As noted upthread, it would be a smart and perfectly legitimate move on your part to schedule as many foreseeably upcoming medical appointments (e.g. annual physical exam, dental work) before the changeover.
But when it comes to calling in sick, it’s a gray line between “a bit under the weather” and “too sick to go to work.” A colleague once told me that you don’t have to be dead to call in sick, but taking it to an extreme - for example, taking an entire day of sick leave because you had a single 1-hour doctor’s appointment - is clearly abuse.
As a federal employee, I accrue about 104 hours of sick leave per year, and it rolls over year after year. Personal vacation time is accrued separately, at a rate that varies depending on your seniority. One incentive against abuse of sick leave is that when you retire from federal service, any sick leave remaining in your account is added to the length of your service for the purpose of calculating retirement benefits.
Another incentive against abuse of sick leave is that the older you get, the more likely you are to encounter a need for an extended absence from work to deal with a major illness or surgery. If your sick-leave account is low because you used to call in sick whenever you had a hangnail, then you may have trouble in your 40s or 50s when you need a few weeks/months off to deal with chemo or bypass surgery.
Verify that you will lose your sick days January first. If so, take one or two because you are sick of the idea of losing your sick time. And take them soon. It’s worth pointing out to them that their policy is likely to cause a lot of December sick days.
Every place I’ve worked has had a policy of no set sick leave limit, but up after three days you needed a doctor’s note (theoretically) and after some time you went on disability. Practically speaking no one ever kept track, and no one I know of abused it. If lots of people work late every day, no one but an idiot would object to taking an hour for the doctor. I’ve worked for idiots, but none that stupid.
Mostly people feeling sick work from home at least some of the time.
Official vacation days are an obligation to you, and you get paid for them if you leave. At AT&T we had personal days in addition to vacation which were not an obligation, so I used them before I left. I wonder if sick leave folded into PTO then becomes more vacation? Unused vacation is a liability, so this is not a good thing for a company’s bottom line.
Mine does - maybe you’ve heard of it: the U.S. Government?
In fact, as far as I know, there is no cap as to how much sick leave I can save up; I already have over a year saved (at a rate of about 13 days per year). One reason that there was no limit is, up until recently, when you left your job, unused sick leave disappeared; however, apparently so many people near retirement were using up as much sick leave as they could that the policy has changed, and if you retire, sick leave now counts as days worked for pension calculation (one year = 1% of your salary). I don’t know how long this is going to last, as I have a feeling there will be a number of complaints that this discriminates against women because it turns into a “reward for not getting pregnant.”
On the other hand, only 30 days of vacation time carries over from one year to the next, and considering that I earn 26 days a year, I tend to have a lot of four-day weekends and rather long Christmas breaks.
We have a couple of different categories of PTO. [ul]
[li]We have vacation that accrues every pay period. We can carry one week over to the next year[/li][li]We have sick/personal time that is granted all on Jan 1. You can use it for whatever you want, but if you run out of sick time you need to eat into vacation[/li][li]We have extra Holiday days, 3 per year, which act just like personal days[/li][li]We also get 3 days for volunteering for a worthy cause[/li][/ul]
That’s my current job, obviously it’s been different at previous jobs. But I’ve never been able to carry over sick time. I’ve always carried short term disability insurance to take care of extended illness but that may not be offered in all fields. In practice, no boss has ever cared if I take sick leave, so I rarely track it or put in for the time; I just take the day off and try to read mail when I can.
I’m thinking mostly in CA government employees whose unused sick days contributes to their overall pension calculation. There is an incentive to not use sick days.
The reason for banks of various days is mostly financial.
In most states vacation days are considered earned and must be paid out on separation.
Holiday and sick days are “conditional benefits” and do not need to be paid out upon separation. Thus they are not earned.
If something is owed you, like vacation days, it shows up on the books as a liability. Companies don’t want this.
Note: Some states don’t require you to pay out vacation days on separation and some states do require you to pay out sick days, see your local state DOL.
