here, that's seltzer or club soda...weird, i know

yes, its an incredibley stupid system...they act as if one can choose how many days they are sick per year...at my current job, i get a pathetic 5 sick days per year...5!!!!!!!!!

I get 5 sick days too - i guess I better not get sick.

OTOH, when I lived in the UK, I used to get so pissed off the number of times a certain individual would get signed off 2 weeks for "stress" only to be found drinking merrily away in the local pub

Now that I've been at my job for a full year, I get 80 hours "paid time off" per year. That's to be used for vacation time as well as sick time and personal time, and doctor appointments and and and...Hopefully I won't get sick, but I've already had to use up 2.25 hours for a doctor appointment, which is likely where half my PTO will go to

oh my god that is terrible...at least if i take a half day or need to take a couple of hours for a doctor's appt, my job doesnt deduct that from anything...total i get 10 vacation, 5 sick, and 2 personal days, in addtion to what i just described (which i tend to try and milk as much as possible )

thats still clearly not enough

10 holiday days??? per year??? ugghhh that's good????

maybe i'll stay in england

lol welcome in north america (canada is the same when u start a job u get 2 weeks vacations a year)

wow, teaching is looking more attractive than it has in years...

hence one of the many reasons i am going back to school to be a professor

that's typical. My first job in the US I had 15 days and we all thought that was amazing.

It is the one single thing that has made settling back into life in the USA the hardest! I had 27 days in the UK, now reduced to 10.

Yeah, but at least in Canada that 2 weeks vacation is federally mandated, plus you usually also get sick days, plus statutory holidays pretty much one per month. (and I read in the last year or so they're considering adding one week to the mandatory vacation allowance) Here in the US, vacation time is NOT federally mandated, (the only western country that does not) employers DO NOT HAVE to give employees vacation time or sick time. Nor do they have to pay you for or even give you the day off for "holidays". As a fer instance, the company I currently work for does not allow for a day off on Memorial Day. Another company I used to work for here doesn't even allow for a day off on Independence Day! Its just another day of the week.

yeah, you guys are stand-outs on a number of things

especially, I am proud to say, signing the Kyoto Protocol, which Australia FINALLY signed after a leadership change, leaving the US on its lonesome

even though it's largely symbolic now, with how much the whole environmental issue has moved on and complexified (made up word alert ), I feel SO much better about being Australian

go Kevin

i wanted to add that my fiance thinks american breakfast is absolutely ridiculous...i kind of agree with him

in italy and albania (the two places where he has lived), people generally have a coffee and little pastry or croissant for breakfast...not the case here in the good ol' usa!!

lol i LOVE typical american breakfast foods, but could definitely not handle eating them everyday...i mean fried eggs with potatoes, sausage/bacon and toast...or pancakes....or french toast....mmmm delish, but oh so fatty!! lol where is the obese smiley when you need it?!

Wel, I just "celebrated" my tenth year with the bank I work for. I have 25 vacation days, 1 floating holiday, 8 sick days and all the national holidays off. Not a bad gig if you can handle the boringness of the job!

I was reading an article the other day that was talking about the Full English... saying that these breakfasts became the norm when people worked so hard that they burned off the 3000 calories from the breakfast by lunch time, but now we're still eating them and our lifestyles are *ahem* somewhat different... the author of the article persuaded a truck-driver to swap his daily fry-up for porridge and the guy lost a stone and a half in a fortnight

I'm guessing similar things could be said of the origins of the hearty American breakfast...

good times, what the heck is a floating holiday???

i had to look up what a stone is but good god!! he must have been quite the husky fellow!!

A floating holiday is granted when a bank holiday falls on a Saturday, so you get to make up for missing that holiday by taking another day off when it suits you!

that is simply awesome

I know! Its stuff like that that keeps me working for this bank!

yeah that does happen... my sweet who is working at the same private company for 11 yrs have 8 weeks vacations a year if i remember well....

oh yea, adriano also gets freaked out everytime we go somewhere and have to go through metal detectors and get searched...the airport is one thing, but when we went to get his ssn we got searched and also when we went to six flags

land of the free

You shouldn't go to Colombia then.

