Live data from Hacker News

Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

technical.ly

211–220 of 239 posts

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#211

When I've been burned out or hated my job, I didn't take vacations, because the crushing realization that I'd have to return to work was almost worse than losing myself in the uninterrupted, repetitive, dead-eyed grind. While on vacation, I'd start thinking about the countdown to the end of the vacation. > Well, root out the real causes of burnout. I'll offer the definition that's made most sense to me. I didn't come…

> The solution is to get a win

My 28 days of paid vacation are my yearly win.

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example, the union could have negotiated rules around an appropriate duration of working hours as well as the start and end times of such. E.g. unionized employees shall not have to work "after hours". Working hours are 9-5. Anything outside of that is paid at 1.5x. Employees can't work from home so as not to infringe on 'family life'. And suddenly the union has made me very uninterested in performing my duties a…

And suddenly the union has made me very uninterested in performing my duties at that company at all. I want to be able to work with flexible hours I was in a union for a little bit, and there was a set process for this. You simply requested & justified a modified schedule, and so long as your boss signed off that it wouldn't negatively impact operations, it was all fine. Not all unions may do this though.

Absolutely agreed that unionized doesn't mean only bad things. That's not what my parent asked about though.

My dad was at a sort of unionized place. The core business wasn't Software but they spun their own IT needs out into an IT service company that became quite large on its own too. This was in Germany though. The actual union negotiated with the core business and for their employees. There's also another system in Germany that's a little separate from unions (which also exist) called roughly translated the "workers council".

The core business for example (manufacturers union) had a 35 hour week. The IT company had an agreement of "what the union contract says but with these modifications e.g. +5 hours." (and some other stuff) the unionization was great for a junior as it guaranteed a minimum pay scale for example with set minimum raises after x time etc. You had to track your time (clocking in and out was provided but not mandatory) and weren't allowed to do too many hours etc. But things were still flexible. Come and go when you want to within reason. And that was already like that in the 1980s. Obviously no WFH at that time :)

When the union renegotiated to 37.5 hours that suddenly meant all IT company personnel had to work 42.5. But the workers council and the company were on good terms and workers were told not to worry, the official stuff will take a week or two to hammer out and put in writing but keep working your 40 hours. The intent was the 40 hours and the +5 was just how it was written down. A technicality.

So yeah it can also be good.

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#213
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say 4 weeks, do you mean 20 days off because there's typically 5 work days in a week or do you mean 30 days?

The legislation says 4 weeks. In practice that means if you work 5 days a week you get 20 days. If you work 3 days a week you get 12 days. I have never heard of an employer that makes its employees only take whole weeks rather than a day here or there even though technically you are only entitled to "weeks" off.

> I have never heard of an employer that makes its employees only take whole weeks rather than a day here or there

This could be country-specific, but in investment banking it is common to require employees to periodically take an uninterrupted block of vacation (in my country, a two-week block once per year seems typical). The rationale is to make it more difficult to perpetuate certain types of fraud, since the bad actor would need to collude with another employee to cover up in their absence.

A bit of a corner case, but thought I'd mention.

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about people who build tons of successful things and get win after win after win, but are still feeling burned out? For me, a "win" would be accomplishing something and then getting to bask in the success and take a fucking break and do nothing for a year. Shoot, even being able to take a break for a month after busting my butt on a project for a year would be nice. But nope. You never really "finish" anything i…

Are there companies that would let you take the rest of the week off in that situation? If so, shouldn’t they also make you work overtime to finish some work that you underestimated? Isn’t the trick to just work at a sustainable pace, day in and day out, and celebrate the wins along the way? All that said, in the last five years my longest holiday has been a week. The work really is endless.

Vacation is still important even with a sustainable pace. Personally, when i’ve managed teams i’ve always included vacation as part of our 1:1 career talks. Especially with new engineers. If people aren’t taking vacations it’s a dealbreaker to me — taking a real, long, no calls while out vacation is to me as core to professional engineering as fixing bugs and shipping features.

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#215
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really surprising you could not just chill for rest of week?

Yes and no. Am I surprised that a human resource extracting paperclip factory would stive to optimize every last minute of the employee's time? No I am not. Do humans need rest and rewards, to feel special, loved, significant, and appreciated, and do they work better for longer periods of time when they are getting all that, and is it a supprising waste of long term value for short term gain? Yes!

Yes humans need rest. Which has nothing to do with situation in which estimates turn out too low and thus estimated work is done faster.

I don't see how it should imply that employee don't have to do anything rest of the week. Likewise, if estimation is too small at the beginning I don't pull 80 hours long week nor I consider it effective.

Had the complain was about overall lack of rest or overwork, that would be understandable. But it is not about that.

It is about expectation that original estimate is measure of how much you should do and if the task turned out faster, you can watch movies rest of the week.

