from Hacker News

The Myth of the Unlimited Vacation Policy

by gershwin on 1/5/16, 2:55 PM with 14 comments

  • by pjc50 on 1/5/16, 3:23 PM

    Indeed. It's a means of weaponising ambiguity into guilt. Everyone knows it's not unlimited, because you can't take 3 months off. But because there's no boundary, the real limit has to be found by stressfully, riskily probing it. Then there's plenty of room for favouritism in who's actually allowed to take the time off.

    See "Tyranny of Structurelessness", etc, etc.

  • by finance-geek on 1/5/16, 3:30 PM

    Some of the nefarious reasons in the article and comments may well be true -- but there is a simple accounting reason for "unlimited" vacation policies -- companies do not need to pay workers for accrued vacation days un-taken.

    In some states and countries, use-it-or-lose-it policies are not legal, so employees always accrue the days, often carrying them from year to year. It is a bit unfair since the employee leaving hits the company with a big payout (though the payout is just payout that should have happened long ago.) On the other hand it is very fair, as i've been stuck in some companies where my boss would not let me take vacation, so the payout was the least they could do.

  • by phamilton on 1/5/16, 3:26 PM

    At a previous company with a "no vacation policy" policy, I found I was more liberal with my odd Friday off to go skiing, and more likely to work remotely one or more days on my actual vacation.

    Today, with a normal PTO accrual system, I find myself very aware that a day of vacation costs me $500 in lost paid out PTO. That makes a semi spontaneous Friday on the mountain more expensive than I'm comfortable with. It means that when I'm bored over the year end holidays at my in-laws home I don't do any work even if I feel like it because I don't want to waste my limited PTO.

    Honestly, I'd rather ski more and have semi-working vacations. Not all the time, but often.

  • by smt88 on 1/5/16, 3:08 PM

    Like unlimited free food/snacks, a ping pong table, nap rooms, and many other "unbelievable" office amenities, the unlimited vacation policy seems cynically designed to keep you in the office as long as humanly possible.

  • by NickM on 1/5/16, 3:31 PM

    Obviously this is just anecdotal, but I work for a company with an unlimited vacation policy, and I've actually enjoyed it. I probably average 4 weeks of vacation per year, which is what I had in my previous (non-unlimited) job. But, now if I want to take more vacation one year and less vacation another year, I don't have to worry about whether my plans fit into whatever arbitrary limitations my employer might impose.

    I've also never had a vacation request denied, and nobody has ever given me any crap about taking too much time off, although not everyone does take as much vacation as I do.

    I'm sure there are companies and situations where "unlimited vacation" does end up translating to "no vacation", but I feel like a lot of the complaints about unlimited policies stem from people who are overly insecure about their careers. If you do good work and are a valuable asset to your employer, nobody is realistically going to fire you for taking an extra week off now and then.

  • by gargravarr on 1/5/16, 3:39 PM

    I think it stems from the limit imposed by the number of days elsewhere; since the days don't carry forward (or if they do, not all of them), you HAVE to use them, which creates incentive to take vacations or you miss out.

    And just like anything else unlimited, having it available without pressure to use it is kind of like a gym pass, you COULD go, but do you really want that hassle just yet?

  • by noir_lord on 1/5/16, 6:48 PM

    Unlimited with a minimum would be better since you'd have a lower bound and everyone would get at least a sane amount off.

    In the UK though we get good mandatory holiday days for FT employed.