The only developed nation that still considers paid vacations a perk.

[Caelifer_1991]

And also invade others to bring them their democratic ways.



None. I'm self-employed. I don't get those paid vacations. On the other hand, I work part time, so ...

PS. It's not "partly 2 weeks", it's nada. As much as your employer gives you and in that case, more than half (according to the article) don't get it afraid they'll lose their job/stay behind/lose to competition etc.

I indeed spend a lot of time talking about America because despite the awful work rights in there, a grand lot of my compatriots are eagerly living behind their country, homes etc not to go work in EU, but to go work in USA. If I had to leave for work, I would not want to go to USA because of said problems with worker rights (and other stuff). But yet you see people flocking to USA despite the absence of those rights.

If there are any immigrants to USA in this thread, I would like to ask their opinion on this matter. The article speaks of an American working in Australia and being amazed by the paid vacations. I would like to listen from a European that prefers to work in USA without paid vacations than Europe.

I still live in the UK but have considered, and still consider moving to the U.S. Primarily this is due to the expansive Aerospace industry over there and the quite substantial increase in wages for what is essentially exactly the same work. The disparity reduces over the course of a person's career, such as with Chartership and such, but the wages for new employees are in many cases 40% higher than in the U.K, for the sake of working an extra couple of weeks, and that reduction in disparity is rather slow, leading to a significantly different average over the course of a person's working life. What's more this doesn't even take account of taxes either (though to be fair it also doesn't account for private healthcare et al, as well). Its worth mentioning that even despite this, the U.S. is still not at the top of the list in terms of places to work in, but rather still comes in third behind Australia and Germany, as those countries also pay better and yet also have better rights for workers. In this case, its not so much that there's anything particularly good about the U.S. (although the wages in this sector do appear to be the best), but rather that the U.K. has a relative over-supply of qualified engineers (or rather, everyone has an under-supply, but everyone else has a far worse under-supply than the U.K.), leading to a suppression of wages for what is a very much highly skilled and professional occupation. I'll decide once I've finished my MSc, though what's more likely is that I take a graduate scheme in the U.K. for a year or two and then move off to Australia afterwards, though if a particularly tempting opportunity should present itself in the U.S., I'm not overly opposed to taking advantage of it.

[Phier]

As a side note I'm going on vacation on Saturday

But so are two of my staff

I am obviously not being a proper boss.

[Gaidin]

As a side note I'm going on vacation on Saturday

But so are two of my staff

I am obviously not being a proper boss.

You're pointless analogy means jack and as you're a business owner and not a worker. Get that through your head until you work for someone instead of have people working for you Mr. False Analogy.

[Admiral Piett]

That's quite retarded. Paid vacation became law in Sweden back in what? The 50's or 60's? ing slowpokes.

Anyone there hiring?

[Phier]

You're pointless analogy means jack and as you're a business owner and not a worker. Get that through your head until you work for someone instead of have people working for you Mr. False Analogy.

Personally I can't wait to hear more of how business should be run in America by Europeans and people barely out of (if even) school for the most part. Meanwhile I pay $25000 in payroll taxes alone every month while being told I don't give enough vacation time.

[Shambloc]

Personally I can't wait to hear more of how business should be run in America by Europeans and people barely out of (if even) school for the most part. Meanwhile I pay $25000 in payroll taxes alone every month while being told I don't give enough vacation time.

On the internet everyone can be a successful business owner paying whatever they want in payroll taxes.

By the way these must be ultra-liberal studies:

https://hbr.org/2012/09/more-vacation-is-the-secret-sa/ (Harvard Business Review must be a hippy blog)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tanyamoh...o-a-new-study/ (Forbes might as well be Worker's Daily)

[Phier]

On the internet everyone can be a successful business owner paying whatever they want in payroll taxes.

By the way these must be ultra-liberal studies:

https://hbr.org/2012/09/more-vacation-is-the-secret-sa/ (Harvard Business Review must be a hippy blog)
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tanyamoh...o-a-new-study/ (Forbes might as well be Worker's Daily)

My truth is listed in my sig.

Lets not confuse "vacation" with 21+ days paid vacation.

You are not even on the same point here really. The forbes says basically take your vacation days, the second is a opinion blog.

Thanks so MUCH!!!!!!one111 I now see the light. (And in a week I'll be seeing the Islands )

[Shambloc]

Yes Harvard Business Review is just an opinion blog, not a highly respected source of knowledge.

Providing paid vacation is key to ensuring productivity as shown by those studies. Without paid vacation, employee productivity is reduced, resulting in more loss of productivity than it would be if they would have gone on the paid vacation.

[DaVinci]

Anyone there hiring?

Why do you bother to make that question here?
It's easy to find out (if you actually don't know anything about european economies, or here Sweden), that Sweden has a (quite) well working society and economy.
But at last a hint, fyi: If companies wouldn't hire employees, there wouldn't be economy nor a working society.

