Mandatory paid time off

Originally posted by Darth Jello
instead of laying you off workers temporarily or permanently during tough economic times, you tell them not to come to work or to come to work at reduced hours and don't pay them. Instead, the government pays them two thirds of their previous wages so that they can keep living and consuming and once the economy picks up and business gets better (something that happens in a more quick and equitable way since instead of a direct bailout or subsidy, laid off consumers still participate in the market so market forces determine the fate of business), those same workers come back to their old jobs at their previous wages. If the business fails or more than 24 months pass, people move to the unemployment system, collect less money, and look for jobs. This is thought of as both a social safety net, a more fair and competitive socialism, and as an insurance policy against political extremism. Germany is the world's fourth largest economy and so the depression and the failure of AIG have set it's economy in free fall and in a position almost as bad as the last years of the Weimar Republic with the unemployment rate (which actually counts everybody who doesn't have work over there including kurzarbeiters) is at 8.5%. And yet the economy is starting to turn around faster than America's and there isn't the kind of depression and misery as there is in the United States where so many companies are just taking advantage of the situation and looting to the degree that in some polls, 35% of Americans are now identifying themselves as socialist or communist.

Good idea. Let's git rid of Social Security and Medicare and replace it with this. 😄

Uh...I don't see how federal legislation requiring more luxury for workers is necessary. If the regulation helped some essential human right I'd go for it, but otherwise.....why?

Originally posted by dadudemon
I already get 30+ days off a year...I just don't take the days off.

I cash out my PTO (Paid Time Off). I get 10 days a year, paid for, by my employer, outside of PTO. (Paid holidays.) I usually take of 3-5 days for vacation, a year. More days than that is just a tad excessive for me.

In other words, Nya Nya. 😛

This legistlation won't do anything for me.

I don't think this legislation should exist, though.

You don't like the vacation options you have? Work for someone else.

Can't get a job that has those vacation options? Tough shit. 😐

I just don't get attitudes like yours. Fukk the little guy. I am also on a PTO system, I currently get 24 days a year and I use all of it. I'd rather have the time off than sell it back to the company, like I said, there's more to life than work.

Thing is, if my company is bought out I could lose my PTO or have it reduced. Time off should not be viewed as a luxury..it should be a right.

< works for the school system; gets checks during summer months off. Woo-Hoo!

That said, Americans love their jobs, it's the core of their self-image. They just can't work enough...otherwise, how are you going to prove your better/richer/tougher/smarter than everyone else, and all while still in your 20s?

🥷

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud

The US needs mandatory paid time off...and not just 1 or 2 weeks.

I agree. Too many companies don't care about their employees and can't be trusted to regulate themselves, because they won't.

There's also a bill for paid sick days.
Seven days, I think it should be ten and increase until you have twenty or thirty.

Also, companies shouldn't be able to fire employees unless they have well thought out reason.

Originally posted by Quark_666
Uh...I don't see how federal legislation requiring more luxury for workers is necessary. If the regulation helped some essential human right I'd go for it, but otherwise.....why?

But people don't need paid time off.

Originally posted by Quark_666
Uh...I don't see how federal legislation requiring more luxury for workers is necessary. If the regulation helped some essential human right I'd go for it, but otherwise.....why?

because evidence in countries that do this proves that it results in less sick leave, greater longevity, and greater work productivity.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
But people don't need paid time off.

That's your opinion. People definitly need time away from work. Often their bills don't allow for them to do so unless it's paid. I really fail to understand many American attitudes towards issues like this. Many rank and file workers and lower level management support corporate policy no matter how unethical it may be despite the fact that most corporations see such personell as nothing more than expendable liabilities.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
That's your opinion. People definitly need time away from work. Often their bills don't allow for them to do so unless it's paid. I really fail to understand many American attitudes towards issues like this. Many rank and file workers and lower level management support corporate policy no matter how unethical it may be despite the fact that most corporations see such personell as nothing more than expendable liabilities.

In an event they certainly don't need paid time off. With all the benefits of time off, enough workers will eventually demand it that they'll be able to get it. Having the government require that companies literally pay people for doing nothing strikes me as insane.

Well luckily, with the current economy and economic system, if the US Government is convinced enough by corporate money, they can technically afford to give as much as 60% of the population unpaid permanent time off and still see stable economic growth and maintain power. It's done by using private security firms. See, you don't really need a social policy when you can strong arm subsidies from the government, fly to work in a helicopter, build really tall walls with gun towers around your house and market all your products overseas with a minimal domestic level of manufacturing and service.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
In an event they certainly don't need paid time off. With all the benefits of time off, enough workers will eventually demand it that they'll be able to get it. Having the government require that companies literally pay people for doing nothing strikes me as insane.

