Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

paperplanes.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 336 posts

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#101

Post by barrkel »

oakesm9 wrote: post #23
javery wrote: post #5

We have an unlimited vacation policy at Adzerk and I try to lead by example by taking at least 2-3 weeks off a year (especially in the summer). We also try to encourage everyone to take at least one solid week off a year and it seems to work pretty well. I think that's the real issue with unlimited policy - if the leaders don't take vacation no one else thinks they can.

Is 2-3 weeks off a normal amount of time in the US? I get 28 days off per year in the UK, which is around the standard amount.

10 days is the normal amount of time as a new employee, not including bank holidays. Often increases with tenure (rather than seniority).

Some companies are more enlightened than others, however.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#102

Post by rmc »

chton wrote: post #50

"We tried something that didn't fit our culture, and it didn't work." Taking less vacation time is not necessarily a bad thing. For myself, not having to meet a minimum quota means I enjoy the vacations I do take more, since I take them when I need and want instead of mandatory ones. It means, as long as I'm feeling good, I can keep the momentum up. The bigger problems is that employees didn't respect others' vacatio…

> That is, to me, a sign of an unhealthy culture. Fix that before trying yet another vacation experiment.

And one way to fix it is to give everyone lots of paid time off.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#103

Post by vosper »

Someone1234 wrote: post #30

I've said it before and I'll say it again, unlimited days off (or "open") and zero days off are identical. If you have unlimited vacation people are inclined to take less and people respect the vacation you take less ("as you can always take more!"). Here's a study[0] (PDF) called "Overwhelmed America: Why Don’t We Use Our Earned Leave?" It is biased (travel association) but interesting nonetheless. According to this…

I think one of the most important points in the article is that forcing people to take vacation, and encouraging them to be completely unavailable, means that the company must learn how to survive the absence of a team member. It forces you to reduce the bus-factor, and this is critical.

I ask my team members to take at least 20 days off per year (we also have an unlimited vacation policy) and I'll be using this argument to encourage them to switch off and enjoy their breaks.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#104

Post by dragonwriter »

ahuth wrote: post #62
dragonwriter wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With these kinds of policies being more common in young companies, I highly doubt that paying back unused vacation can have any significant effect on normal operations. It has an effect on the balance sheet, since vacation time accrued but not used is a liability; in companies whose operations are labor-heavy, and that have high-pay workers, that's may be a concern, especially when seeking investors, since concrete…

We should have no sympathy for 'balance sheet' or accounting reasons for anything. Regardless of how much vacation time is on the books as a liability, the company's cash flows are exactly the same.

> We should have no sympathy for 'balance sheet' or accounting reasons for anything.

I don't see what sympathy has to do with it. The state of the balance sheet is a concrete concern for investors, and therefore for companies seeking investors, independently of whether you have sympathy for it or not.

> Regardless of how much vacation time is on the books as a liability, the company's cash flows are exactly the same.

Possibly, but so what? The statement of cash flows matters, of course -- particularly in the short term -- but investors care ultimately about value, not cash flow. (After all, borrowing money produces a positive cash flow the same as selling product does, the difference is that the former also accumulates liability.)

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#105

Post by rmc »

oakesm9 wrote: post #23
javery wrote: post #5

We have an unlimited vacation policy at Adzerk and I try to lead by example by taking at least 2-3 weeks off a year (especially in the summer). We also try to encourage everyone to take at least one solid week off a year and it seems to work pretty well. I think that's the real issue with unlimited policy - if the leaders don't take vacation no one else thinks they can.

Is 2-3 weeks off a normal amount of time in the US? I get 28 days off per year in the UK, which is around the standard amount.

(Broadly) there is no legal requirement for paid holidays in the USA. About 25% of employees don't get paid holidays. The USA is shockingly backward compared to EU when it comes to employment rights.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#106

Post by danielweber »

debacle wrote: post #40
sportanova wrote: post #2

Of course the other reason for 'unlimited vacation' is so when an employee leaves, the company doesn't have to pay them for unused vacation days. Huge red flag when a company has 'unlimited vacation'

IIRC, the company doesn't have to pay you for unused vacation days even if you don't use them. It's pretty much at the discretion of the company.

Check your employee handbook.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#107

Post by madcaptenor »

vonmoltke wrote: post #82
CalRobert wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until I left the US every I worked operated on the basis of accrued vacation. The day you started you had 0 vacation days, after 6 months you could use half your annual allotment, etc.

My previous company ran a PTO system and advanced the entire balance on 01JAN every year. There aren't many, but they are out there.

My current company does this. In addition balances have to be used by the end of the year. People are encouraged to take their vacation, so this leads to a lot of people taking random days in December off. As a result you can't get a damn thing done in December.

I can't help but think that a system where accrued days expire after a certain amount of time or you can't carry more than a certain balance would mean that people's vacation time would be spread out more. As a result I could actually get some stuff done now that requires coordinating with people. I'm not sure if there would be a cost, however, in not being able to get stuff done at other times of the year.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#108

Post by Hansi »

jbb555 wrote: post #33

very good. Except "now has a required minimum of 25 (paid) vacation days per year, no matter what country they live in." Well no. If they live in the UK for example they have a mandatory limit of 28 days not 25 because it's the law.

Well the 28 day limit covers public holidays as well, maybe they mean in excess of public holidays and therefore cover pretty much every country everywhere?

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#109

Post by mhurron »

Arjuna wrote: post #73
Someone1234 wrote: post #30

I've said it before and I'll say it again, unlimited days off (or "open") and zero days off are identical. If you have unlimited vacation people are inclined to take less and people respect the vacation you take less ("as you can always take more!"). Here's a study[0] (PDF) called "Overwhelmed America: Why Don’t We Use Our Earned Leave?" It is biased (travel association) but interesting nonetheless. According to this…

Thanks for the link to that study. In "europe" a two week vacation (10 work days) is common/standard. As opposed to American's "long weekends." To that point, if you've ever wondered (as I have) about the differences in philosophy on the topic of vacation between America and Europe, you may enjoy this paper [1]. It attempts to examine those differences. It's entitled "Europeans Work To Live and Americans Live To Work…

> This study suggests that as the number of work hours increases, Americans become happier about life

This makes sense. From a very early age, Americans are inundated with the idea that their worth is tied to if they work hard and have a job. Those that don't have a job or those that aren't perceived as working hard are below them. The worst thing they can say about someone is they are lazy.

I work from home 2-3 days a week. My in-laws believe I goof off and play games (which they also disapprove of) or watch TV all day. Nothing will dissuade them of that belief unless I change to working at the office for long hours.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#110

Post by TallGuyShort »

vosper wrote: post #103
Someone1234 wrote: post #30

I've said it before and I'll say it again, unlimited days off (or "open") and zero days off are identical. If you have unlimited vacation people are inclined to take less and people respect the vacation you take less ("as you can always take more!"). Here's a study[0] (PDF) called "Overwhelmed America: Why Don’t We Use Our Earned Leave?" It is biased (travel association) but interesting nonetheless. According to this…

I think one of the most important points in the article is that forcing people to take vacation, and encouraging them to be completely unavailable, means that the company must learn how to survive the absence of a team member. It forces you to reduce the bus-factor, and this is critical. I ask my team members to take at least 20 days off per year (we also have an unlimited vacation policy) and I'll be using this argu…

In general I would agree, but I think you've gotta be careful that doesn't come off as "we need to make sure you're not a vital member of the team".
Post reply on HN