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions do sometimes make it hard to get rid of bad workers... not sure that's the same as "rewarding" them though. I can't think of examples of punishing good ones though. Union contracts frequently have defined procedures for requesting a merit pay increase with a mandatory review process, along with similar procedures for reclassification to a higher level position, also with more pay, when a person's scope of resp…

Getting to keep your job when you don't deserve it is absolutely a reward. As for punishing good workers... I've heard plenty of stories where someone was really good at their job and they just needed some small thing done that they couldn't get the right department to do, so they did it themselves. The union jumped all over them because it's contractually obligated that the other department perform that function. It…

Sounds like you'd have the same problem if you were a cowboy coder at a non-startup.

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be so miserable if it had to deal with a union. Though to be fair I am not overworked or undervalued. I imagine there’s a lot of engineers who large companies just grind through.

No need to be miserable in a union. If you don't like the union you just don't deal with it. Ignore their meetings & other communication. In the US at least, Per the SC's Janus ruling, public unions can no longer require fees at all, and the same goes for private unions in right-to-work states.

After Janus my wife could stop her union membership but she does not due to concern about repercussions from union members in terms of their ability to reduce her opportunities.

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but so is letting "unlimited" just turn into looting by the privileged or some sort of toxic "my manager won't let me take more than a week off". Which is what I've been getting at. People love to condemn Unlimited PTO as some sort of toxic trap, and it certainly can be, but it all comes down to if your HR department is competent and cares. If your management is bad, having fixed PTO isn't going to save you fro…

That's just because it's more common the case that employees get screwed by the company than other way round. One easy way to make unlimited really unlimited is by having a reasonable number of mandatory days off like 4 weeks. Then I'll believe unlimited PTO.

I'm not asking you to "believe" in anything. There are just some companies where you can take 4-6 weeks off and some companies where you can't, and which one you're in depends on which team you work on and who your manager and HR rep is more than what they claim their PTO plan is.

I hypothetically have almost 5 weeks of days off at my current job and between not having much vacation options because of pandemic and not wanting to just be lazy at home, I haven't used most of it. Should someone from HR just tell me I'm not allowed to work in December now?

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#219
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don’t they call it something else then? Maybe “Flexible PTO”? I really don’t like the “unlimited” part of the name. It feels confusing / misleading to me.

Probably because "unlimited" is the relevant part to the part of the company that cares - HR. If it was limited, it would need to be tracked. I get the objection to the fact that you can't literally take 200 days off or whatever, but that just feels like pedantry when at this point the colloquial meaning of "unlimited pto" is fairly clear.

The colloquial meaning doesn't seem clear at all. Am I OK taking 2 weeks? 3 weeks? 4 weeks? 5 weeks? 6 weeks? 7 weeks? 10 weeks? Which is it, precisely? At what precise number of days does it go from being "a reasonable amount" to "lol are you nuts?"

Re: Vacation isn’t the answer to employee burnout

#220
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can confirm, recently went from a great manager who always had our backs and celebrated our successes to one who offers zero support, plenty of blame and zero recognition. I’ve been surprised how devastating it’s been.

"plenty of blame and zero recognition" Does the amount of blame and recognition vary with the amount of effort you put in? I've seen situations like this, and seen people feel burnt out when: 1. However hard they work, they do not get blamed less or recognized more, or even 2. They are blamed more than people who contribute approximately zero. Because those people doing nothing have no output, hence nothing to be bla…

We sometimes say "No good deed goes unpunished".

I've seen plenty of 2 and find it fascinating how instincts for feedback, including my own instincts which I need to improve, can be so counterproductive towards the hardest working, most committed and effective people.

Not just critical feedback, but assistance, resources and support also follow a similar pattern.

If someone's working hard on something and making clear progress when others are not, from time time they slow down or even just appear to. It's inevitable even if just due to random events.

Occasionally I've seen someone with a history of conscientious and effective work, going through a rough time, a difficulty, or whatever it may be, and be offered straightforward, non-judgemental, kindly meant assistance. That's really nice when it happens for real. But it's so rare. Not many people seem to have it in them to just offer simple agenda-free help to someone without creating more burdens.

Much more often, I've seen the conscientious high performer given gradually increasing harsh feedback even while they are still ahead of others around them, mixed with offers of "help" which are more of a burden. And other people looking for opportunities to "replace" the high performer in various minor roles, perhaps with themselves naturally, due to mistaking results and effort with status and petty-political influence.

The most insidious and ironic of these I've seen weaponized burnout itself: "You seem like you may be heading for burnout. Why don't you step down for a while", said by someone who had been politically maneuvering to take over the role and whose public dramas were a significant driver, perhaps the only driver, of the burnout they purported to care about.

It is a rough social regulation cycle for the person committed to conscientious and effective work in an environment where people say they want one thing but act to produce another.

Post reply on HN