So... um... my boss sent me home today.

[VAMatt]

Mbolibombo said:

superchunk said:

I wouldn't want the government requiring a specific vacation time. That should be a benefit the company can dictate.

1. Companies can remain more flexible and controlling of their costs.

2. It's a benefit employees can compare when looking for an employer.

3. What else are you losing as a potential benefit because the company has to pay out 5 weeks a year to each employee?

 

 

US doesn't require a specific number that I'm aware of. However, I've never worked at a company that didn't offer at least 2~3 weeks a year for FT employees. Where I work now, the first year you received 2 weeks vacation and 1 week personal time. The 2 to 6th year you get 3 weeks vacation and 1 week personal. 6+ you get 4 weeks vacation and 1 personal. A time based benefit is pretty common as well. So in reality I'm getting 4 weeks paid a year now, which honestly is a lot. 

Why? Companies have enough benefits already. They can dictate all they want, but if they ever touched my 5 weeks of vacation I would riot. 

1. On the other hand, with 5 weeks vacation employees can remain more flexible. More power to the employees. 

2. That's only a good argument if companies offer 6 or more weeks compared to 5 weeks by law. You could still want more vacation than 5 weeks, 5 is the very minimum.

3. Nothing? If anything there's more benefits.. to mention. What benefits do you have for not having 5 weeks of vacation?

Good for you if you are pleased with 4 weeks paid vacation. 

Nobody is arguing that lots of vacation time is bad.  Superchunk, like me, is saying that the law shouldn't dictate the terms of an employment relationship.  

Government screws up everything it touches.  The less it touches your life, the better off you are.