Diana

so wait, if the holiday falls on a weekend, for instance 4th July, most people DON'T get the Monday off?

oh dear, I think I need to lay down.

I work freelance now, so I don't really get to take any of my holiday time, but when I finish my contract I get paid for any holiday time I have built up. I get the statutory minimum amount of holiday pay, but that's still the equivilent of 24 paid days off a year.


I am happy to say that I have only ever seen schools with metal detectors on American TV, but I bet they've got plenty in L.A.

I'm really not looking forward to only getting 6-8 weeks off when I have a baby as opposed to 1 full year in Canada!!!

Some U.S. employers have great vacation time. My SO gets like 4 weeks or something like and he's only been there 3 years. He also gets extra personal time and sick time.

I'm not living in the US yet, but I've noticed that in Canada its really popular to use "green" (Cloth ones) grocery bags now and re-use and most grocery stores and even retail stores now carry them, but not so much in the US.

Hmm...

If a holiday lands on a weekend, nobody gets off, period. Not even government employees, who'll try and take off to avoid work anytime they can. When I first heard from my wife that if a holiday comes around on a weekend in Canada, you get off for it on either the Friday before or the Monday after I was literally stunned. That seems so inefficient. Nobody is entitled to a day off, especially a holiday. If it happens, great; if it doesn't, too bad.

Reba pretty much covered why vacation and sick days are in such short supply here in the U.S., but she didn't explain the part that separates the U.S. from some other countries -- such as her home in Canada. Many other nations, including Canada, have governments that are much more "intrusive" into everyday business and this includes supporting some areas monetarily. This generally allows companies to give employees more time off (or in some cases, they don't have any choice, since it'll be mandated) for vacation days, sick days and maternity leave without losing too much money.

In the U.S., most companies receive little-to-no help whatsoever, so it's up to that business to support itself. If American companies were to try and copy what's done in other countries, most would be forced to either shut down or fire tons off the payroll. Neither scenario is a pretty picture, since in both, lots of people would be without work and while that might grant you more "free time" you certainly wouldn't enjoy it since you'd lack an income.

So if a business allowed a lot of vacation and sick days to each employee, those days would no doubt get used and the company as a whole would be less effective and efficient. This would mean less money brought in. People also tend to call in sick when they're feeling fine, so even if they (and when) they managed to use up their vacation time, it's a sure bet that there would be numerous individuals who would use their sick days as impromptu vacation time.

As far as maternity leave is concerned (I know this is a real sore point with mothers or mothers-to-be coming from foreign nations to the U.S.), we generally don't offer a whole lot of time off. To be honest, you'll be lucky if you can find work that'll allow you anywhere from six to eight weeks off; if you can manage to find a job that lets you take 12 weeks, keep it, since those are exceedingly rare (although they do exist).

Once again, it's all a money issue, since pregnant women are considered an unnecessary expense in both time and money. Maybe that's not the nicest way of looking at the "miracle of childbirth" but do try and see it from a company's perspective. They've hired you to do a potentially important job. You'll be out however long and in that amount of time, they'll have to hire someone else on a temporary basis who doesn't know a whole lot about the business office, the people there or anything else and be forced to train them. In addition, they'll be paying them while they're paying you (who isn't there, simply because you and your husband/boyfriend decided that you two absolutely needed a child). They're not allowed to fire you too, so they're forced to keep you there as well.

All of the above explains why there are such strict artificial limits on maternity leave. It has much less to do with company's being "mean" than it does with "staying alive." Since they only see they money they bring in themselves, if they offered the generous packages other countries (like Canada), I don't doubt there would be many women who would get pregnant for the sole purpose of reaping those benefits; as it is, my wife has known women to do this in Canada.

Recently a lot of stores started offering their own canvas or cotton bags for sale. I dunno about in other towns, but hardly anyone here uses re-usable bags except me. I've been using the same canvas bags for probably 10 years or more (obviously since before I moved down here) and baggers have been known to run screaming when they see me because they "don't know how to pack them"

yeah.. maternity leave is sooo unecessary....
you know thoses little guyz will help pay for the retirement and debt of the country i believe isn't it ?
Damn... that sounded bad PoolX

Somebody posted above that if the holiday falls on the weekend that nobody gets the day off. Period. Well, that is not exactly true.

