After living in the USA for close on 15 years, and then moving back to the UK, although I am missing America in many ways, one thing I don't miss is the attitude by US employers to time away from work. The more hours you worked (unpaid), the more you were thought of. Working very long hours, and not taking your vacation time was almost worn as a badge of honor by many of my work colleagues. If when you started full time employment, you got 10 working days off a year...well...you were lucky. If you actually took all your time, often that was not looked highly upon. My wife got 5 paid days vacation a year when we lived in Austin. She was told that after 2 years they would review it. Now here she gets 30 days paid leave. I think that the USA has higher productivity than a lot of European countries, but how much of that is due to longer working hours etc, I don't know. Still, while the hours worked here have remained stable or even dropped slightly in some countries, in the USA they have risen over the last 4 or 5 decades. Here in the UK, the legal minimum vacation time to offer employees in full time work when they start, is 20 days, plus public holidays. Many companies start people on 25 to 27 days, that is a full 5 weeks paid vacation, plus public holidays. It feels so much better, knowing you can take a 2 or 3 week vacation, and STILL have possibly a couple more weeks to take when you choose. From the top down, the attitude is the same. the MD of my quite large global company is perfectly fine with people taking time for themselves, and actually has kicked me out of the office on a few occasions when I have stayed more than 30 or 40 minutes late. Do you think it will ever change in the USA to where the idea of taking time off for yourself is seen as a positive thing? Do you think that US companies will ever see the value in giving employees more time off? I can honestly say, I really feel I am more productive and positive now than I was working in the USA. I put most of this down to being able to break up the year with time away from work. Wondering what you guys thought about this subject?
my old company was sweet in that we had 3 weeks paid + anywhere from 1.5 to a full 2 weeks off during xmas/nye depending on how the holidays fell on the calender. God bless unions' arrogant entitlement attitude during negotiations... the new co. doesn't do the xmas/nye thing, but oh well. the championship year I just emailed my bosses telling them I was heading to Pasadena and spent an extra week away. the head boss didn't like it, but he's an aggy, f**k him anyway.
The American obsession with not taking time off is baffling. What's amazing to me is that technology is supposed to make life easier but I'd postulate that, over all, American's lives are harder. Shouldn't people have more free time? It's bizzare to me that the opposite is true.
That's b/c we keep getting a higher standard of living, enabling more work, value creation and prosperity, and more goodies to spend our money on. In the past you might only have one breadwinner but you didn't have 2 or 3 or 4 cars per family, huge houses and as much in the way of exotic vacations and toys. People made due with less.
It's struck me before that this is a curious cultural phenomenon, particularly contrasting the U.S. v. Europe. I have a hypothesis (if it's even that). The U.S. is at most a century or so removed, and in some cases, only a few decades removed, from living by carving out a life on the frontier/building from the ground up. If you took a wagon out west, once you took the wheels off, you worked pretty much every day. You had to. We have an American work ethic that is rural in origins (as the entire country was rural a mere 250 years ago or so) and deeply ingrained. Europe, on the other hand -- they had enough of the whole "work your *** off/subsistence living" thing with serfdom. They shook that **** off a while back, modernized, and they ain't going back to working your *** off for the lord of the manor. Indeed, vacation and the right to tell the boss/lord to piss off are hard-won rights to the European culture. Maybe there's something to that. Or, maybe I'm full of ****. It strikes me as an interesting idea, at least. I am often struck by how much human beings are products of their history, which is often relatively ANCIENT history (hell, look at the fact that the Serbs and muslims are still pissed off about the Battle of Kosovo, which happened in 1389). It wouldn't surprise me that the relatively recent histories of serfdom and the American frontier still wield significant influence over our national characters, respectively.
We have to work harder to make more money so we can spend money on more stuff we don't have any time to enjoy.
