Kansas Crimson

My employer is transitioning to a "Flexible PTO" program this year where we longer accrue a specified amount of PTO and instead can pretty much take off whatever time we want, with common sense limitations of course.

I previously received 200 hours of PTO a year to use as I see fit. Sick, sick of working, vacation, whatever. And we had a "use it or lose it" in which we could only carry over 56 hours of PTO to the next year. Anything left on your balance on December 31st is lost (I think I managed to burn off enough time the last two weeks to only give up maybe 20 hours of PTO or so).

The one coworker that I have who I would see abusing this just left our employer last week. Everyone seems like they wont abuse this and be taking off 45 days a year or something insane. Anyone else work in a "flexible PTO" workplace? Just curious.

I don't have any stated PTO/vacation/what-have-you. The purpose of these "unlimited" or "flexible" plans is mostly to ensure employers don't have to pay out unused time on separation (particularly in California). That they sound employee-friendly is a bonus.

In my experience with clients who have these sorts of plans, "abuse" of the plans is exceedingly rare (and, in fact, what really happens is people start taking less time off).

I used to.

Most of us, myself included took very little time off, probably less than if we had a number floating around reminding us that we hadn't taken any time off.

And then there were a small number of people who abused it...and I mean, they abused the shit out of it. One in particular...I mean, she never worked. (It was also a job where you could work more or less anytime you wanted, and our boss didn't really give a shit, so those were factors that played in).

I think a lot of it is just a way that your employer can make sure you're always available. The ability to have employees always reachable is so much more important now than making sure everyone is at work for 8+ hours a day.

in my previous academic position, i pretty much had this in practice, but it wasn’t a formal policy

in my current position i’m afforded 2 “personal days”, 15 vacation days and 10 sick leave days (5 days can be rolled over annually)

what’s kinda fucked up is that prior to the first of the year, employees company wide that had to quarantine for covid got paid time off that didn’t count against their normal usage...not the case in 2021 for some reason

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:04 pm I don't have any stated PTO/vacation/what-have-you. The purpose of these "unlimited" or "flexible" plans is mostly to ensure employers don't have to pay out unused time on separation (particularly in California). That they sound employee-friendly is a bonus.

In my experience with clients who have these sorts of plans, "abuse" of the plans is exceedingly rare (and, in fact, what really happens is people start taking less time off).

My wife's administrative assistant retired recently, I think he official retirement was at the end of December, but her last day was sometime in early September because she had so much sick leave and vacation time built up.

None of these changes ACTUALLY ever benefit the employee no matter how they're sold.

What constitutes abuse? If someone is intentionally not using it all and losing bankable PTO, they’re an absolute sucker.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:08 pm What constitutes abuse? If someone is intentionally not using it all and losing bankable PTO, they’re an absolute sucker.

Do you use substantially all of your PTO (if you have a stated amount)?

I am fortunate to be on a locked salary, with no limit to my days off.
I take a 7-10 day vacation 3-4 times a year. As reliable as the sun otherwise.

I’ve only ever had “unlimited” time off. Which blows.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:08 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:04 pm I don't have any stated PTO/vacation/what-have-you. The purpose of these "unlimited" or "flexible" plans is mostly to ensure employers don't have to pay out unused time on separation (particularly in California). That they sound employee-friendly is a bonus.

In my experience with clients who have these sorts of plans, "abuse" of the plans is exceedingly rare (and, in fact, what really happens is people start taking less time off).

My wife's administrative assistant retired recently, I think he official retirement was at the end of December, but her last day was sometime in early September because she had so much sick leave and vacation time built up.

None of these changes ACTUALLY ever benefit the employee no matter how they're sold.

And administrative assistants (and similarly-situated people) are pretty reliable users of PTO.

We used to have vacation days we could pay out or save.
Now it's unlimited.
And to be honest, it saves the company money in both not having to pay out AND very likely, actual PTO hours -- i'm pretty sure most people take fewer days off in that scenario.

It sounds good.
It ends up not being so.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:15 pm I’ve only ever had “unlimited” time off. Which blows.

My offer letter for my first job out of law school offered three weeks or four weeks of PTO. I don't remember which; it might as well have said three months or four months, for as likely as I'd be to use it.

Some time between the issuance of that offer letter and my start date, the firm had adopted an unlimited plan.

Because the firm got tired of paying out PTO for, for example, a fifth year associate who'd taken maybe five weeks total.

I have a seperate vacation and sick pay pool. 5 days per year for sick. Accrual changes based off of title, tenure and work status.

