Coyote Blog

Can you imagine how that kills projects? You need this by when? Oh, wait I'll be gone for the entire project.

@a_random_guy

You aren't getting it. The judge ruled that if an employee gets sick during his planned 6 week vacation, he can take another paid vacation later in the year to make up for the sick days. I predict that the reported prevalence of traveler's diarrhea will skyrocket among Europeans on vacation. (I wonder if seasickness will count towards sick days.)

Perfect example of liberal, socialist "entitlement" mentality. No one should be "entitled" to any vacation days or sick days (by order of a government or court). It should be dictated by the free markets and your negotiations with your employer. In the case of this court ruling, they are not referring to being able to switch your vacation to sick days. It's that you are entitled to REPLACE, one for one, all the days you were sick with an equal number of vacation days, irrespective of sick days you may or may not have saved up. Its no wonder the US is so much more productive and entreprenurial. European way of doing business encourages laziness and a "what's in it for me" mentality. Just hideous.

My experience is slightly differently: you arrive at work at 9, work super-focused (no lunches, idle chit-chat, online shopping, browsing) and at 4pm that's it. 1pm on Fridays.
The economy in question is the workhorse of Europe and insanely efficient at everything it undertakes.

The problems in Europe are mostly not caused by too much of a slacker attitude or overbearing entitlements (there are many problems with the latter, but they will manifest severely for the first time in a few years). They have much more to do with the consequences of a liquidity bubble overinflating specific sectors of the economy and the tensions between the approaches to managing debt in different cultures of the EU.

“The purpose of entitlement to paid annual leave is to enable the worker to rest and enjoy a period of relaxation and leisure,” the Court of Justice of the European Union, based in Luxembourg, ruled in a case involving department store workers in Spain. “The purpose of entitlement to sick leave is different, since it enables a worker to recover from an illness that has caused him to be unfit for work."

Seems like the same argument could be used when one is sick on the weekend. Do workers get extra weekdays off for that?

Clearly, the EU needs to rule this entitlement in arrears, for at least the past century (industrial revolution, etc.), so that descendants of those entitled to previous vacations, and forced to labor under later-determined intolerable conditions, may collect on this.

Spain, specifically, will benefit due to their 3000% unemployment rate, which can now be shifted to ex post "vacation."

“The purpose of entitlement to sick leave is different, since it enables a worker to recover from an illness that has caused him to be unfit for work.”

Are employers allowed, in any way, to recover from an employee who is found to be unfit for work?

Didn't think so.

>>> If the employee becomes unfit for work in the long-term, they will be fired.

This is Europe we're talking about dude. Are you sure of that? There are lots of union situations here in AMERICA where that's almost impossible.

Ex. Teachers have to pretty much be found with the small, underwearless child on their naked LAP to get outright fired, instead of moved to a closet somewhere doing paperwork and continuing to get paid.

>>> Makes sense to me. Sure, you ought to enjoy your job, but there are more important things out there. Work should not be your life.

This attitude is fine. The notion that your employer owes you the life you want that you attach to it is rather bogus. Why should S/HE be your slave?

Hmm?

By what right do you demand that your employer give you things you haven't earned?

In reality, there is a concept for this -- "paid leave" -- which means do what you want with it -- call in sick, go off on a holiday, whatever. You get 'x' number of days per year, and that's it. What you do with them is your own choice.

I do, however, have news for you -- the people who make six figures? They tend to work far more than 40-50 hours per week, and take vacations -- if they do at all -- on spurts that align with time between projects -- they schedule their vacations so as to not interfere with the work.

So don't be expecting a six-figure job, and don't be whining about someone ELSE getting six figures for busting their ass. They worked for it, you didn't. And that's fine. It's this "I want what he's getting AND I want the lifestyle **I** want" crap that's massively bogus.

a random guy-

spoken like a career employee. try actually starting and running a business sometime. you may wind up with a real shock.

as i got bupkis pointed out, that's a disturbingly entitled attitude.

why should your employer be legally forced to give you what you do not earn? and how could it possibly not affect the rest of your pay? can you really think that employers will pay as much for 46 weeks of work as they do for 50?

@morganovich: I did run my own business for several years; decided I disliked doing nothing but marketing, management and customer relations all day. So I sold the business and went back to being an employee. Been there, done that, it's not for everyone.

I never said anything about paying 50 weeks of salary for 46 weeks of work. You made that up. However, if an employee wants 6 weeks of vacation, and the employer is willing, why not have a contract for 46 weeks of salary distributed over 12 months? Or at least agreeing that the employee will occasionally be allowed to take unpaid leave? That is what I wrote above.

There is nothing magical about the 2 weeks most (US) employees have. In fact, as I said above, I consider 2 weeks to be stupid - it is simply too little. Work should not be your life - if that is an "entitled" attitude, so be it. I intend to know what my kids look like.

