1551
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

In many parts of Europe, it’s common for workers to take off weeks at a time, especially during the summer. Envious Americans say it’s time for the U.S. to follow suit.

Some 66% of U.S. workers say companies should adopt extended vacation policies, like a month off in August, in their workplaces, according to a Morning Consult survey of 1,047 U.S. adults.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Which gets into an entirely separate (though related) issue, where workers with children get benefits and accommodations that childless workers don't.

Sometimes it's overt and blatant like in your case, others, it's more limited to interactions and relationships.

A few jobs ago, I worked in a small office where the owner was good about approving PTO, but didn't want more than one person in any given dept out at the same time (ridiculous, but that's how he was).

I planned a vacation of a long weekend one summer and got my PTO approved in like February for this long weekend in June.

Literally 3 weeks before, this lady I worked with tells me that I "need to reschedule my PTO".

After looking into it, I learn that what's really going on is that she wanted to take a week long vacation with her kids since they'd be off for the summer, and one of my days overlapped with the week she wanted to take.

I refused, saying that my friends and I had already made arrangements.

And then she blew it up, in the office in front of everyone, and told me how I was being so rude and mean and inconsiderate, that I could go and do things whenever I liked because I didn't have kids...and that I "just didn't get it" and could never possibly understand how hard her life was because I didn't have kids.

I assumed that my boss and other coworkers would see how ridiculous she was, but while they mostly kept quiet, the ones who did speak up actually did think I was being unreasonable for not canceling my vacation to trade with her, seeing my plans as less than hers, just because she had kids.

I learned to get comfortable with coworkers thinking I was an asshole, though, and enjoyed every moment of that getaway.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Workers with children should get benefits childless workers don't. They need them.

Rescheduling of PTO shouldn't happen tho. That was on your boss to catch and mitigate.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

The ideal baseline of all workers should be plenty adequate for everyone, regardless of marital status.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

And yet workers with children need, at minimum, things like FMLA

I do not agree that everyone's baseline is or should be the same.

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Why should only workers with children get FMLA? Why can't someone caring for their parents get the same?

That's what GP meant.

[-] Gargantuanthud@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 year ago

I don't know about giving extra benefits to workers with children. Certainly, workers with children should be given what they need to have a healthy work/life/family balance but I don't think workers without kids should be denied those same opportunities just because they chose to live their personal life differently. I think workers in the same role should be equally compensated with all of the same benefits and opportunities which then can be utilized as best suits their personal situation.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

I don't see how a worker without kids is harmed here. This seems like a "I dont feel like we should kick puppies" argument - no one is insisting we kick these metaphorical puppies

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They should all get the same amount of benefits, though possibly differing in kind.

Having children nowadays is a choice, not something beyond people's control (like a disability), and people shouldn't be getting extra rewards from work for making choices which have nothing to do with work.

It would be massivelly unfair to those who made a personal choice not to have kids to be de facto discriminated against because of that.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It's not unfair. Your benefits include bing significantly wealthier and having more free time. Flexible time off for children isn't some unreasonable ask.

[-] IamtheMorgz@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

While I agree that flexible time off for children isn't a big ask, it's disingenuous to say that childreee people are somehow not deserving of those same accommodations because they have more money and free time. First off, you don't know someone's personal or financial situation. They could be helping to support their aging parents or something. And second, it's a choice to be a parent or not. If I go out and buy a Bugatti I don't therefore deserve to have some special treatment from my job. And while kids are obviously more important to accommodate than a lot of other things (like cars, lol) they don't somehow make the parents extra super special because they have a FaMiLy. Everyone has a family!

Reality is everyone needs those kinds of accommodations sometimes and employers should realize that employees are human with lives outside work.

this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
1551 points (98.1% liked)

News

23649 readers
2374 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS