Not allowed to take a vacation?

Archived From: Finance
  • Go to page :
  • 12 3
  • Text Only
tlvx said:   Welcome to the land of the free... er, "free market," where, if you happen to deliver a baby... or, if you decide to take just a few weeks off of work... than, you are seriously pushing your luck on being replaced.
The next action is what I would think about. In this "free market," a competitor would realize that he gets a benefit by keeping his employees longer than the guy across the street who replaces them at his first chance available. Well, the customers start going to the one who keeps his employees around, because they actually have a clue on what they're doing, and this evil "free market" supports the guy who doesn't fire his employees. Now, companies begin to take staff turnover into consideration, because it matters to the customers.

I'm sure Greece can force companies to offer more time off without penalty, and I would also ask you how long that can be sustained. The point of capitalism is to make us all better off rather than perfect. Compared to a random person in India or a random African country, we are surely better off with our free market. Again, it may not be perfect, but at least you can provide a house and food for your kid. Not everyone in those countries can do that.

I guess I feel lucky to even have lived to 25 - not too long ago, 30 would be the end of life. Expected life times have substantially increased because of this free market, and I try and not overlook how many things go right because the flaws are far easier to see, but the things that went well just get taken for granted.

ankitgu said:   tlvx said:   Welcome to the land of the free... er, "free market," where, if you happen to deliver a baby... or, if you decide to take just a few weeks off of work... than, you are seriously pushing your luck on being replaced.
The next action is what I would think about. In this "free market," a competitor would realize that he gets a benefit by keeping his employees longer than the guy across the street who replaces them at his first chance available. Well, the customers start going to the one who keeps his employees around, because they actually have a clue on what they're doing, and this evil "free market" supports the guy who doesn't fire his employees. Now, companies begin to take staff turnover into consideration, because it matters to the customers.

I'm sure Greece can force companies to offer more time off without penalty, and I would also ask you how long that can be sustained. The point of capitalism is to make us all better off rather than perfect. Compared to a random person in India or a random African country, we are surely better off with our free market. Again, it may not be perfect, but at least you can provide a house and food for your kid. Not everyone in those countries can do that.

I guess I feel lucky to even have lived to 25 - not too long ago, 30 would be the end of life. Expected life times have substantially increased because of this free market, and I try and not overlook how many things go right because the flaws are far easier to see, but the things that went well just get taken for granted.
Customers just evaluate goods and services and compare value, but certainly not based on backroom employee relations. If employee happiness shows up intangibly in a better product or service, that may just set the value of what's being sold, higher... which can be a liability when you have virtual sweat-shops undercutting your prices to the point of no return. Sure that example is extreme... but, it's called globalization, and it's been happening for quite some time now... exporting jobs, and whole swaths of industry overseas. But, the solution is not to become a sweat-shop, it's not to become the lowest bidder. It's to create global standards of a living wage, with sensible holiday, benefit, and employee (human) relations... and to enforce it all over the world.

The only reason it's not on the agenda, is because of greed, pure and simple.

So, unfortunately, in the, "free-market," Greed always takes precedence for what's good for Society as a whole. But, when Greed heavily influences both sides of policy, it's a conflict of interest. Being free to pillage and plunder your country at the behest of it's citizens, is only freedom for a few, but not the many.

tlvx said:   ankitgu said:   tlvx said:   Welcome to the land of the free... er, "free market," where, if you happen to deliver a baby... or, if you decide to take just a few weeks off of work... than, you are seriously pushing your luck on being replaced.
The next action is what I would think about. In this "free market," a competitor would realize that he gets a benefit by keeping his employees longer than the guy across the street who replaces them at his first chance available. Well, the customers start going to the one who keeps his employees around, because they actually have a clue on what they're doing, and this evil "free market" supports the guy who doesn't fire his employees. Now, companies begin to take staff turnover into consideration, because it matters to the customers.

I'm sure Greece can force companies to offer more time off without penalty, and I would also ask you how long that can be sustained. The point of capitalism is to make us all better off rather than perfect. Compared to a random person in India or a random African country, we are surely better off with our free market. Again, it may not be perfect, but at least you can provide a house and food for your kid. Not everyone in those countries can do that.