Interesting comments and thoughts. I think that yes, people do definitely strive to have a larger house, x number of cars, etc in the US. You get that here, but it does not seem to be such a motivator. Maybe the whole thing about America being young and having rural work attitudes is right. Another thing I was thinking about was also the attitude to taking sabatticals, i.e. long unpaid time away from work to travel. It's pretty accepted here, even amongst older employees and not just students taking a gap year out to backpack around. There is even a company that specializes in gap years for middle aged employees. It's normal for companies to give you 6 months or a year off to go travel and hold your job open for you. So, is it going to change anytime soon? Is there a way to encourage change? At some point in the not too distant future, we're going to move back. I'm really looking forward to everything but the working environment.
In some endeavors there is a huge prize for first place and not much for second. In others the reward is fairly proportionate to effort. If you are engaged in an effort of the first type my advice is to work your *** off and retire at 40. If you are engaged in the second type take your four weeks of vacation. But if you're in the first type and losing to those who outperform you, or you're in the second type, don't cry. You made the choice.
The CEO of one of the Indian outsourcing firms recently commented that he was hesitant to work with Americans because it seemed that there was more pressure to leave the office by spouses, whereas in India, the spouses are much more understanding of husbands staying later at the office. I know “on average” Americans are supposed to work the greatest # of hours, but I suspect that includes the great masses of the poor in India/China, etc. Within a particular service profession (law, IT, finance) I suspect that is not the case. But that is our competition. So I suspect if any changes occur, they will work the opposite way.
Hayden, I was just joking about Japan since they are known to have a good work ethic. Interesting about the long term view that they take though.
i got a 4 week sabbatical after 5 years at my company (no longer offered). i get 4 weeks of vacation that doesn't carry over (my mgr is letting me carry over 2 weeks 'unofficially', as i took 1 week last week). i work for a good company, but i do work a lot. i also work from home and have a lot of flexibility, though. i'm a lucky working bastard, but i think most performing sales droids are...
I've known companies that have the attitude that taking longer than a week's vacation at once basically proves that you're not an irreplaceable employee.
BA93 - another essential of the seemingly american paradigm. ie - someone can take two weeks off without everything falling apart, then that must mean that they are a superfuous employee! or, maybe it could mean that a few people were pitching and helping out because they want their **** taken care of when they leave as well. that's my favorite part of layoff time. layoff the "dead weight." right. well, not all of it is dead weight. these people obviously did something, because now i'm doing a fuckton more work. and if i'm a bit strung out or worn out, they look at me cockeyed when i want to take a day off because there aren't enough people here to do the work. well, f**k that ****.
Vacation? What are you people ******* socialists? Corporate dogma so dominates our culture that its more important to serve the system and the company than it is to serve yourself. We're indoctrinated into this ******** from grade school. The greater corporate good is most important, conformity and repression are the norm.
Boy... They sure taught different things at your school... I don't remember that indoctrination... However...in a lot of jobs, the reason that people work so hard is that they are in competition with others. The person who produces the most gets the brass ring, so to speak...those who don't still do OK, but not as well... A lot of Americans work tons of hours because they WANT to be the one who "wins"... My industry is different, though, so I'm pretty lucky...
I have thought about this pretty often. I just took a trip to New Zealand, and whenever I told people I only had two weeks there because that is all the vacation I get, they were amazed, ahem...uphauled. I think it motivates me to set off on my own -- I really don't like the fact that I get two working weeks (less than four percent) of the year to do what I want to do. That sounds ludicrous to me. Before I took this job, I was offered another -- one of the deciding factors to decline it was that I had no days I could take off for the first six months. Then, I received something like 0.6 days off for every month I worked until I was there two years and it bumped up to 0.8 days per month -- that included sick days too. I like that my job is fairly flexible now, but still having two weeks seems slim.
The funny thing is that Asian work even harder, but for Asians it makes more sense because you eat what you kill. Most people in HK work on Saturdays (not me).
Yeah well that is the thing. I do understand that the reality or possible perception is that people work those long hours and don't take time off because they either want to be first, or they are worried about being the one fired when it comes to cutbacks. That is the problem. It's almost impossible to swim against the tide with the working population and companies thinking the same way. I think though that it is much healthier and better for people to have the time to take off. Regarging your batteries, spending some long quality time with your family/kids etc....that is priceless. Here is a chart (take it with a pinch of salt as it is wiki) showing minimum vacation time offered by country. The Link This one is from CNN... The Link
I'm very glad that the US is where it is in that chart... It's not the gov'ts job to mandate vacation time... The "one size fits all" approach doesn't work in hospital gowns, why would it work in the employment sector...