I have worked for some companies that have comp time - they give you 2 - 3 weeks vacation and an additional 6 - 7 days to cover things like illness, and alternate holidays. I liked the system. Never had to feel guilty about taking a day off from work (when I get sick, I always dread calling in - do I sound sick enough?)

a random guy-

you seem to be missing the thrust of the issue here. let's try again.

the entitled part of your attitude is not wanting 6 weeks of vacation. you are free to ask for and want whatever you want. maybe you can get it, maybe you cannot, but so long as it is the result of a mutually agreed contract between two willing parties, hey, it's all good.

where it slides into entitlement is when the government uses coercion to force your employer to give it to you. in your first comment you describe that employers "ought" to do. they ought to do what they think is important. you may have a view and so may they. but using the heavy hand of government regulation to make sure they have to see it your way is where the trouble starts. this means an employer may no longer express his preferences and that someone else who would be willing to do the job with fewer vacation days cannot compete with you for it on that basis.

if taking away the rights of a would be employer and a would be competitor for a position is not entitled, then i don't know what is.

and a contract for 46 weeks of salary is NOT desirable in many cases. i would not hire anyone on that basis. we need too much continuity and you still have to pay benefits. you wind up with 10% more employees that way.

mutual agreement is fine. you ought to be free to ask for money or vacation or a corner office or whatever matters to you. however, someone else must be free to ask for less and employers must be free to offer less as well, else you are wielding coercive force in an entitled and predatory manner.

that's the issue with the european system you seem to champion.

you make like it, but others have preferences too.

also: from your description it sounds like i was correct in describing you as a true employee. you gravitated back to where you belong. but just like i said above, it's not for everyone. people who DO chose to behave otherwise must be free to do so, not forced by law to accept your preferences. that is not a free society.

What got me was not the dozens of holidays or even the 4-6week of vacations...

It was "bridge days".

If a holiday ever occurred on a Tuesday or Thursday everyone took the Monday or Friday as a "bridge day".

Whats a "bridge day" you ask? Its a normal workday only no one shows up for work. They don't take vacation, they just don't show up.

I spent two such days wondering around a mostly empty factory. When I planned my visit I did ask if anyone was on vacation. Nope. We are all working. Except they are not there.

Grumble....

>>> Orders aren’t placed and deliveries aren’t made because your customers aren’t buying and your vendors aren’t selling, projects are scheduled as if August doesn’t exist.

And the problem here, of course, is that August DOES exist. Resources are consumed, wear and tear on assets still accumulates, and all the while, nothing is being produced to counter that.

Equally critically, there are always things in demand. Suppose you're on vacation and need your car fixed, but all the mechanics -- are they off on leave, too? "I'm using public transport!!"... Well, buses, trains break down as well. What then, grasshoppa?

Life goes on, 60/24/365.25...

And this is why US productivity remains far greater than Europe's.

I would say that the European system isn't an awful approach to a bad idea, but I would argue that at the least, a rotating system of anticipated leave would soften that problem -- if, say, one third of the employees took leave in March, one third in August, and one third in December, that would probable be more sensible. Take your leave during the time of year you'd like, as much as possible. Find some method for resolving conflicts (worst case scenario it's no worse than it was before, where you took your time off whether it was convenient or appropriate to your own life's goals... Me, I love snow skiing. WtF good is a forced vacation in August going to do me?)

Not because of the people being more competent as a whole, but because of the difference in work ethic.

America has this kind of unique quality as a people. Excluding two groups -- both of whom I'll point out don't really have a history of doing all that well in America -- ALL Americans are descended from "go-getters" -- hard workers and risk-takers -- aggressive personalities all.

All of our (yes, I'm American) ancestors are here because they looked around them and saw The Way Things Were. They said "This sucks. I'm going somewhere else to see if it can be better." -- and they didn't just talk about doing it, they did it... and they also had the smarts and, yes, the luck, to choose America rather than, say, Poland (not to suggest any issues with Poles, mind you). They risked it all and left everyone and everything they knew behind so as to have a chance to Get Ahead and to provide more for themselves and their progeny.

Now note the two groups that don't function all that well in the system -- Native Amerinds, who were already here, and the descendants of African Slaves (yes, blacks), whose ancestors didn't choose to come here but got shanghaied. Neither one was selected for aggressive, risk-taking behavior and making smart choices to succeed. I'd argue that one consider this when one looks at the difference between most Asians, who were discriminated almost as much as blacks (segregation from whites was common, and certainly any Asian who attempted to associate sexually with any middle-upper-class white woman was taking a big risk)

=============

Mark2 -- yeah, comp time seems like a good idea as opposed to "specialized" time.