I guess I feel lucky to even have lived to 25 - not too long ago, 30 would be the end of life. Expected life times have substantially increased because of this free market, and I try and not overlook how many things go right because the flaws are far easier to see, but the things that went well just get taken for granted.
Customers just evaluate goods and services and compare value, but certainly not based on backroom employee relations. If employee happiness shows up intangibly in a better product or service, that may just set the value of what's being sold, higher... which can be a liability when you have virtual sweat-shops undercutting your prices to the point of no return. Sure that example is extreme... but, it's called globalization, and it's been happening for quite some time now... exporting jobs, and whole swaths of industry overseas. But, the solution is not to become a sweat-shop, it's not to become the lowest bidder. It's to create global standards of a living wage, with sensible holiday, benefit, and employee (human) relations... and to enforce it all over the world.

The only reason it's not on the agenda, is because of greed, pure and simple.

So, unfortunately, in the, "free-market," Greed always sets precedence for what's good for Society as a whole. But, when Greed heavily influences both sides of policy, it's a conflict of interest. Being free to pillage and plunder your country at the behest of it's citizens, is only freedom for a few, but not the many.
Problem with your way of thinking is that the alternative is net worse than the system you are complaining about. Basic principles of economics tells us that when the free market "fails," and the government intervenes, they almost always make the situation worse off.

jkimcpa said:   Problem with your way of thinking is that the alternative is net worse than the system you are complaining about. Basic principles of economics tells us that when the free market "fails," and the government intervenes, they almost always make the situation worse off.
Advocating nothing, is nothing more than a cynical shrug of the shoulders, with no convictions to make the world a better place. The rest is simply product of the government being run on behalf of the special interests, and not for the people. That's why, when they, "intervene," it's usually just cosmetic, and doesn't demonstrate a fundamental shift in values... because in the end, nothing of substance is ever actually enforced.

tlvx said:   jkimcpa said:   Problem with your way of thinking is that the alternative is net worse than the system you are complaining about. Basic principles of economics tells us that when the free market "fails," and the government intervenes, they almost always make the situation worse off.
Advocating nothing, is nothing more than a cynical shrug of the shoulders, with no convictions to make the world a better place. The rest is simply product of the government being run on behalf of the special interests, and not for the people. That's why, when they, "intervene," it's usually just cosmetic, and doesn't demonstrate a fundamental shift in values... because in the end, nothing of substance is ever actually enforced.
Usually when people rail off on the "free market" it is a thinly veiled promotion of regulation and often times socialism.

If you are advocating nothing, then cool story bro.

CptSavAHo said:   Al3xK said:   SlimTim said:   Al3xK said:   If you mean, "I refuse to work on vacation because it can wait until I get back" then I agree. I, however, am almost irreplaceable so when I vacation, there are times where the company will lose $150k/hour if I can't be available...and if I took the "refuse to work" attitude I'm sure I wouldn't last long.

With all respect, are they idiots? Vacation is the least worry about keeping an employee available. We lump all of the possible scenarios under the euphemism "hit by a bus". Are they unwilling to do whatever is needed to have a 2nd person who can cover the spikes where you are worth $150k per hour? Unless you are a highly successful entertainer like Jimmy Buffet or Tom Brady, it seems like inexcusable recklessness on their part.


There is a second guy who can do what I can, but sometimes we can't completely cover each other's abilities and there are some things that only I know. And those "issues" that have <1% chance of occurring while I'm on vacation really only take maybe 1-3 hours for me to fix. So it's an acceptable risk. I'm considered "on call" at all times. I'm given a bunch of freedom too as a result.


Sorry but there's a lot of contradiction here, and it doesn't add up. Either you seriously overvalue your importance to the company or you have a very unusual role, like say Coach of <insert major league team here>. Beyond that very unlikely scenario going to have to call BS on the on call/lots of freedom. A great example, a friend is a regional anesthesiologist in West Texas. He makes ~$300k/yr and all expenses paid. He is on-call 24/7 for several local hospitals. In his contract he can not -ever- be under the influence of alcohol, not even one beer. When he goes on vacation another anesthesiologist flies in to cover him. Another friend is a very specialized diver. Not being able to take a bid could mean he misses out on as much as $35k or more, he never goes on vacation and has one cell phone that if you miss the call it routes to a pager, leaves an email, and calls his wife. So in my experience you either aren't worth a lot and have a lot of freedom or you are worth a lot and are always on call with no freedom.


I'm not sure what's contradictory. The $150k/hour is if one of our key production lines goes down...and that's the figure I always hear if there is an issue. It produces $150k of product every hour. There are a total of 3 people to cover each other (myself included).

I'm salary and don't have set hours...come in around 9am and leave a 4pm. Can take days off whenever, etc. Tons of freedoms.

jkimcpa said:   Usually when people rail off on the "free market" it is a thinly veiled promotion of regulation and often times socialism.
The problem with having a fair discussion about laws is that, "regulation," has somehow become a bad word, amongst others, thus causing a disconnect in sound reasoning. Instead of having a grown-up discussion, we resort to "labeling" the discussion, or virtual "name-calling."