Eric, I can understand you not wanting the government to require a minimum amount of time off (although I think this is a good thing to ensure), but do you see any benifits of giving employees more time away from the office? I feel far less stressed and I think people take less sick days (at least at my company) because they can use their vaction time to do what they need to. Do you feel that 10 days a year is acceptable? Paid vacation? U.S. workers have no guarantees Wed May 16, 2007 5:44pm EDT WASHINGTON (Reuters) - When it comes to guaranteed paid vacation, U.S. workers don't seem to get a break. While the French get 30 days of paid leave and most other Europeans receive at least 20, the country with the world's biggest economy does not guarantee workers a single day, researchers said on Wednesday. Most U.S. firms do in fact give employees vacations, but the lack of government guarantees means one in four private-sector workers do not get paid leave, said researchers for the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a Washington think tank. "The United States is the only advanced economy in the world that does not guarantee its workers paid vacation days and paid holidays," said economist John Schmitt. "Relying on businesses to voluntarily provide paid leave just hasn't worked," he added. "It's a national embarrassment that 28 million Americans don't get any paid vacation or paid holidays." Workers in Finland had one of the best annual leave packages among developed countries, a study by the center found. Finnish workers received 30 days of paid vacation plus another nine paid holidays. French workers were guaranteed 30 days of paid annual leave, but only one paid holiday. Most European workers were guaranteed at least 20 days of vacation, and some also received as many as 13 paid holidays. Canadian workers were guaranteed 10 days of vacation plus another eight paid holidays, while Japanese laborers only were guaranteed 10 days of annual leave, the study found. U.S. workers were guaranteed neither paid vacations nor paid holidays. Despite the lack of government guarantees, 90 percent of U.S. employers offered vacation, the study found. Workers received an average of nine days of paid vacation and six paid holidays, a total of 15 days off per year. "The sum of the average paid vacation and paid holidays provided to U.S. workers in the private sector -- 15 in total -- would not meet even the minimum required by law in 19 other rich countries," Schmitt said. The Link
Two anecdotes: 1. When I was about twelve I bought a dairy cow and entered the dairy business. I milked that cow twice a day, every day. I milked her when it was cold. I netted a little better than fifty cents a day. If I was sick or on rare occaisions my brother milked her but his rate was a dollar a day so I had a strong disincentive to use him. If that cow didn't get milked she was in pain, lowered her production rate till the mnext calf and could get "ruined". She also was more agitated. Compared to people who settled this country my commitments were nothing. Those folks could die if they didn't get the job done. I could bore you with details of other farming duties. The short version is that when it is time to get the hay in you do it, no matter how long or how inconvenient. The repercussions of doing otherwise are severe. 2. When I first came to work in London in the early 90s I had dinner with the managing partner of Goldman Sachs. He explained to me the difference between the New York deal cycle and the London one. In New York the principles negotiated from 8 to 5, the senior bankers and lawyers structured the deal from 5 to 10, the middle bankers and lawyers redrafted the documents from 10 to 1 and the typists typed till morning while the junior professionals proofed. At 8 they started a new round of negotiations with new deal documents to work from. In London the senior lawyer would say "I can't structure this evening. I have opera tickets." The documents were structured and redrafted on day two but couldn't be typed that evening. They were typed on day three but invariably the pace was slow and somebody had other commitments so they weren't ready till the morning of day five. Monday's negotiations were resumed Friday, not Tuesday. Clients liked the New York way better. The fees were tens of millions of dollars ... or they were zero. Do you want a good hay crop or a ruined one? Do you want to do takeover deals or run the cash register at Target?
Let's take a look at what we think would be a reasonable vacation policy for a business most of us know fairly well - the football program at UT. They recently hired a new employee - Will Muschamp. What should be Will's expectations for vacation, and I'll add hours worked per week? I have my ideas. It's ugly, like most jobs that are highly competitive and pay $400K. I figure if Will doesn't like it he should go be an assistant at Dime Box. I figure Will will take less vacation and work more hours than his boss' policy dictates. I figure Will plans on having an even better job in the near future.