You're wrong here. Corporations are currently eliminting or at least reducing things such as health care benefits, company match 401K contributions, and yes, vacation/paid time off. This was the case before the economic downturn and it has massivley accerelated with the poor economy. Unless unions make a strong comeback (extremely unlikely) goverment mandates are the only thing which will prevent the eventual thirdworldization of the American labor market.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
I just don't get attitudes like yours. Fukk the little guy. I am also on a PTO system, I currently get 24 days a year and I use all of it. I'd rather have the time off than sell it back to the company, like I said, there's more to life than work.

Thing is, if my company is bought out I could lose my PTO or have it reduced. Time off should not be viewed as a luxury..it should be a right.

I'm more of a capitalist than a socialist.

Like I said, I'd trade out SS and Medicare for this program in a heartbeat. They are both failed systems. They need to be scrapped anyway. This vacation thing would make more people happy.

However, if I had my choice...we'd get rid of SS and Medicare...AND not have this idea, too.

Then use the money saved to help bring down some of the deficit.

I am a "f*** 'em" type of person. Can't get a job that you like? Your fault. Don't get enough pay? Your fault. F*** you, etc.

This is America. 🙂 It's the "f*** 'em" way. 😉

Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm more of a capitalist than a socialist.

Like I said, I'd trade out SS and Medicare for this program in a heartbeat. They are both failed systems. They need to be scrapped anyway. This vacation thing would make more people happy.

However, if I had my choice...we'd get rid of SS and Medicare...AND not have this idea, too.

Then use the money saved to help bring down some of the deficit.

I am a "f*** 'em" type of person. Can't get a job that you like? Your fault. Don't get enough pay? Your fault. F*** you, etc.

This is America. 🙂 It's the "f*** 'em" way. 😉

You're right, your way of thinking will win in the end. And that's precisly why America's days as a first world country are numbered.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
You're wrong here. Corporations are currently eliminting or at least reducing things such as health care benefits, company match 401K contributions, and yes, vacation/paid time off. This was the case before the economic downturn and it has massivley accerelated with the poor economy. Unless unions make a strong comeback (extremely unlikely) goverment mandates are the only thing which will prevent the eventual thirdworldization of the American labor market.

Yes, but how does the economy benefit from forcing companies to pay people when they aren't working? If anything that would damage the businesses, reducing jobs, reducing money for consumers, damaging economies. This sort of thing is best left up to business because it really isn't a neccessity for the workers. Good for morale? Sure. But not something workers need to have.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
You're right, your way of thinking will win in the end. And that's precisly why America's days as a first world country are numbered.

Oh, hell no, dude. I haven't met one person, outside the internet, that thinks that same way as I do. Not even close. It's all about "more government programs."

Originally posted by dadudemon
Oh, hell no, dude. I haven't met one person, outside the internet, that thinks that same way as I do. Not even close. It's all about "more government programs."

You're reading the wrong sites then. I'm not advocating more government programs. I just want to make labor laws more worker friendly.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes, but how does the economy benefit from forcing companies to pay people when they aren't working? If anything that would damage the businesses, reducing jobs, reducing money for consumers, damaging economies. This sort of thing is best left up to business because it really isn't a neccessity for the workers. Good for morale? Sure. But not something workers need to have.

The economy benifits by people spending money on leisure activities. Money flowes through the system. You are overstating job reduction and economic damage which would both be minimal (how does a nine figure bonus for a CEO benifit the economy), just as naysayers of minimum wage do. Business already has too much power in our society. I'm not advocating socialism, just balance. In the end, it's about doing what's best for the workforce.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
You're reading the wrong sites then.

That doesn't make sense. I just said that the only place I am meeting people similar to my line of thought (less government) is on the internet.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
I'm not advocating more government programs. I just want to make labor laws more worker friendly.

B-b-b.......

Okay.

But you are, indirectly. There would have the be an oversight group to enforce this new law. By programs I simply mean "money". There's probably a lot more involved and I just can't think of anything at the moment. Well, there is the employer side of things, as well.

Some girl came around my house wanting me to donate money and sign some sheet to help fund the Paid Days Off movement or something.

I asked her, "Why should people get paid for not working?" after a good 10 second awkward silence she decided to leave.