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

251–260 of 336 posts

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#251

Post by maaku »

johnward wrote: post #120
izacus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, having 20-25 (almost mandatory) days of per year is implemented by law here in most countries of EU. How is that a "wierd" policy? (By "almost mandatory" I mean that at least here, you must use up your vacation days until end of next year.)

In the US that's weird because the mandatory days off per year are 0. A good amount for most people in the US is 10 days per year (or two weeks). I get 4 weeks which is pretty great but many of the people I work with end up not taking all of those days or taking days and also working on them due to culture. It's ridiculous.

5 days is pretty common actually (the week between Christmas and New Years).

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#252

Post by lazyant »

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…

> In "europe" a two week vacation (10 work days) is common/standard

In some countries (at least France and Spain) there's a minimum 30 day vacation by law, it's pretty normal to take a whole month off.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#253

Post by maaku »

jcadam wrote: post #63
CaveTech wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"At least 2 weeks off". Isn't 2 weeks the bare minimum?

I'm also in the US, and I receive 15 days of combined vacation and sick leave. So one bad flu can wipe out your ability to take an extended vacation. Or, alternatively, you take only a day or two when the flu is at its worst, then come into the office to stare blankly at your screen and drool on your keyboard, whilst getting your colleagues sick. Yes, stupid policies tend to incentivize people to do stupid things.

You should have personal illness / sicktime in addition to vacation. If you don't ... that's sleazy.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#254

Post by walshemj »

kabdib wrote: post #203
walshemj wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm is that not a breach of contract could in a tech company lead to an exodus of staff.

You shouldn't be surprised at the number of execs who don't really care. at. all. about attrition, and who are clueless about what motivates engineers.

I wouldn't :-) but that just means you competitors just got a free shot at your best and brightest.

The really clever ones volunteer for redundancy and the pay off and then go and work for a competitor.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#255

Post by [deleted] »

spydum wrote: post #237
nekopa wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An idea might be to track until the minimum has been met, then no more tracking after that.

problem with minimums is people like myself and certainly countless others will forget about it till end of year, then take off the entire month of december because they "must".

[deleted]

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#256

Post by Igglyboo »

butwhy wrote: post #13
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.

I like how you imply that 2-3 weeks is a long time, plus longer than your colleagues. This makes an unlimited vacation policy completely pointless if you ask me.

2-3 weeks is a long time in the US. I get 10 days off a year, many people get less. Federally mandated vacation is also not a thing here.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#257

Post by apetresc »

jarek wrote: post #205
evanpw wrote: post #194

I don't think I see a single negative comment here about long vacations, so allow me to play devil's advocate. (These questions don't necessarily reflect my own opinions.) 1. If this is such a free lunch (employees are both happier and more productive overall), then why isn't lots of vacation offered everywhere (in the US)? Can it really be the case that the vast majority of US companies are too short-sighted to make…

> Can it really be the case that the vast majority of US companies are too short-sighted to make a policy change that would be in their own best interest? You can ask that about anything. Are the U.S. banks really so short-sighted to offer absolutely crap person-to-person transfers and get undercut by any number of hacky startups? Were the U.S. car manufacturers really so stupid? Are California taxpayers really too s…

That's not really a rebuttal. Sure, maybe we can ask that question about those things too. Why not? Are you expecting everyone's political opinions to mesh with yours so closely that we'll all agree if a theory seems to contradict them, it must obviously invalidate the theory?

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#258

Post by qq66 »

nerfhammer wrote: post #244
eru wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking vacations only outside summer is forbidden in France?

No, they have to take at least a summer vacation. They get another 5 or so weeks off to use during the rest of the year

That's an infantilizing policy. Why should the government decide when you take some of your vacation?

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#259

Post by IndianAstronaut »

padobson wrote: post #27

If I worked somewhere that had an unlimited vacation policy, I think I'd probably stop working on Fridays all together. An unlimited vacation policy could be an open invitation for a 4-day work-week (or 3 day or 2 day...)

I think a 4 day workweek should become a thing. I am more than happy to put in extra hours monday through thursday so I can have an extra day for the weekend.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#260

Post by angersock »

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.

Right, but if I'm understanding all this correctly, unused vacation time exists as outstanding debts that can be called in as soon as an employee departs.

In theory, that could be enough to tank a company that otherwise might've (somehow) survived the departure of their employees.

Post reply on HN