Obviously, if people weren't greedy, and chose to take care of, maintain, and share all of the world's resources, without doing things like printing monopoly money, backed by nothing... or, making it extremely difficult to take vacations or spend time with a newborn child... than, there wouldn't be a need for laws. If people weren't always trying to exploit loopholes in the current laws, than we wouldn't need to discuss the implementation of new laws.

Alas, certain people - that have become quite influential in society - are not inherently fair and magnanimous, certainly not without laws that are enforced to preserve and protect the well being of society as a whole.

tlvx said:   The problem with having a fair discussion about laws is that, "regulation," has somehow become a bad word, amongst others, thus causing a disconnect in sound reasoning.

But not without good reason.

The graveyards are full of indispensable men. This notion that a job has a 24/7 hold on the average worker bee is insane.

Al3xK said:   

I'm not sure what's contradictory. The $150k/hour is if one of our key production lines goes down...and that's the figure I always hear if there is an issue. It produces $150k of product every hour. There are a total of 3 people to cover each other (myself included).

I'm salary and don't have set hours...come in around 9am and leave a 4pm. Can take days off whenever, etc. Tons of freedoms.


I don't think they have "production lines" in nuclear power plants, you are probably confused.

Many corporate America employees put themselves into position of being "important" (job security) and after they complain that management doesn't allow them to take vacation... Everyone is replaceable!...

Ecuadorgr said:   Al3xK said:   

I'm not sure what's contradictory. The $150k/hour is if one of our key production lines goes down...and that's the figure I always hear if there is an issue. It produces $150k of product every hour. There are a total of 3 people to cover each other (myself included).

I'm salary and don't have set hours...come in around 9am and leave a 4pm. Can take days off whenever, etc. Tons of freedoms.


I don't think they have "production lines" in nuclear power plants, you are probably confused.


Now I'm confused. Who said anything about a nuclear facility?

Al3xK said:   Ecuadorgr said:   Al3xK said:   

I'm not sure what's contradictory. The $150k/hour is if one of our key production lines goes down...and that's the figure I always hear if there is an issue. It produces $150k of product every hour. There are a total of 3 people to cover each other (myself included).

I'm salary and don't have set hours...come in around 9am and leave a 4pm. Can take days off whenever, etc. Tons of freedoms.


I don't think they have "production lines" in nuclear power plants, you are probably confused.


Now I'm confused. Who said anything about a nuclear facility?


Look at your avatar
(Doh!)

woowoo2 said:   Al3xK said:   Ecuadorgr said:   Al3xK said:   

I'm not sure what's contradictory. The $150k/hour is if one of our key production lines goes down...and that's the figure I always hear if there is an issue. It produces $150k of product every hour. There are a total of 3 people to cover each other (myself included).

I'm salary and don't have set hours...come in around 9am and leave a 4pm. Can take days off whenever, etc. Tons of freedoms.


I don't think they have "production lines" in nuclear power plants, you are probably confused.


Now I'm confused. Who said anything about a nuclear facility?


Look at your avatar
(Doh!)


Now that was funny....

JonnyRock said:   My boss complained last year that I didn't make it clear far enough in advance when I was taking vacation
(It had been in my vacation planner for over 4 months)
I then gave him a years notice for my vacation this year
He then told me I was telling him too far in advance
I was quite frustrated at this point and asked "Exactly how far in advance would you like"
I then got the management non answer "enough time to schedule your replacements"
Some times they are just hoping you will not take it I think


You: I'd like to take my vacation in November 2013.
Boss: You're telling me too far in advance.
You: No problem. I'll just keep reminding you every day from now until the day that you tell me that it's no longer "too far in advance".

Tell your boss you have cramps and explosive diahrea because of all the stress of the job and spend 4 hours a day in the can until he suggests you take a vacation. Get some good books on tape and Netflix on you iphone to pass the time.

vickh said:   I lost 1/2 my PTO pay when I left my CA company. apparently it was in the employee hand book
Did you have a union there with a special agreement in place?
If not, it really doesn't matter what the employee handbook said.
see #10



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

TRUSTe online privacy certification

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2014

It's time for an upgrade!

After a decade on our current platform, we're upgrading our plumbing. The site will be down for a few hours starting at 10PM CST tonight.

At FatWallet we strive to bring you the best coupons, deals and Cash Back. So please come back and check us out.