Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
in [Europe]
|
From: BB on 23 Jul 2006 12:49 On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 00:36:28 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote: > Most employers I know of recognize the value of rested employees.. > > If they really recognized that, they'd give employees more than four > weeks, and they'd do it from the first day on the job. I imagine a large part of productivity would also involve showing up. All I find from internet searches is that there is significant debate about whether many weeks of vacation actually makes a worker more productive. -- -BB- To e-mail me, unmunge my address
From: Stephen Dailey on 23 Jul 2006 13:08 On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:20:50 -0700, dgs <dgs1300(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Stephen Dailey wrote: > >> Every employer I've worked for has offered 4 weeks of vacation after a >> specified period of employment. I've never been with one employer >> long enough to earn 4 weeks, though. > > You've just touched on a significant difference between American and > (many) European policies regarding vacation/holiday leave. Yanks might > accrue 4 weeks of leave at a given employer, but once they change > employers - a not uncommon occurrence - the meter gets set back to 2 > weeks, because the new employer is not obliged to honor the former > employer's vacation/holiday leave policy. Nor should they be. Whatever earned benefits the new employee left behind is not the new employer's concern. It's common practice (or maybe the law) to pay an employee who leaves with vacation time on the books, for that time. That came in handy when I quit with 2 weeks' unused vacation once since it amounted to 2 extra weeks' pay. > In Europe, vacation/holiday leave is more tied to the worker. If you > quit one company to change jobs to a new employer, and you had four > weeks of vacation/holiday accrued, no big deal; you'll still have four > weeks at the new employer - or even five or six weeks. This sounds like a reason not to hire experienced workers, or at least a reason to pay them less. === Steve Shoreline, Washington USA smdailey(a)seanet.com 23 Jul 2006, 1007 PDT
From: Dave Frightens Me on 23 Jul 2006 13:15 On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 09:30:09 GMT, jim(a)jibbering.com (Jim Ley) wrote: >On 23 Jul 2006 01:29:51 -0700, "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> If you read my >>post I spoke rather specifically about *NEW* employees. And in that >>case it makes a definite difference. > >No it doesn't, I've worked with lots of very good people who were more >productive in their first months that later - the boredom outweighed >the experience - indeed the experience caused the boredom. Indeed, I have seen this a lot. People get used to just going through the motions, and playing the game. Their vacation time wont make any difference to the company's profits. (note to self, you speak British English, so why are you saying 'vacation'?) -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- --
From: Dave Frightens Me on 23 Jul 2006 13:17 On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 09:33:24 GMT, jim(a)jibbering.com (Jim Ley) wrote: >On 23 Jul 2006 01:18:25 -0700, "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>It has to do with a lot of reasons. Vacation entitlement is a small >>part, but it's a part. The primary problem is the "free lunch" attitude >>that Europeans seems to have. Lots of vacation without earning it. Free >>medical care. Cradle to grave security. You name it. > >You need to understand Europe is not one homogenous country, it is >full of lots of different countries, with very different systems on >all the above, I doubt Tchihiuahua could get his head around that. If it's not American, it's socialist and doomed for failure. -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- --
From: Dave Frightens Me on 23 Jul 2006 13:29
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 17:14:54 +0200, Martin <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: >On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 13:26:27 +0100, this_address_is_for_spam(a)yahoo.com >(David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and >deansgate) wrote: > >>Martin <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 12:11:14 +0200, Dave Frightens Me >>> <deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote: >>> >>> >On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 10:05:08 +0200, Martin <me(a)privacy.net> wrote: >>> > >>> >>On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 23:36:41 +0100, this_address_is_for_spam(a)yahoo.com >>> >>(David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and >>> >>deansgate) wrote: >>> >> >>> >>>Mxsmanic <mxsmanic(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> JohnT writes: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> > So, yet again you don't know what you are talking about. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> That does not follow. >>> >>> >>> >>>What? I would say that it's a pretty safe bet that it applies to almost >>> >>>anything you talk about here. >>> >> >>> >>I've gone back to believing that he is just a troll. >>> > >>> >He's mentally ill, for sure, but I don't know if I'd consider it >>> >trolling. He's not anonymous enough. >>> >>> Yeah? Show me a photo of him/her/it >> >>You first! :) > >We'll have to wait until DFM has done the Mixi tour. Will you guys pitch in a few euro? I'm not kidding, I'll do it! -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- |