awesome in theory. There are plenty of companies with this policy and people end up taking way less time. A big reason for companies to do this is that accrued vacation time on the books counts against the books of a company as an outstanding expense.
post by And? at Sep 24,2014 5:05pm
Your point?
post by You didn't notice at Sep 24,2014 9:14pm
This stopped being a music site a long time ago. It's for the reverend to repost shit he saw on Facebook and what movie he's currently watching.
It's a decent idea but I think this could be harmful to employees in certain scenarios. There should still be an accrual on the books for a cash payout when an employee leaves in my opinion.
And yes, I thought about that angle when terminated. but then figured they would just have a better severance. My company doesn't allow you to carry over any time from one year to the next. So if you get fired on the first day of Q1, you get nothing. Oddly, I just found out Q1 starts april 1st.
post by Nuclear Human Resourcse at Sep 25,2014 9:02am
I would prefer to be cashed out each year. On the other hand, we have a guy that owes us so much sick/vacation time that he has to pay us back while employed at new job hahahahahahaha.
post by DYA is IN MORKNING at Sep 25,2014 10:21am
The only question I have is "can I vacation in LEO."
My company has busted a bunch and during some of the downslide from 8K to 500 employees, the severance packages were awesome at the beginning. One guy was laid off with 2 months severance and all his vacation. Then was hired back as a contract worker after a month (probably making more money too) and worked on contract for just under 11 months before being hired back with full seniority. A month or 2 later was laid off again for 1-2 months with another 2 months severance (spent that time hiking all around asia) and then was promptly hired back. I tell him all the time that he is my hero.