[Phier]

Yes Harvard Business Review is just an opinion blog, not a highly respected source of knowledge.

Providing paid vacation is key to ensuring productivity as shown by those studies. Without paid vacation, employee productivity is reduced, resulting in more loss of productivity than it would be if they would have gone on the paid vacation.

You don't seem to get this, if you want to extrapolate this bit...

A 2006 Ernst & Young study found that for each additional ten hours of vacation employees took, their performance reviews were 8 percent higher the following year.

If you never work just think what your performance reviews should be! See we are arguing vacation vrs European levels of vacation.

BTW that guy, in HBW was selling his own book

http://www.amazon.com/Way-Were-Worki...reative=392969

[The spartan]

Again, had you bothered to read the studies or pay attention to what I've actually been saying for half a dozen posts or so, you wouldn't have bothered to waste a post on your condescending little tirade. Read the studies, come up with something coherent, and then maybe we'll talk. Regurgitating rhetoric out of a "Living Wage" pamphlet isn't what I'd call constructive.

Wut? I had read through the thread, which study are you referring to? I never saw anything on the productivity of labor vs the labor market...

[DaVinci]

As we discuss in principle quality of life issues, here some links of common acknowledged studies/statistics/indexes, which put out ranking-lists.

Social Progress Index, 2014.
New Zealand: Rank 1
Switzerland: Rank 2
Iceland: Rank 3
...
Sweden: Rank 6
...
Germany: Rank 12
UK: Rank 13
Japan: Rank 14
...
USA: Rank 16
...
France: Rank 20
Spain: Rank 21
Portugal: Rank 22
...
Italy: Rank 29
...
Greece: Rank 35
...
Israel: Rank 39
...
Russia: Rank 80
...
China: Rank 90
...
Chad: Rank 132 (last)

----------------------------

where-to-be-born index (previously called the quality-of-life index), 2014.
Switzerland: Rank 1
Australia: Rank 2
Norway: Rank 3
...
USA: Rank 16
...
Nigeria: Rank 80 (last)

----------------------------

World Happiness Report, 2013.
Denmark: Rank 1
Norway: Rank 2
Switzerland: Rank 3
...
USA: Rank 17
...
Portugal: Rank 85 (last)

----------------------------

Happy Planet Index, 2012.
Costa Rica: Rank 1
Vietnam: Rank 2
Colombia: Rank 3
...
USA: Rank 105
...
Denmark: Rank 111 (last)

----------------------------

Satisfaction with Life Index, 2006.
Denmark: Rank 1
Switzerland: Rank 2
Austria: Rank 3
...
USA: Rank 23
...
Burundi: Rank 178 (last)

----------------------------


All in all, the USA is not so bad (despite some odd facts), just doesn't rule the rankings though (as some die-hard US-patriots might wish).
Exception in all tendencies is the Happy Planet Index, but there, the ranking is pretty strange anyway, at least in particular, quite some countries with pretty high poverty rule there.

And to understand all these rankings, one have to check-out the different methodics, plus certainly weighting-in the year of the statistics/indexes.


---

And again to Legio Italica, as for his reply to me above: If you would read what i wrote above in my comments about economy/business-structures, then you would (perhaps) understand, that you simply have no clue about what you are talking about here in your posts (and hiding behind linked studies doesn't help you in any way to make there sense, whatsoever, with your examples and trials of summaries).

---

Plus, for all die-hard traditionalists, nationalists, far right wingers and fascists: One can easily find out, that the democracies rule in all those rankings (exception is, as said, the one called Happy Planet Index).

[Shambloc]

You don't seem to get this, if you want to extrapolate this bit...



If you never work just think what your performance reviews should be! See we are arguing vacation vrs European levels of vacation.

BTW that guy, in HBW was selling his own book

http://www.amazon.com/Way-Were-Worki...reative=392969

Yea, they would be non-existant.

Yes, the dude wrote a book. Experts tend to do that.

[Admiral Piett]

Why do you bother to make that question here?
It's easy to find out (if you actually don't know anything about european economies, or here Sweden), that Sweden has a (quite) well working society and economy.
But at last a hint, fyi: If companies wouldn't hire employees, there wouldn't be economy nor a working society.

Easy to find out? LOL, when's the last time you've tried to apply for a job 5,000 miles away? Things like that are not realistic for us without college degrees and thousands of dollars to spend on travel expenses.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Wut? I had read through the thread, which study are you referring to? I never saw anything on the productivity of labor vs the labor market...

