Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do it because we actually want people to use it rather than get a check. L

The way some companies are implementing the cap is you don't get a check. When you hit the cap, even if it is in March, you stop accruing leave. They aren't "taking" anything from you, but you work without earning any leave or getting a check for not taking leave. It's a total win for the company.

What stops you from taking any other Friday off for example? It could be a win for you too

Lots of times you have to get vacation time approved. Many managers won't approve this bc the office needs coverage on Fridays. It is different if you take two weeks off vs 10 Fridays.

I said for example.
If you hit the ceiling by March and not accumulating anything else - take a day off every other week rather than loose the benefit company provided.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do it because we actually want people to use it rather than get a check. L

The way some companies are implementing the cap is you don't get a check. When you hit the cap, even if it is in March, you stop accruing leave. They aren't "taking" anything from you, but you work without earning any leave or getting a check for not taking leave. It's a total win for the company.

What stopes you from taking any other Friday off for example? It could be a win for you too

Lots of times you have to get vacation time approved. Many managers won't approve this bc the office needs coverage on Fridays. It is different if you take two weeks off vs 10 Fridays.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do it because we actually want people to use it rather than get a check. L

The way some companies are implementing the cap is you don't get a check. When you hit the cap, even if it is in March, you stop accruing leave. They aren't "taking" anything from you, but you work without earning any leave or getting a check for not taking leave. It's a total win for the company.

What stopes you from taking any other Friday off for example? It could be a win for you too

Anonymous wrote:We do it because we actually want people to use it rather than get a check. L

The way some companies are implementing the cap is you don't get a check. When you hit the cap, even if it is in March, you stop accruing leave. They aren't "taking" anything from you, but you work without earning any leave or getting a check for not taking leave. It's a total win for the company.

We do it because we actually want people to use it rather than get a check. L

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't most companies cap leave? It's so they aren't hit with a huge financial burden if someone leaves/retires with 1000+ hours they have to pay out.

I work for the fed government. If you get over 240 (or maybe it's 250?) you can't accrue more annual leave. They won't pay it out. Dh (fed too) loses leave every year because of this. I wish they would pay us out. Mainly because if you're hitting use or lose annual leave it's because your job isn't allowing you to take many vacations due to the difficulty.

You can accrue more than 240, you just can't carry it over from one year to the next. You only lose it in December. If you hit 240 hours in March, you'll keep accruing hours until December.

Exactly. I'm in use or lose status from the first pay period every year. Now as a manager, I'm supposed to keep track of employees status and encourage them to take leave so they won't lose it at the end of the year. I'm also,supposed to have very pressing reasons why I'd deny leave to someone in use or lose that would force them to lose it. I'm at three hundred something right now. I save it so I can take the whole Christmas break plus time around Thanksgiving.

My company capped leave accrual at 160 hours and you can only carry over 88 hours at the end of the year. Really sucks if you're trying to save up leave for maternity leave at the beginning of the year.

Anonymous wrote:SRA International did this a year or so ago. They also lowered the accrual cap for some employees, which really stunk.

Too bad!

Where folks get grumbly is a situation like SRA where they change the policy.
It used to be that you could rollover up to a certain amount of leave at the end of the year. (use or lose)

They changed it in two ways. First, the cap is in effect for each pay period, which means every pay cycle is use it or lose it. (at least you don't have to take all of December off anymore)
Second, a lot of people had their cap lowered. When the changes went into effect (without much notice), a lot of folks who had been following the rules suddenly stopped accruing leave. Some of those losers were people who were following the previous policy and simply had a lot of leave or were folks who planning to use it later in the year.

It's not the worst policy in the world but people get annoyed when you change the rules in the middle of the game and when they feel like you are taking things away from them.

Anonymous wrote:Don't most companies cap leave? It's so they aren't hit with a huge financial burden if someone leaves/retires with 1000+ hours they have to pay out.

I work for the fed government. If you get over 240 (or maybe it's 250?) you can't accrue more annual leave. They won't pay it out. Dh (fed too) loses leave every year because of this. I wish they would pay us out. Mainly because if you're hitting use or lose annual leave it's because your job isn't allowing you to take many vacations due to the difficulty.

You can accrue more than 240, you just can't carry it over from one year to the next. You only lose it in December. If you hit 240 hours in March, you'll keep accruing hours until December.

One of the aspects of the problem is I, as an employee am expected to have nearly 100% time sold. If there is a gap in coverage, then I can be laid off, leave without pay, or use leave. Only works if I have the leave.

Anonymous wrote:Very sad. So stealing money is bad, but stealing time - perhaps the most precious gift of all - is OK?

Where do you see stealing? Are you not allowed to take time off? Does management force you to work without vacation?
I don't get it - I always have problem with not too much time off, never worried about loosing leave time.

Anonymous wrote:Very sad. So stealing money is bad, but stealing time - perhaps the most precious gift of all - is OK?

I see your point. But it's a huge liability for companies to carry large PTO burdens.

I know we're all busy, feeling guilty about taking time off, whatever, but everyone should try hard to never leave PTO on the table. This is why I try to use as much leave as I can throughout the year. I don't want to get to Nov. or Dec. and realize I have crapload of hours to use or lose before the end of the year.

Very sad. So stealing money is bad, but stealing time - perhaps the most precious gift of all - is OK?

Anonymous wrote:It's been "'use it or lose it" everywhere I've worked.

Yes

Of course it's legal.