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

321–330 of 336 posts

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#321

Post by kriro »

walshemj wrote: post #248
kriro wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a somewhat related note, one of the things that irks me the most (working in Germany) is that I have to take a 30 minute break after 6h of work and another 15 minute break after 9h and can't work more than 10h without someone signing off on it. I can't even opt out of this. This seems totally broken, especially since you are not technically supposed to take other breaks without signing out of work. As someone usin…

that 30 minute break after 6h of work is other wise known as Lunch :-)

Yeah that's obviously the reasoning behind it however the specific structure with the forced 15 minute break as well has lead (unintentionally I assume) to a structure of work 9h on Monday-Thursday and 6h on Friday for most employees. So basically everyone generates roughly 2h of OT every week then takes a Friday off once they hit 6 (or saves up).

And I tend to eat a "power breakfast" and smaller snacks (apple etc.) during the day so I can live with a later lunch break. However if you don't check out after 6h the system automatically checks you out. So technically you can't just take the lunch break after 7h (you can take it after 5h).

In practical terms it's a nonissue really but the overall design just upsets me for some reason :D

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#322

Post by Robin_Message »

Already__Taken wrote: post #96
delluminatus wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know why? Is it just to encourage people to take more vacation time?

I also do not know why but I've read about encouraging people to take days off has effects like people who are ill taking care of themselves and not spreading a cold around the office and ruining the whole work place attitude.

This is why in sensible countries sick days are not subtracted from your holidays.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#323

Post by ido »

david927 wrote: post #180
mhurron wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Contrast that to somewhere like Germany, which is where this article was written. Work days end early. The culture in Germany is not to live at work. Work is for working. You come to do a job, not to have interpersonal relationships with co-workers. Apparently I need to move to Germany because this is exactly how I work and like to work.

It's true for most of the world, actually.

Most of europe anyway. Not so sure about e.g. Asian countries, especially the poorer ones.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#324

Post by elsjaako »

geofft wrote: post #236
AndrewKemendo wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree 100%. I am talking about giving people 1 month off per year. In those cases, how do you maintain efficiency without bloat?

What's wrong with bloat? Isn't profitability the goal, not efficiency? If it's best achieved by having more resources so you continue to be profitable when one resource is unavailable, then have more resources. This is as true of hard drives and fire exits as it is of employees. Expanding on a point by brational, see Tom Demarco's book Slack: Getting Past Burnout, Busywork, and the Myth of Total Efficiency . It makes…

I was expecting some kind of subgenius material. Please tell me JR "Bob" Dobbs is at least mentioned.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#325

Post by kpmah »

alkonaut wrote: post #319
kpmah wrote: post #314

"unlimited" days off are nonsense. Can I take off 365 days a year? If the answer is no it's not unlimited. There's a limit, you're just not specifying it.

I have a feeling this only works in places where you can be fired for performance reasons.

Sure, but my point is if you can be fired for taking too many days off, it's not unlimited. It's limited by the amount of work you're expected to reasonably do, and that's decided by your boss and colleagues. Except now instead of having a hard number where you know you are safe, it's completely subjective how many days off you can take.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#326

Post by johnward »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #306
johnward wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is exactly why these policies suck. It's "unlimited" but it's implied that you don't take too many days. It's like the comcast of vacation policies.

That's what the minimum days you must take is for. If the company culture is right, it's a liberating policy. At my new job now it feels like I'm spending a precious commodity instead of booking vacation feeling like reprieve due in the wake of hard work or payoff.

Oh I agree. I like the idea that the article was talking about. I'll be interested in seeing how it works out. It reverses the stigma to almost be where you'd look bad for not taking enough time vs taking too much time.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#327

Post by im2w1l »

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".

Have a "vacation year" that ends in August then.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#328

Post by calgaryeng »

e40 wrote: post #64
gadders wrote: post #61

As a counterpoint, most investment banks enfore a mandatory 10 working day break where all remote access capabilities are disabled (including blackberries). This is less out of altruism, and more so that any untoward activities can be uncovered whilst the person is out of the office.

This is less out of altruism, and more so that any untoward activities can be uncovered whilst the person is out of the office. I'd love to hear more about that.

There have been many cases of people in finance being able to cover up significant losses of company funds (through bad trades or what not) or a long period of time simply by understanding the front/back office systems.

If you force people to leave (and cut off remote access) they are unable to maintain the pretenses required to cover up these losses, and can help drive exposure of foul play. At a minimum you'd need two people 100% in on the cover-up which reduces the chance of it happening.

Re: Travis CI: From Open to Minimum Vacation Policy

#329

Post by encoderer »

dyadic wrote: post #280
encoderer wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't find 4 weeks to be a "lot" of vacation time, but I think the hundred million workers or so who have 2 weeks or less every year would disagree that 4 weeks is "standard." On top of that I took 2 weeks of remote work. That said, if you're an awesome engineer (especially mobile -- Trulia has about a dozen mobile apps to build out), and you want 10 weeks every year, lets talk. I don't hire for the mobile teams so…

I realise it wasn't your main point, but can we stop with this trope of remote work being like a holiday or somehow worth less than in-office work.

If you don't think the flexibility of remote work is valuable, try giving it up?
Post reply on HN