Vacations are great, but never cut it fully. Importantly, unlimited pto never works in the workers favor for some reason.
One of the ideas I’ve been mulling is mandating a vacation and a long one at that. I’ve heard many industries already take a fairly long summer break in EU, so I suppose this is similar.
One worry I’ve heard is our work will be delayed due to this break but maybe it won’t? I feel rejuvenated good engineers would be more productive in 10 months than worn down ones in 12.
There’s also the practical logistics of running an always on service, but I feel like for most tech companies this should be doable with a skeleton support staff (even if that) especially if we freeze the code weeks before we leave work.
Would love anyones thoughts on how this might work and what the pitfalls would be (and also to ask if this would entice the best engineers as much as I believe).
The original meaning of sabbatical was for labourers to take one whole year off after working for seven straight years.
Maybe you should offer something closer to that definition?
Of course, after a year off, it might be hard for the employee to mentally go back and do the same thing for another seven years, but don't forget, as a company you've done without them for 12 months, so it may not be too big a deal if they do decide to leave.
Essentially, you'd be ensuring that MOST of your employees will stay with you for a seven year tenure, which is much higher than most companies would average for their employees.
I'm not good at public maths but I think you'll be paying employees 14% higher than the market rate based on the 1 year paid sabbatical at the end — but don't forget, if the employee leaves after 3 or 4 years, you don't have to pay that 14%.
EDIT: If I were doing this I would probably pay the extra 14% to a trust account each month, which would then be paid out as a salary during the 12 month sabbatical (so their actual salary may be slightly lower than their final year's salary, as they'll have probably received raises during their seven years of employment). The advantage to the employee of doing it his way, is they'll rest assured their salary received during their sabbatical is guaranteed, even if the company gets shut down.
My experience has been that the more we get the more we want. So after a while we stop appreciating what we have and expect more. I bet, after a bit, long sabbaticals are bound to be unappreciated. The last place I worked at had amazing benefits and lots of time off. Yet people would bitch about it not being enough. So I would make long sabbaticals a reward for the individuals rather than an expected benefit for it to continue its intended impact.
A. Capital - Investors will be highly skeptical of this approach. Is there a CEO they can invest who does not give people 2 months off? If so, they’ll probably send their money that way.
B. Competition - Your competitors will be delighted to learn that your workforce is 10-15% less active than they are.
C. Recruiting - yes, many will be excited about the prospect of so much time off. But experienced employees will be skeptical of this approach and may see it as a risk. There are also people who gasp do not want to take 2 months off and enjoy working throughout the year.
Again, as leader you are free to do what you want but for every major decision you can ask yourself a simple question - does this help accelerate or slow our revenue?
As someone's employer, you shouldn't presume to know what vacation schedule is best for their mental health or productivity. Some people may be happier if they can take shorter breaks more often. If you want to give your employees two months of vacation time, that's fine, but let them decide how and when to make use of those days rather than imposing your own preferences on them.