> I think one of the easiest wins here would be what some US startups with unlimited leave were practicing: a required minimum of days off.
Any examples of companies that are doing this? I haven't heard of many, at least in the SF Bay Area.
Any examples of companies that are doing this? I haven't heard of many, at least in the SF Bay Area.
The rest of the days might be lost, transferred into next year’s vacation with a cutoff (like until end of Q1 next year or end of the year otherwise they are lost), or with no cutoff and they stack up forever.
And if you delay two weeks to next year that means 5 mandatory weeks that year.
And: it is not just in theory. It is the law and both parts can get in trouble if you don't follow it.
If the PTO is not taken, the company can be fined by the state, so this is taken rather seriously.
It also forces people to communicate details somewhat.
Although around Old Street the buses don’t really go above walking speed.
For others reading, here is what I found:
> at a minimum, covers those officers and employees involved or engaged in transactional business or having the ability to change the official records of the institution
https://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/industry/il960822.htm
> The New York State Banking Department considers it to be a prudent business practice for every bank, and branch or agency of a foreign banking corporation, to promulgate and maintain a written vacation policy which, at a minimum, covers those officers and employees involved or engaged in transactional business or having the ability to change the official records of the institution. This policy should also cover all other staffers who are capable of influencing or causing such activities to occur. The Department strongly recommends that all traders be covered by the policy.
> Employees in such sensitive positions should be required to take at least two (2) consecutive weeks of vacation (or other leave) on an annual basis. During such time, the officer or employee must be off-site and off-line. In other words, not only should he/she be physically absent from your premises, but he/she should also not be permitted to effect any transactions or other banking business from off-site, such as through an off-site computer link.
https://www.dfs.ny.gov/legal/industry/il960822.htm
archived at: https://outline.com/Y3dcgF https://archive.md/LJvbH
You come back with a lot of energy too :-)
"Man Returns To Work After Vacation With Fresh, Reenergized Hatred For Job"
* https://local.theonion.com/man-returns-to-work-after-vacatio...
I picked at random, the `manager` and I both know I'll be working at home anyway.
From the candor of GP's comment, I would venture to guess that both he and the manager are type-A personalities who want to be at work all the time. My dad was and is like that. He progressed much further in his career than he would have otherwise and our family was none-the-worse for it. Not everyone is like that, but I don't see it as incomprehensible (or even a problem).
Although I'm not the same as my dad, I've long felt an individualist stubbornness that leads me to a similar conclusions. When I was a kid, we had a birthday party at a bowling alley and the attendants put the bumpers[1] up in our alley and wouldn't take them down. I was so incensed that I instead made a game of trying to whack the bowling ball hard enough against the bumpers to bounce over them. I was elated when I got one all the way into the next alley.
My gut reacts to the idea of "mandatory days off" in an intuitively similar way, even though I probably wouldn't be incensed about it the way I was about the bumpers in the bowling alley as a child. I'm probably on the extreme end of a cultural and value difference between Americans and Europeans.
[1]: https://cdn.mykidlist.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/0211010...
There's a bit of that. The main reason though is that I am way out of touch and unable to separate work/whatever life for a bunch of different reasons. Let's say I am a mess right now and not caring much about losing vacation.
> From the candor of GP's comment, I would venture to guess that both he and the manager are type-A personalities who want to be at work all the time. My dad was and is like that. He progressed much further in his career than he would have otherwise and our family was none-the-worse for it. Not everyone is like that, but I don't see it as incomprehensible (or even a problem).
Not really, maybe. I am a teamplayer and a people pleaser but I have some type A tendencies (types only tell a part of the story anyway). I have nothing to show for that though (not a top leet coder, not a top lead manager, etc. I am good, reliable but I am not shining).
I think if I was more "type A" I would not let such things happen.
> [1]: https://cdn.mykidlist.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/0211010....
How did you do that :D
> We don't frown on people taking time off, but rather encourage people to take care of themselves and others by having some time away. If you notice that your co-worker is working long hours over a sustained period, you may want to let them know about the time off policy.
> Not taking vacation is viewed as a weakness and people shouldn't boast about it. It is viewed as a lack of humility about your role, not fostering collaboration in training others in your job, and not being able to document and explain your work. You are doing the company a disservice by being a single point of failure. The company must be able to go for long periods without you. We don't want to lose you permanently by you burning yourself out by not taking regular vacations.