Also have been in a flexible PTO program at a previous employer.

There's not a massive difference between the 2, IMO. Never been in a use it or lose it type of program in regards to vacation PTO, but it is that way with sick time.

Like CnB stated though, how can you abuse this really?

My next trip is to Arizona to look at properties the 1st week of May.
Staying a few days at my KU room mates' house in Tucson.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:18 pm

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:15 pm I’ve only ever had “unlimited” time off. Which blows.

My offer letter for my first job out of law school offered three weeks or four weeks of PTO. I don't remember which; it might as well have said three months or four months, for as likely as I'd be to use it.

Some time between the issuance of that offer letter and my start date, the firm had adopted an unlimited plan.

Because the firm got tired of paying out PTO for, for example, a fifth year associate who'd taken maybe five weeks total.

It just seems to be impossible to have any kind of employee friendly plan in the billable hour world. Only real way to do it is to just drop the billable requirement by 5% or whatever. Of course, they’d adjust the salaries accordingly.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:24 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:18 pm

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:15 pm I’ve only ever had “unlimited” time off. Which blows.

My offer letter for my first job out of law school offered three weeks or four weeks of PTO. I don't remember which; it might as well have said three months or four months, for as likely as I'd be to use it.

Some time between the issuance of that offer letter and my start date, the firm had adopted an unlimited plan.

Because the firm got tired of paying out PTO for, for example, a fifth year associate who'd taken maybe five weeks total.

It just seems to be impossible to have any kind of employee friendly plan in the billable hour world. Only real way to do it is to just drop the billable requirement by 5% or whatever. Of course, they’d adjust the salaries accordingly.

It's the deal you make. I will say - I hear all the time from people who leave firms to work in-house that adjusting to a more traditional corporate world (tracking PTO and so on) is insanely frustrating and constraining.

I've worked one job in my life that offered me paid vacation. I've owned my own business for the last 30 years and have done well enough that over the course of the last three or four years I've been able to take off anytime I want for any length of time I want. I was fortunate enough last year to spend about 3 months out in Japhy's Empire. That said, I'm about 8 months from retirement and I'll have all the time in the world!

First job I had after college had vacation days and sick days, I think you get 4 hours of each every two weeks.

I knew I was only going to work there for 2 years, so after I found out you got paid your accrued PTO when you quit, I tried to let it pile up.

What I didn't know, was that you only got paid out your vacation time and not your sick leave. I wish someone had told me that, because I'd have claimed sick leave for every time off I took. (I know I was on vacation but I got a stomach bug).

I think when I quit I had like 65 hours of vacation time and nearly 200 hours of sick leave. I was so pissed when I found out I just lost the sick leave time.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:27 pm

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:24 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:18 pm

My offer letter for my first job out of law school offered three weeks or four weeks of PTO. I don't remember which; it might as well have said three months or four months, for as likely as I'd be to use it.

Some time between the issuance of that offer letter and my start date, the firm had adopted an unlimited plan.

Because the firm got tired of paying out PTO for, for example, a fifth year associate who'd taken maybe five weeks total.

It just seems to be impossible to have any kind of employee friendly plan in the billable hour world. Only real way to do it is to just drop the billable requirement by 5% or whatever. Of course, they’d adjust the salaries accordingly.

It's the deal you make. I will say - I hear all the time from people who leave firms to work in-house that adjusting to a more traditional corporate world (tracking PTO and so on) is insanely frustrating and constraining.

There are certainly perks of the unlimited plan.

Of course, nothing is as cushy as the plaintiffs’ side.

My previous company (based in California) switched to FTO from PTO in 2018. During the following 2.5 years I worked with them “abuse” was limited to a few individuals and certain departments. I took less than my PTO allowance in 18, but more in 19. So it’s a wash. Overall the impression is that people took less time off.

I found myself marking odd days as FTO but doing some work from home than the opposite where I’d mark days as WFH but take the time off to do something. I’m sure most people did that.

While some of the motivation is not having to payout the accrued time there is actually another California law which is the primary motivation. Employers are required to set aside the funds corresponding to the accrued PTO in a separate account and then take it back when employees actually take the time off. For companies with large numbers of people especially those who have been there for a while that fund’s size can be quite large. The reason I know that is because a large Pharma employer I worked for forced everyone to take the Friday before Memorial Day and Labor Day as PTO (apparently they are allowed to do that) as that fund was getting quite untenable.

So, yes, the policy is really to benefit the employer.