Where I work, if the hol falls on a Saturday we are compensated with a "floating holiday", which I described above. However, if the hol falls on a Sunday, we do get the Monday off.

So, as you can see, I am, in fact, compensated for the weekend holiday either way. It really varies by employer, though.

Whoa. I think you may be dealing with some past-life issues.

In Canada, the holidays are federally-mandated, so the citizens are entitled. The only time you don't get a day off if it falls on a weekend is if it's Canada Day. The day it falls on is the day it's celebrated.


Weak argument here, DP. Most companies receive little-to-no help in Canada either.


Yeah, sorry. Another no-go. What you are saying here is that everyone who receives vacation and sick days is a scammer and will abuse the system. As a long term salaried administrator in my former position I received 7 weeks paid vacation and 130 sick days annually. I, along with my fellow administrators, usually lost a lot of our vacation days because we were so heavily burdened with work that we couldn't get away. In addition to that, I can tell you that very rarely did we use any of our sick leave. And even when we did, we worked from home. Ditto with the unionized employees. Nope. A definite no-go, DP.




Yeah. Because who wouldn't want an entire lifetime of payback for a year "off" with a screaming, crying, demanding baby? That's just too silly for words.

yea, but the tide is turning as far as the bag situation goes...it is going to be a gradual change, but at least here in new york i see A LOT of people with the reusable, canvas shopping bags...in fact, in the area where i live, its kind of odd to see someone with regular plastic bags...as with most things though, we are just ahead of the curve, i guess

They just got them in the local grocery stores here in Florida! Like... within the last two weeks.

i just graduated from fsu a year ago, and i never once saw one of those bags until i came home to ny...i cant even imagine most people down there using them, so im not surprised

That's so true. The good news is that those people will soon be dying off and there'll be younger, more environmentally-conscious old people moving down here.

Past life issues? I'm not sure I "get" that one. It doesn't matter, so don't bother. The point I was attempting to explain (and apparently wasted my time on) is that no one is entitled to something simply because they think they should have it. It's this "me, me, me" self-entitlement mindset that's eroding the United States and Western Civilization in general.

Now then... as for "holidays," those aren't necessary. They are essentially privileges and by no means an entitlement. If you're able to celebrate it and get time off work, that's wonderful. If you can't, that's tough luck. The world won't stop for each and every individual. The sooner people realize that, the better off we'll be.

And honestly, I don't care what they do in Canada as far as holidays are concerned. I'm talking about the U.S. here. If Canada wants to give off every third Tuesday of the month, fine. I'm happy for you. But that'll have absolutely no influence on what the U.S. decides to do.


That's news to me. From what I've read (and heard), most companies in Canada receive government subsidizing. That can go a long way. Maybe where you worked they didn't, but "most" doesn't mean "all" either.


So you didn't take advantage. That's great! I applaud you. No, really I do. But for every one person like you, who takes their job seriously and won't attempt to screw their supervisors over, there are at least two-to-three more who will. Why? Because they can. By our very nature, people will take advantage when and where they can. Not everyone, of course, but far too many. It's because of these people that companies need to enforce the policies I spoke of before.

Is that fair? Probably not. But then again, your problem shouldn't be with the businesses, but with the jerk employees who make such practices necessary. Get rid of them and perhaps those rules can go away.


I agree, it's not the most logical thing to do and it certainly wouldn't be my choice. However, it does happen. My wife has told me about enough female coworkers who've pulled this stunt at different workplaces. So I'm not pulling this idea out of rear-end.


First of all... I never said "maternity leave is unnecessary." I was merely describing how most businesses feel about maternity leave. If you thought it "sounded bad" then direct your displeasure towards any number of companies; not me.

