re: EDIT: Should employees be allowed unpaid leave if their work is covered?

quote:

---

Actually, Med insurance is 100% paid by the company, worker pays $25.00 copay. Vacation is 2 weeks after the 1st year, 3 weeks after 5 years, 4 weeks after 10 year and 5 weeks after 15 years. 13 paid holidays. Retirement is paid 100% by the company up at a rate of 15% of the employee's base salary. Bonus system is 50-100% of employee salary based on company profits. Sales guys get auto allowance, car insurance, etc paid by company with generous expense accounts. It's horrible to work here I tell ya!~

---

My company offers 3 weeks vacation/sick time, 1 week personal, accruing from day 1. That number goes way up by the time you hit 10 years. Two weeks paid holidays, plus the week between Christmas and NYE is off (and paid) companywide. Also from day one you have the option of investing in the company (which hit 20%+ APY over the last 3 years, btw) though you are vested starting year 1. Bonus at the end of the year, with bonus for not participating in med insurance, and matching 401k to boot, also Dependant care FSA for daycare, healthcare FSA, and life insurance. As a policy, even though we are salaried under professional exemption, all workers get overtime past 40 hours, in the rare instance someone goes past 40 for the week.

Also, we have a flexible schedule where as long as you bill out 40 hours and you get you work done, you can comp your own time and leave early when you want (I.e. work 9-9-9-9-4).

Just ask yourself- does the average engineering major want to wait a year to get all of those benefits?

Also, do you offer the new hires health insurance or do you treat them as scum 1099 contractors?

I've seen lots of changes in benefits compensation since I joined the workforce.

My current company offers unlimited vacation time to VP and above. Other employees are awarded personal and sick time on Jan. 1 and vacation time accrues. However, they are incredibly lenient about giving people unpaid time off if it is required.

I have worked for companies where vacation was accrued but could not be used until after 1 year. And companies where time is awarded day 1 and vacation could be used as long as work load allowed.

Companies maintain policies and procedures about time accrued and awarded and how and when that time can be used. However, as a manager, if you want to keep good people, you need to deal with things on an individual basis. If within that first year, an employee wants a day off to go on a family vacation, you have to weigh one day off against possibly losing an employee and all the resources you've already put into them. If someone is abusing it, then you have to deal with the person abusing the policy, not necessarily overhauling a policy in general.

As to the OP's original question: getting unpaid leave prior to it being earned, that would have to be on a case by case basis. I don't think it's something that is hard yes or no.

quote:

---

Fortunately in your case, you're not measure upon your personality and character. I wouldn't buy a fire extinguisher from you if I were on fire. (That's another hyperbole for you).

---

quote:

---

That hyperbole makes no sense. I'd just use the fire extinguisher to put myself out. I would not sell you my only means to survival. You suck at these.

---

OK. I've met my quote of dealing with retardation for the day. Good Luck, sir.

You're operating under the presumption that your job is inherently better than the other one. I can see this is going nowhere.

"Work here, Mr Qualified Candidate. It's so much better than other places we will offer you a smaller total compensation/benefit plan. We only want people here that want to be here."

quote:

---

What the frick is wrong with that?

---

The fact that most companies don't have this stupid policy

I've had it both ways: accrued and all at one time. Much prefer the all at one time.

Its not really unreasonable

quote:

---

Sneaky__Sally

---

The one factor that you arent considering is that for that first year, you are actually being compensated less.

So if a company paid someone 70K to work 50 weeks as opposed to 52 weeks, they are paying that person the same salary but more per/effort.

That and frick a company that doesnt respect its employee enough to know that people need time off in order to live a balanced and healthy life.

I don't work under it any more, so I should have had a relevation of the oppression I experienced in my first.