Well, guaranteed paid holidays are a form of guaranteed wages; they are simply a mandatory cost to employers. So if you'll refer to the two linked studies, historical findings over the last 70 years or better in the US show that mandatory increases in labor costs have acted as a sort of price floor, incentivizing businesses to optimize and become more efficient in order to cut costs. This has, over time, produced a substitution effect where technology and more efficient labor structures have replaced lower skilled/very young workers, because it was/is increasingly unprofitable to hire them. Think of it as being an employee that produces $8/hr of value in a world where the minimum wage/benefits amount to $10/hr. It would be very difficult for such a person to find a job, and historically, that's exactly what we've seen; at least in the US.

That's not to say that minimum wages or minimum benefits like paid holidays are inherently "bad," they simply carry costs/benefits that should be taken into account when forming policy. Mandating paid holidays at X margin might work out nicely for a 30-year old white collar worker with a Bachelor's and 5+ years on the job, but for the unemployed seeking employment, for the new/young workers, and for the unskilled, it's more of a hurdle than a "perk." Businesses can adjust in a variety of ways to new regulations. Workers can either work more or less; ergo the latter are inherently more elastic (sensitive).

I haven't said anything about productivity in reference to this issue, neither have you provided any source or data on your comments about the issue, so there goes your blatant strawman. So for yet another round, let me point out that mandatory across-the-board base levels paid vacations function like increases in the minimum wage; workers are effectively paid more money for the same amount of hours - less hours if you deduct the vacation time but I digress. Historical data in the US has shown that increases in the minimum wage have had a reductive effect on job growth, especially among young and unskilled workers, a trend supported and amplified by 70 years of evidence in the other study on education effects.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w19262
http://www.nber.org/papers/w16355

Now, in the case of paid vacations, these negative externalities could be offset in terms of overall efficiency by, say, increases in productivity, but in any case any decent analysis of economy must take into account as many observable variables as reasonably possible. Now, should I keep repeating myself or do you want to continue to strawman?

And again to Legio Italica, as for his reply to me above: If you would read what i wrote above in my comments about economy/business-structures, then you would (perhaps) understand, that you simply have no clue about what you are talking about here in your posts (and hiding behind linked studies doesn't help you in any way to make there sense whatsoever).

So...confronted with evidence, you simply appeal to ridicule and claim I have no idea what I'm talking about because you're too smart for silly diversionary tactics like academic studies? Meanwhile you've posted nothing but anecdotes, unsourced claims and "happiness indexes." My good man, I bow to your vastly superior scholastic prowess Please, do forgive my ignorance and explain to a poor simple sod like me, what are you claiming, exactly? Or did you just come here to talk about "your experiences" at "the store by your house" whilst ridiculing the US and its "19th century business models?" You've shown an inability to detect sarcasm, but surely you can tell the difference between evidence and anecdotes? Or maybe I'm just unable to comprehend your "advanced" skills.

[Thorn777]

You know a population has really lost it when they view people granting them more vacation as another oppurtunity for a national dick-waving contest.

[tarvu]

I haven't said anything about productivity in reference to this issue, neither have you provided any source or data on your comments about the issue, so there goes your blatant strawman. So for yet another round, let me point out that mandatory across-the-board base levels paid vacations function like increases in the minimum wage; workers are effectively paid more money for the same amount of hours - less hours if you deduct the vacation time but I digress. Historical data in the US has shown that increases in the minimum wage have had a reductive effect on job growth, especially among young and unskilled workers, a trend supported and amplified by 70 years of evidence in the other study on education effects.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w19262
http://www.nber.org/papers/w16355

Now, in the case of paid vacations, these negative externalities could be offset in terms of overall efficiency by, say, increases in productivity, but in any case any decent analysis of economy must take into account as many observable variables as reasonably possible. Now, should I keep repeating myself or do you want to continue to strawman?

So...confronted with evidence, you simply appeal to ridicule and claim I have no idea what I'm talking about because you're too smart for silly diversionary tactics like academic studies? Meanwhile you've posted nothing but anecdotes, unsourced claims and "happiness indexes." My good man, I bow to your vastly superior scholastic prowess Please, do forgive my ignorance and explain to a poor simple sod like me, what are you claiming, exactly? Or did you just come here to talk about "your experiences" at "the store by your house" whilst ridiculing the US and its "19th century business models?" You've shown an inability to detect sarcasm, but surely you can tell the difference between evidence and anecdotes? Or maybe I'm just unable to comprehend your "advanced" skills.

So you cite articles on minimum wage in your argument against paid vacations, and supposedly all "across the board base levels" of employee incentives. Does that just include the things that Americans are currently deprived of when compared to labor standards elsewhere, or are we also suffering from own oppressive labor standards when compared to places like Cambodia, Qatar and Guatemala?

Clearly we could get to 0 employment and beyond if we tried!