Click to view attachment

I must say I think the whole holiday thing sucks although Jeremy gets 5 weeks paid leave so that is pretty good... god knows what I will end up with

No, Canadian companies do NOT receive any sort of government subsidies or regular benefits or hand outs or cash advantages or anything like that from the government - another urban myth fostered by Americans who don't want to make any sort of concession to looking after their employees and cry 'foul' when told other countries can do so without biting into their profit base. There have been cases of major industrial corporations working out favourable loan terms with the federal or provincial governments to assist them over difficult times in the market (the auto industry is one that comes immediately to mind), but those are loans, not grants - and the parent companies of many of those corporations are American. The exception would be specific circumstances such as maternity leave which is supported by premiums paid by both the employer and the employee to the Employment Insurance program managed by the Federal Government. The employer doesn't pay the salary of the person on Maternity leave so they can afford to hire a temporary replacement.

If you want to talk about out and out 'hand outs' in fact, take a look at how the US governments subsidize agriculture in this country - substantially - so as to corner the market and prevent a fair market environment in which other countries could compete fairly with the US, then claim foul when other countries offer incentives to their own producers.

Thanks Kathryn. I really couldn't be bothered to respond because it was obvious there were huge misconceptions in all areas.

BTW, DP, the "past-life issues" was in reference to the antiquated thinking. Thoughts of forced labour and 19th century coal mine workers sprang immediately to mind.

I've heard all the arguments before that PoolX put forward. I don't think they add up frankly. The truth is that if some kind of regulation was enforced companies would simply learn to make it work or go under. Same way they do if the competition do something better or cheaper.

I really think that some Americans are brainwashed against a society that attempts to ensure that their citizens have a basic standard of living. In most countries 'liberal' is not an insult.

i agree with you and also think that giving employees more time off would improve morale and actually allow for greater productivity...this is because employees wouldnt be coming in sick and/or fatigued...i also think that a shorter work day (say 9-4 instead of 9-5) would produce a similar effect

At the minute i work 8.30 to at least 7, so even 9 to 5 would be amazing

thats horrendous

Same here...we get a floating holiday to use any time we like during that year when a holiday falls on a weekend. I think you'd have to do a real big widely based study of businesses across america to get a real feel for what's out there. Some people work in an area or city that does things a certain way and they assume it's that way across the country. Remember each state also has it's own government and "culture" if you will, so you're going to find many variances.



Ugh, I'm so bad at using quotes! I just wanted to state that I agree with everyone here. I agree with PoolX that many people DO take advantage of sick time and maternity leave. There are also people (disgusting people) who take advantage of fostering children just to have them do their housework and collect the $$ for themselves giving the child the bare minimum. There were many women in WI having babies just to collect on welfare (when we had it). I agree with Krikit too that it's a ridiculous thought. But that's because we are responsible mature adults who know right from wrong. The women doing this are undereducated, come from very poor families, many times are on drugs or alcoholics etc...they don't know any better and see it as a quick solution to get some extra $$ and not have to work. They aren't thinking about the demanding toddler, smartmouthed adolescent & expensive teen they will have in the future. And they probably won't care because they aren't good, caring parents either. It's a viscious cycle.
I think the things DeadPoolX has said are ugly truths, some things were a little too generalized and not true across the board, but the point was made. I really would like to learn more about how other countries function before I form my own opinion on these matters. What you all say about Canada does sound good, but the money has to come from somewhere. How do the companies stay afloat if they're giving all that paid maternity leave (up to a year!! i was shocked!! and very jealous ), all that paid sick time is unreal (who would need that??). Are prices for everything higher then? Do the business owners just run the business for the good of others and not make much profit? I realize the big corporations here are producing some ridiculously rich top dogs who need to be brought back down to earth! Nobody on earth is worth the money some of these ceo's make...nobody. I'm not trying to make any jabs here, just trying to understand it. How does it add up?

I've highlighted the pertinent area in Kathryn's post, below. The companies aren't paying the entire maternity leave. They pay 25% and the remainder is topped off by the Federal Government, up to 75% of the employee's salary. However, this does not mean that an employee on maternity or paternity leave will receive 100% of their salary. There is a cap on the amount the government will pay out. I believe it is around $400/week. Many people cannot afford to take a year from work because they need the entire salary to sustain themselves and their family, so they will take a reduced leave or share the leave with the lower wage earner of the family if the female is the major breadwinner. You also need to have been employed full-time for the 52 weeks preceding the claim. Otherwise you are not eligible. Employers pay unemployment insurance premiums to the government, which are deducted from the employee's paycheque (which covers all forms of unemployment... not just maternity leave). It is pro-rated to the income and there is a maximum amount payable per year. The salary savings from the worker's leave of absence will (usually) offset the cost of a replacement because there is a timelag between the leaving of the staff and the hiring of the interim employee. As well, some employers choose not to replace the employee at all, which will also offset their costs.