Possibly. But could we possibly have our priorities wrong? Earning huge amounts of money does not necessarly equate to better quality of life. Of course it gives you the option to buy expensive items, live in a larger home, drive more expensive cars, but at what expense? For example, if he is earning $400k a year, but working all hours of the day and most of the night, many weekends, no real vacation, does he get to spend quality time with his wife and children? Still, maybe it is the right choice for him. I am not interested in becoming rich if it means having little life outside of work. I of course don't want to be poor, but just because I only want to work 46 of the 52 weeks of the year, should not mean my only choices are a temp job at Wal Mart. My company is profitable, we work hard while at work, but as I said, from the top down, people understand that your job is not the be all and end all of your life. Everyone is on board and I feel far less burnt out at the end of the year. You could call me lazy I guess, but it's not the work I am afraid of. It's the fact that I should not have to sell my soul to a company. I knew personally of someone that busted their arse working long long hours, and was earning a lot of money, took minimal vacation, and had all the luxurys most people could want. The plan was to retire at about 50 and take it easy. The guy retired at about 51, and 2 weeks later dropped down dead from a heart attack. Possibly the stress of his work life had taken it's toll. I don't know for sure of course. That does not appeal to me! Again, yes the US is probably the most productive due to hours worked, but....it's also the only place where there are no minimum vacation days offered and offers the least out of industralized countries. That can't be good for employees? One of my faviourite quotes is by Oscar Wilde. "No man is rich enough to buy back his past"
Two things: One -- compared to europe, HK, etc...how does our typical work day compare? I work a lot of extra hours but that's probably because I f**k around so much during the actual workday. Thank you Hornfans. I don't really have a problem with this because I don't get bored out of my mind, and it keeps me fresh. My job is just to think up stuff, so i can't really force it. BUT...I'm guessing I could cut my hours by a good 25% if I focused more during the day. Second -- Do the fewer hours translate to a significant reduction in standard of living? Do people in these other countries make less money..is the middle class worse/better off? Can they buy a car for their wives for christmas? Not that I can..just wondering. I did a project for some Belgians a while back..Duvel beer..good stuff. Anyway, during the research for that I read up on their work week and schedule. Pretty sick...maybe it's changed, but it was a 32-hr week...that's awesome. But honestly, during the offseason, what the hell would I do with all that extra time off?
London Ollie, I don't disagree with anything you said. But many situations don't lend themselves to a 46 week year. My example of Will Muschamp is one of thousands, or more. I also point out that many people, maybe even most, employed in this type of job are not motivated primarily by money. Many are motivated by winning and see money as "points" or necessary to manage a tough lifestyle. Let's look at Mr. Muschamp again. I suspect he likes coaching and wants to excel. He is driven to be a "winner" in his mind. I'm not going to debate whether his values are good or bad. But I do say again that competition creates winners and losers, and if you want to win you usually must hustle. The problem with the UT football coach, the banker chasing a deal with a ten million dollar fee or the surgeon who wants to invent a new medical device is with us forever. But what about engineers at Boeing? These guys probably don't want to work three thousand hour years. But if they are on the 787 project and it gets in a jam and their piece is on the critical path they need to do what it takes. If not they need to be a $60K a year guy doing the grunt stuff working for a $100K guy doing the good stuff who can be counted on to deliver in a pinch. The rewards to Boeing and its employees of beating Airbus are high as are the problems of losing. The employees who are ready to contribute to a winning effort are different from those who aren't. It's a reality of competing against Airbus for the prize. Most significant activities have a need to perform in the clutch. Even jobs like a priest are not thirty two hour a week jobs if you're serious about doing them well. I don't think most priests are in it for the money and I suspect many work fairly long hours. Somebody is in the hospital and ... I'll bet Mozart and Einstein worked more than thirty two hours a week. BTW, I'm 55 and work ZERO. I got fed up.
