I can take vacation, but only when my work is done

iStockphoto

(MoneyWatch) Dear Evil HR Lady,

I am a salaried employee that works in monthly cycles. I have a set amount of work that must get done in 1 month time frames. My company is telling our department that in order to take time off, we need to get the work done on our own time. I am a healthcare professional so getting the work done in half the time is not a safe option for patients. If I take 1 week off, I have to squeeze those days into my weekends and evenings.

How can they claim to be giving me paid time off when I must work weekends/evenings to get the work done? I still put in the same amount of time just on different days. Obviously this is unsafe for our patients, but do we have any legal standing to ask for coverage?

• Bosses, let your employees take vacation
• I'm exempt. Can my employer deduct PTO for doctor's appointments?
• How to fight a bad vacation policy

The first question is, are you salaried exempt, or simply salaried? The former means you are not eligible for overtime, no matter how many hours you work. The second means that if you work 40 hours or less you get the same paycheck, but if you work more you are owed overtime pay. You may be classified incorrectly. But, let's assume that you are legally exempt from overtime pay.

First of all, there is no federal law requiring vacation. Employers can set whatever restrictions they want around vacation pay--how much to grant, who gets priority, how many days you can take off together, what time of the year you can take it, etc. All of these things are entirely up to the employer. (FDIC insured institutions may be an exception, as the FDIC recommends consecutive days off, but that doesn't apply to you.)

So, saying, "You can only take a day off if you've done all your work," is perfectly legal. Because as an exempt employee you are not paid by the hour and companies can restrict vacation. (What they cannot do is go against their own employee handbooks. They can, however, change their employee handbooks, but not retroactively.)

But is this a good idea? Of course not. When we accept jobs, vacation is included right next to the salary in the offer letter. They do this because companies know that people value vacation. Companies want the best people to work for them, and therefore they have to be competitive on both salary and benefits. Additionally, people who get some time off perform better. Downtime is actually good for people. Brains need a bit of a break from time to time.

What can you do about it? Well, first of all, I would find out if the people who made the policy have any clue what you actually do and how it affects patient care. You would think this would be the case, but often times policies are made by people who don't have a clue about the amount of work it takes to get things done. They are simply looking at the bottom line and saying, "Why are we hiring temps/paying overtime/having decreased productivity when people are on vacation? This is too expensive! Stop it!"

Second, since money is doing the talking here (they certainly didn't make the policy in interest of boosting employee morale or increasing patient safety) you can approach this from a financial standpoint. How much money do they stand to lose if patient care is compromised? How about the potential of a malpractice lawsuit?

Third, you need to talk about employee morale. They probably think it's not an issue because the economy is bad and it's not easy to find another job. Except that a bad economy doesn't mean that people don't get sick, so this means that if you leave they will just have to replace you. Recruiting costs are actually pretty high. Additionally, happy workers are better workers. 

The person who needs to be your advocate is your direct boss. She needs to be the one making the case to her boss as to why this is a ridiculous rule. But, in order to get her to agree to do this, you may have to be the one who comes up with a workable solution. Because, after all, if you're not doing the work, who is? Presumably, it has to get done.

If your leaders continues to enforce this rule, then you'll have to ask yourself if this a deal breaker for you. If it's not, then you just have to find a way to handle it. If it is, then start looking for a new job. Unfortunately, sometimes that is the only way to get senior management to listen.

Have a workplace dilemma? Send your question to [e-mail].

[smartistartist]

That's so funny... I had the EXACT same conversation with an old Manager of mine. When she came in as Manager, I went from a regular 40/hr week (getting paid hourly) job to working 96+ hours/week working evenings and weekends... and STILL only getting paid for the 40 (so when I quit, I got a nice hefty cheque for all of that unpaid OT b/c I was non-exempt and kept very good record and proof of my hours - which she tried saying were 'volunteer'! She lost!). Anyways, during the 'sleep' conversation she was also debating that my children would still be my children even if my family were to split over my long hours. And babysitters... well, they really don't mean anything by giving operating hours! If they SAY they finish at 6pm and you don't show up until 8pm to pick up your kid... what are they going to do? Throw them out on the street? No, they'll keep them until you get there! Yes, maybe true, but how am I going to work tomorrow if my sitter gives me my kid 2 hours later than planned and refuses to babysit for me again! I left and found a different job where I (and mylife and health) were respected! It's sad that she lost many of her solid employees by running them into the ground (within just a 4 month period), and is STILL running her current staff into the ground! Treating people with consideration and respect, giving them time off, giving them an extra 1/2 hour for lunch every now & then when they've earned it, or whatever the perks may be, will only make them put more into their job! It's really a proven fact! That said - it is not unreasonable for a boss to ask you to finish your tasks before taking your time off, even if there is someone there to fill in for you when you're gone. What would not be fair, or reasonable, is if they give you more and more so it is never-ending, and impossible to 'finish' before your time off. I don't know how your company works, but where I am, you must turn in your request for time off (when it's 1 week or more) at least 1 month in advance. And the earlier the better. It must be approved, and there are typically conditions attached... "Yes, you can take the 3rd week in April off, however, we'll need you to have x, y & z finished before hand, and you'll have to make sure that Jane is up to date on a & b at least a week before you go so tht she can answer any questions that may come up for it. It's all in writing, and once it is approved, if the employee does what is required of him/her then the time off carries on as planned. If the employee fails to do what needs to be done then they are aware they are putting their time off in jeapardy.

[Random12345789]

Well it's official. Companies have finally figured out all the ways to creatively circumvent every law, wording and mathematical compution of hours. Could it really be that top management is so moronic that they don't realize any of the downsides of this? Or do they just not care? Or better yet is it a creatively crafted plan to cull the herd and force employees to quit? I ask this because I worked for a company that had me working 100 hours a week for many months (they fired staff and had me working two full time and one part time job). I finally sat down and explained I wasn't left with enough time sleep and got into this inane conversation about how many hours does a human really need to sleep each evening. Long story short, they really just wanted to get as many people to quit as possible because once they learned one person could do 2.5 jobs they got greedy at the thought of saving even more money and geting them to do 3.5 or 4 or 5. I don't attest to be "better" than anyone because of my education, however, I will say this. After spending many years and tens of thousands of dollars on educating myself, I am sickened at the thought that I have wound up in corporate America, where I have spent an incredible amount of my time trying to rationalize with the upper management individuals who seem to have the lowest intellect of the human species. As here we are left having to explain to them why if I work extra hours during the week that I am taking vacation it defeats the purpose of the vacation...which companies don't give employees out of "kindness" but because it makes them more productive...but then again I guess that brings me back to the analysis of does a human really require sleep every night.