so when you say 'reduced leave', do you mean that they would work part time??

even we had something like that here, it is still MUCH better than having to work full time, especially when you have a new child

Sorry. By "reduced leave" I mean the mother might take, say, 3 months maternity leave and the father would take the remaining 9 months. Or, if there is no traditional family unit, the mother would take what she requires/can afford and then return to work.

thanks for the explanation

in the states i have never heard any mention of the father taking leave for a new baby...funny how we consider ourselves to be so up on equal rights for men and women, yet ive never even heard this issue raised

But it's hardly "forced labor," Krikit. Nobody is making anyone else work for any company in particular. You are free to choose who you wish to work for, provided you have the qualifications, of course. If IBM is being a "slave driver" then why not go work for Hewlett-Packard instead? If someone is too worried about "rocking the boat" then that's not a company issue, it's a personal one.


Three things:
1. These aren't MY arguments. These are the reasons stated over and over and over again by businesses and economic statisticians on Wall Street. If you disagree with them, that's fine. Take it up with them, but don't blame me.

2. You're right. If some sort of regulation was enforced, many companies would learn how to make it work or go under. How would they do that? They'd fire as many "unnecessary" workers as possible so they keep their business running and earn a profit. That's how it works. Unless you want the government to enact a law stating that companies can't even lay off their own employees. If that occurred, then we'd be nothing be a nation of freelancers. No one would want to own and run a business. Why hire someone when you'd have virtually no ability to fire them as well?

3. You'll have to remember that "liberal" in the U.S. tends to mean something different than in most of the world. The classic definition of "liberal" actually has far more in common with being "progressive" than it does with American Liberalism. In Classical Liberalism, someone who was a liberal wanted to gain better conditions in society and government for their country.

In contrast, American Liberalism essentially means Socialism. So when an American says "liberal" as an insult, he or she is using the American version of the term to mean "Socialist." The reason this doesn't sit well with many in the U.S. is because Socialism and Capitalism can rarely, if ever, coincide and Americans are raised to believe strongly in a heavily capitalistic society.


1. CBR, thanks for be able to look at what I said without going haywire. I realize my words weren't the nicest and probably pretty unpopular overall, but that doesn't make them any less true (at least in some cases).

2. You're right, CBR -- the money does have to come from somewhere and that's the Canadian tax payer. Taxes in Canada are quite high or at least, much higher than those levied in the United States. Canadians are probably used to them. In a nutshell, Joe and Jane Canuck are paying for their neighbors to stay at home on maternity leave for up to a year (at a reduced salary) after popping out as many kids as they feel like having.

Honestly, I wouldn't be too thrilled about that. Why should I have to pay for someone I don't know (or at least, know well) simply because they decided they wanted a kid or two or three and so on? It's their child(ren)! Let them pay! I'll pay for mine; they can pay for theirs! That seems fair to me. If they can't afford kids, then you know what they should do? Not have any at that time. That's the smart and simple solution. It's better for everyone all around.

As for sick days, I agree with you -- if someone is taking a ton of sick days off, they're either faking it or far too ill to be of any use to the company. In either event, they're costing the business money and not getting their work done. That's probably one of the best reasons right there for a limited number of sick days.

Prices are higher in Canada, despite the fact the U.S. and Canadian dollar can be equal in value or one worth slightly more than other on any given day of the week. My wife regularly complains about this, since given the exchange rate, prices shouldn't be so different, but they are still. I just bought a brand new hardcover book. It was $26 USD and $35 CAD. I just checked XE.com and the exchange rate between the U.S. and Canadian dollar, as of April 24, 2008 is $26.00 USD equals $26.38 CAD. As you can see, the difference is so minimal, it's barely worth considering; however, publishers are somehow getting away with charging an extra NINE DOLLARS for the same book. That's before any extra taxes are added on too.