Paid Time Off

[lanejudy]

I’m just surprised at the lack of mandatory vacation time.
I thought that was kind of a given in all first world countries.

The US is well behind other countries with regards to vacation or paid time off requirements.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I’m just surprised at the lack of mandatory vacation time.
I thought that was kind of a given in all first world countries.

I think your point was made several comments back...we get it already

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

The US is well behind other countries with regards to vacation or paid time off requirements.

It's not a comparison to every country but generally the U.S. is considered a more productive country. It can also be hard to do business with certain countries when they have breaks so getting a hold of people in Germany or France, etc can slow down projects and other things. There's always upsides and downsides to how things go.

 

[barkley]

States and/or individual businesses can set "better" rules than the federal minimums for any of these as well - such as some states pay higher minimum wage, some states require xx sick days, etc.

yup, our state's minimum wage (including tipped jobs) raises to $17.13 January first.

The counter point is by not encouraging those who are sick to stay home, HR is instead further impacting and reducing productivity by spreading the sickness throughout the employees. Bring on the next pandemic.

YES-THIS. I remember getting into a 'spirited' discussion with my manager when he said that I was going to have to start tracking my staff's sick leave usage and if it exceeded (best of my recollection) 60% of their monthly/annual allocations then have a conference with them which could lead to a write up. I was AGHAST-first they were union and there was no way a write up would ever fly when they were using what the employee handbook and their union contract said they rightfully earned and accrued, second (and my bigger point) was that we worked with the public who were often Ill, or the children they brought in were (back when Medicaid did'nt issue traditional insurance cards but monthly paper perforated 'stamps' to get services we got dozens of people daily who needed replacements) and it was better if one of my staff felt a 'tickle in the throat' to take a day or two off vs. hacking and sneezing and exposing everyone else in the unit. I asked if he was going to cover if myself and my entire unit ended up all out with a virus that then toggled to our kids which kept us off longer but still not exceeding our allocations (large banks in some staff's case) of sick leave. I think my reaction was not isolated b/c I never heard it brought up again.

 

[disneychrista]

The counter point is by not encouraging those who are sick to stay home, HR is instead further impacting and reducing productivity by spreading the sickness throughout the employees. Bring on the next pandemic.

My current employer basically tells employees who come in visible sick that they are given sick days to use them when they are sick and to go home. Of course there is always going to be a someone who will call out when they aren't sick. It is hard to completely stop that.

 

[kdonnel]

My current employer basically tells employees who come in visible sick that they are given sick days to use them when they are sick and to go home. Of course there is always going to be a someone who will call out when they aren't sick. It is hard to completely stop that.

So much of the work culture in the US is fearing you will be fired or first to be laid off if you take any time off.

 

[sam_gordon]

Are you sure about this? As far as I know, having worked in HR for a number of years previously, there is no requirement that holidays be paid at anything other than straight time. Many employers will pay OT or DT but there is no requirement. This could have changed as I haven’t kept up on all the law changes in the past several years since HR is no longer part of my current job.

There is no legal requirement that holidays be paid extra. BUT, at least at my past employer, everyone got 8 hours for a holiday, whether they worked or not.

If you worked a holiday, you got your base rate in addition to the holiday pay (so DT if you will). Not everyone was required to work on a holiday, but there were positions that had to be filled on holidays (usually less than a "normal" work day).

 

[tvguy]

My current employer basically tells employees who come in visible sick that they are given sick days to use them when they are sick and to go home. Of course there is always going to be a someone who will call out when they aren't sick. It is hard to completely stop that.

Unfortunately there is no perfect solution. As Covid taught us, often a person is most contagious in the time period before they actually feel sick, and not contagious towards the end of them feeling sick.
It was nuts during Covid. HR was legally bound to warn employees that they had been around another employee who tested positive, but HR could not say WHO that person was. Yet it was apparent because one employee was suddenly "off" for 10 days and they could not even say they were off sick under privacy laws if it was covid.
And then there the employees who use sick time for "mental health" days, and then get the flu in October or November when they have exhausted all their sick and vacation time and if they don't come in, they don't get paid.

 

[_19disnA]

Companies vary regarding vacation/sick leave/paid time off etc. Comparing what one company does vs another doesn't really accomplish much and you have to consider the entire context of the benefits offered. Where I work, no one encourages salary employees to come to work if ill. No one ever heard of covid prior to 2019, so the applicable HR policies were written years ago. It is rare for a salary employee to be out of work for illness, tends to be more of the exception vs the norm. Many companies with hourly employees have union agreements that describe the applicable policies. I agree with others, that a company can choose benefits MORE generous than the federal requirements, but not LESS.

As I understand the overtime rules, salary employees who spend less than 50% of their time directing others are classified as non-exempt and much be paid overtime when working. Exempt employees are classified as spending more than 50% of their time managing subordinates, are not required to be paid overtime. I believe those are the federal guidelines but don't work in HR. How much extra you get paid for overtime I don't believe is specified by the govt but each company decides that on their own.

 

[tvguy]

As I understand the overtime rules, salary employees who spend less than 50% of their time directing others are classified as non-exempt and much be paid overtime when working. Exempt employees are classified as spending more than 50% of their time managing subordinates, are not required to be paid overtime. I believe those are the federal guidelines but don't work in HR. How much extra you get paid for overtime I don't believe is specified by the govt but each company decides that on their own.

LOL. I was exempt salaried for 16 of my 42 working years, and probably illegally. First of all in California, as I mentioned, there is a minimum annual pay you had to get to be salaried. In 2025 it is $68,640. And I have heard many claim that salaried employees are paid to work for the company, but not to work a set number of hours, so a set number of vacation and sick days does not apply. I ran into a situation with Jury Duty. The policy was you got 2 weeks with pay for Jury Duty IF YOU WERE HOURLY. I was on a case for 6 1/2 weeks and got paid, allegedly because I was salaried. A few years later that came up with another salaried employee, but ownership had changed. Corporate of the new owner did not agree with that position. Ultimately it went to the State Labor commission and after months she got her pay for the days beyond 2 weeks Jury Duty policy.
Other reason I think I was illegally classified as salaried exempt was I was the only one in the building for six of my eight hours a day. So I clearly was not supervising anyone else for half my shift.

 

[Praying Colonel]

Back when I was a working stiff, I earned 4 hours of sick leave and 8 hours of regular leave every pay period. So 108 hours of sick leave and 208 hours of regular leave each year.

Sick leave grew forever, but we could only carry over 240 hours of regular leave every calendar year. I worked on getting to the "use or Lose" number on my regular leave, then after that I'd take all my leave I needed to take to get to the 240 number by the end of the year.

 

[lanejudy]

Exempt employees are classified as spending more than 50% of their time managing subordinates

Other reason I think I was illegally classified as salaried exempt was I was the only one in the building for six of my eight hours a day. So I clearly was not supervising anyone else for half my shift.

Exempt has more to it that just supervising others. Basically it comes down to the amount of autonomy the employee has -- discretion, judgement, decision-making, etc.; or specialized knowledge.

 

[KPeterso]

Exempt has more to it that just supervising others. Basically it comes down to the amount of autonomy the employee has -- discretion, judgement, decision-making, etc.; or specialized knowledge.

I would agree with that. I am exempt-salary. I have no one reporting to me and am a higher level individual contributor.

 

[_19disnA]

Perhaps the total policy/laws/regulations have more fine details about exempt/non-exempt, but that is how it actually is implemented at the company where I work in simplistic terms.