.
Yep it's a trick. Rest assured that if some company offers something that seems too good to be true, it's exploiting you in some way.
The problem is knowing how much vacation time is adequate, since the employer does not communicate that to the employee, leaving it as "unlimited". Of course it is not unlimited. Business communications should be clear in expectations with no room for misunderstandings. If employers do indeed want responsible people to take appropriate amounts of vacation, then they should communicate that in appropriate language. For instance, giving it a name such as a "responsible vacation policy" and not a misleading "unlimited vacation policy".
In some workplaces, there is so much neverending work that it is never a good time to take a vacation. That was the case in the jobs that I had. If my jobs had an "unlimited vacation policy" my colleagues and I would never had been able to take vacations due to our heavy workloads.
Whether it is intended or not, "unlimited vacation" companies don't have to pay out unused vacation time to existing or departing employees so that is to the employer's and not the employee's advantage. I think that the choice of the word "unlimited" says it all. Just a way to deceive.
At my employer, they call it Responsible Time Off. We don't have a limit, but you're supposed to use it in a fashion that doesn't leave the team or clients hanging. That said, I've never had an issue taking time off.
If there is so much never ending work, and your organization has not set up a system of backups for when people are out, then that is a failure of management. At the very least, I'd be bringing this up on those "culture surveys" and in 1-on-1 meetings with your manager. Worst case, I would leave such an organization. It's just not a reasonable arrangement for me.
At my employer, they call it Responsible Time Off. We don't have a limit, but you're supposed to use it in a fashion that doesn't leave the team or clients hanging. That said, I've never had an issue taking time off.
If there is so much never ending work, and your organization has not set up a system of backups for when people are out, then that is a failure of management. At the very least, I'd be bringing this up on those "culture surveys" and in 1-on-1 meetings with your manager. Worst case, I would leave such an organization. It's just not a reasonable arrangement for me.
Yes, "Responsible Time Off" is certainly a better and more accurate name. It seems that your organization is handling it correctly, trusting its employees in using vacation time in a rational manner and not using the "unlimited" moniker as a scarecrow to frighten employees into not taking any time off at all.
I agree that if a company has a constant stream of neverending work and no backup personnel then that is indeed a failure of management. But it is the workers who have to pay for that failure. Management does not pay and even benefits from this failure in saving labor costs by just having the minimum amount of personnel to keep the company going, plus forcing the employees to put a lot of unpaid overtime hours in providing free work for the company. So management wins.
Also, the last company that I worked for had plenty of those "culture surveys" and 1-on-1 meetings. However, it was hazardous to one's career health to bring up or to point out anything negative. While those surveys were supposedly confidential, they were not. Every day, everyone had to spout off how great everything was. If anything negative was ever presented then the person bringing it up was labeled a "complainer". That person's career at the company would be immediately stifled. In a worst case scenario, the person would be walked out the door. I saw one example of that when I attended a staff meeting where one very brave employee started to point out the problems and deficiencies of the company. He did so in a very eloquent and deferential manner, maneuvering the manager into intellectual corners that he could not get out of. Within a day, that employee was fired. He paid for his bravery with the loss of his job.
So you had two choices at that company. You could either be a complainer on your way out, or a yes-man that claimed that everything was great. I was a yes-man at that company for 28 years. I sold out for a steady salary and a pension. For me, it was a reasonable albeit wacky arrangement. Now I have retired and it is now irrelevant except for the pension and the Social Security payments.
Yes, "Responsible Time Off" is certainly a better and more accurate name. It seems that your organization is handling it correctly, trusting its employees in using vacation time in a rational manner and not using the "unlimited" moniker as a scarecrow to frighten employees into not taking any time off at all.
I agree that if a company has a constant stream of neverending work and no backup personnel then that is indeed a failure of management. But it is the workers who have to pay for that failure. Management does not pay and even benefits from this failure in saving labor costs by just having the minimum amount of personnel to keep the company going, plus forcing the employees to put a lot of unpaid overtime hours in providing free work for the company. So management wins.
Also, the last company that I worked for had plenty of those "culture surveys" and 1-on-1 meetings. However, it was hazardous to one's career health to bring up or to point out anything negative. While those surveys were supposedly confidential, they were not. Every day, everyone had to spout off how great everything was. If anything negative was ever presented then the person bringing it up was labeled a "complainer". That person's career at the company would be immediately stifled. In a worst case scenario, the person would be walked out the door. I saw one example of that when I attended a staff meeting where one very brave employee started to point out the problems and deficiencies of the company. He did so in a very eloquent and deferential manner, maneuvering the manager into intellectual corners that he could not get out of. Within a day, that employee was fired. He paid for his bravery with the loss of his job.
So you had two choices at that company. You could either be a complainer on your way out, or a yes-man that claimed that everything was great. I was a yes-man at that company for 28 years. I sold out for a steady salary and a pension. For me, it was a reasonable albeit wacky arrangement. Now I have retired and it is now irrelevant except for the pension and the Social Security payments.
Toxic, that's all I have to say about that. I'd have left. Fortunately, for most people, we have other options than to work for a poor organization like the one you described.
Thanks for all the advice so far. I have not gotten an offer yet so this is just hypothetical as of now. Upon investigating more, the co seems to tout 'unlimited' vacation except of course there are some caveats … and one cannot take off in more than 10-day increments (so it's not really free-reign … like you can't just go and take a month off …. and you shouldn't anyway).
But I think I am leaning more toward something clearly defined, though if the job were offered to me, I think I would accept.
Toxic, that's all I have to say about that. I'd have left. Fortunately, for most people, we have other options than to work for a poor organization like the one you described.
Definitely toxic. Still is for the people left there who have to work and endure that. And that company doesn't seem to have any problems in attracting more suckers (sorry, employees) to keep itself going.
It's funny how people always point that out -- as if I just cannot do math, read a book, or watch TV or anything. I obviously know how it works. The people there are very happy. We do not have droves of people from Scandanavian countries, Canada, or most of western Europe coming here, and part of it is our work obsession (though a smaller part than other political matters, but to talk about it will get us shut down)
I was simply responding to your statement that if we switched to unlimited vacation here in the U.S., we'd be free to work whenever we want and wherever we want. Nothing more, nothing less.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