I'm just going off on a tangent though, accusing you of yet another strawman. Back to the original topic of how 70 solid years of evidence, and probably every credible study on the topic has proven beyond a doubt that minimum wage and by extension all other standards in labor are harmful to economies and more importantly harm the poor workers being tricked by those "living wage pamphlets". Besides we make more money in America, and that of course translates across the board to better access to all of the things we both need and want to buy, and the freedom to enjoy those things because you know Economics!!!

I can't even see where to begin arguing with that, keep that European socialism out of my country! Vacations Shmocations.

[Lord Thesaurian]

So you cite articles on minimum wage in your argument against paid vacations, and supposedly all "across the board base levels" of employee incentives. Does that just include the things that Americans are currently deprived of when compared to labor standards elsewhere, or are we also suffering from own oppressive labor standards when compared to places like Cambodia, Qatar and Guatemala

I'm beginning to wonder if this entire thread isn't just one big troll fest. Point to where I said I'm "against paid vacations." Point to where I said I'm against "all employee incentives (whatever the hell being "against" that would even entail)." Quote me. This should be good. Or you could continue to strawman an troll your jolly way along. I'm entertained either way.

[DaVinci]

I haven't said anything about productivity in reference to this issue, neither have you provided any source or data on your comments about the issue, so there goes your blatant strawman. So for yet another round, let me point out that mandatory across-the-board base levels paid vacations function like increases in the minimum wage; workers are effectively paid more money for the same amount of hours - less hours if you deduct the vacation time but I digress. Historical data in the US has shown that increases in the minimum wage have had a reductive effect on job growth, especially among young and unskilled workers, a trend supported and amplified by 70 years of evidence in the other study on education effects.

http://www.nber.org/papers/w19262
http://www.nber.org/papers/w16355

Now, in the case of paid vacations, these negative externalities could be offset in terms of overall efficiency by, say, increases in productivity, but in any case any decent analysis of economy must take into account as many observable variables as reasonably possible. Now, should I keep repeating myself or do you want to continue to strawman?

So...confronted with evidence, you simply appeal to ridicule and claim I have no idea what I'm talking about because you're too smart for silly diversionary tactics like academic studies? Meanwhile you've posted nothing but anecdotes, unsourced claims and "happiness indexes." My good man, I bow to your vastly superior scholastic prowess Please, do forgive my ignorance and explain to a poor simple sod like me, what are you claiming, exactly? Or did you just come here to talk about "your experiences" at "the store by your house" whilst ridiculing the US and its "19th century business models?" You've shown an inability to detect sarcasm, but surely you can tell the difference between evidence and anecdotes? Or maybe I'm just unable to comprehend your "advanced" skills.

Lol. First of all, you are going here on minimum-wage, which is not the point from which the OP and following comments come overall. Minimum-wage is a special item. I recommend, make your separate thread about it, then i'll be happy to discuss the item there (edit: you can also do a search, as i remember, we have at least one thread about it in TWC; plus recommend to put it into PA not Mudpit, as i intend to keep myself merely out of Mudpit threads, this post could be my last post in the Mudpit).
Else to this as well, you now have put out two links to studies of the National Research Bureau, which is in reality a download-link site (with due payment to get the study), and above that a short summary on which you build-up your argumentation? Wow.

My point of "you have no clue about economy" stands, where i debunked your "suggestion" how to see counts of productivity/economical efficiency, because that was your initial post where you overall mentioned numbers to build your arguementation, period.
And fyi, besides that i'm owning a degree in economics/business/administration plus uni-degree as engineer plus diverse further expert-certificates, which allow me to apply a profession as consultant with huge investment projects, and running my own office, formerly worked in responsible position for close to 10 years, formerly worked in diverse branches for about 4 years, and i'm not your teenage-neighbor (i'm 48), so you might believe, that i know from what i speak when i tell something about how business functions in reality (you might say now, "hey, he mentions his diploma, clear sign for bad debate skills" (feel free, jingle it as you like), contrary to you, all what you bring up is two US minimum-wage studies to support your points with the short summaries there?
I even do not see any point from your side for the topic here, that makes sense, except where you say, that diverse impacts have to be considered when debating about ie. minimum-wage, while that is a statement tha tis valid for every kind of investigation/analysises etc., so also that senseful statement is of less to no value (because close to everybody knows that).

[trance]

Anyone there hiring?

Depends on the sector . It's hard to make a proper living here without a univ-level education unless you're into construction, electricity and the likes with required prior training. Our ing garbagemen make more than our teachers.

Anyway is it really this controversial in the U.S? Labour rights ain't really a socialist pitfall, even one as fairly to the right as I am can see that. Paid vacation and minimum wages doesn't equal doom and socialist gloom. We're talking about statutory vacation, this wouldn't affect higher end positions very much (wikipedia gives 14.6 day vacation as an average in the U.S) but would make a significant difference for those working in far less glamorous contexts.

Your efficiency wouldn't be compromised.