Companies are free to limit the amount of sick, vacation, holidays they offer as long as they do not discriminate on basis of a protected class. Employers are also free to tell you when you can take your vacation, so you could wind up in a position with owed vacation days, your employer not allowing you to take it and you lose them.
As for me, I do not get any sick time. I am salary and they say I can take off whenever I like if I am sick. The punched employees get five sick days a year, (they lose them if not taken) so I try to take the same number.
We have 10 vacation days (with 5 additional days earned every 5 years) and 10 personal days. The personal days can be used for sick time, but they can also be used just like vacation with planned time off using personal instead of vacation. It seems to work without having to change over to a PTO system.
How many of those are people with kids who made the economic decision that the other spouse or a paid caregiver would be better than staying home when the kids are sick?
Well, it would be nice if the feds offered some kind of maternity leave, rather than nothing flat. The six weeks that it takes to just medically recover takes a while to accumlate, and it’s not a fun calculation to weigh that against your declining fertility and raised risk of birth defects.
When I retired last year I had over 6 months of sick time accumulated (after 34+ years of working there*). Needless to say, it all went bye-bye when I left**. I suppose if we had had PTO instead I would have used those days for vacation along the way, because they certainly weren’t going to let me accumulate 6 months of vacation time. Our vacation accumulation was limited to 35 work days, after which you stopped accumulating.
The only scenario where this would have worked against me is if I had had some catastrophic injury or illness that kept me in the hospital for a few months. As it was my sick time would have covered the gap from disability insurance coverage for over a year; with limited PTO accumulation, not so much.
I never worked under PTO so I don’t know if it had any other unfortunate side effects for employees. I understand why it is better for employers, but that isn’t necessarily the same thing.
*for the first 22 years or so I worked there we got 10 paid sick days per year, and that’s when I did most of the accumulating. When times got tough after 2002 they cut that in half, and I only accumulated maybe 1 or 2 days a year after that.
**One of the biggest reasons they were not too sad to see me go - that huge liability vanished off the books without a trace as soon as I was out the door. None of the sad faces when I left were on upper management.
Yes, I would. Until this year, I had had precisely two days off (following a minor car accident) in eight years. I had to have surgery in April (six weeks off in total) and I would’ve been mightily pissed off that, having used almost no sick leave up until that point, I would be expected to take four of those six weeks as unpaid leave.
I deliberately do not take a sick day if I have a hangnail, unlike some of my colleagues, for the very reason that I might need more leave down the track for surgery or if I break a bone or something similar.
All my jobs have had sick time and vacation time separate.
The cap on vacation time on the books has always been 2 years worth of vacation. If you are getting 2 weeks cap at 4 weeks, if you are getting 3 weeks cap at 6 weeks.
Sick time was normally 10/12 of a day each month worked. Or 10 days a year. Cap set at 40 to 50 days. In January any time over the cap was paid out at 30 minutes pay for each hour over.
The great thing about the cap was with a major medical issue you could take time off with out a loss of pay. 4 years ago I had a total knee replacement. I was off work 60 days and had 30 days of sick time on the books. Because I could coordinate sick time with disability I was off work and was paid in full. Well maybe a little extra. My employer gave me 50% of my wage and the insurance gave me 55% of my wage, so I got 105%. Plus the insurance part was not taxed at all as income.
Over the years I had several employers and each time I left a company I was paid out for all vacation time on the books, but the sick time was lost.
As for the OP. If you are planning any medical or dental procedures I would have them done before the new program takes effect
Another thought I have never understood people who use up their sick time as they earn it. Twice in my life I was off work for an extended time and had sick time to cover it. My wife also had knee surgery and the sick time on the books.
Now if you have a large rainy day saving account so loosing a months pay would not hurt then I could understand not having any on the books. But I would not have liked to have to move money around to replace my or my wife’s wages for two months.
Many government employees do get to “convert” their sick time at retirement. The sick time is added to the service time used to calculate the retirement.
Assume an employee has 22 days sick time (1 month) on the books at retirement. It would increase the retirement amount by 0.2% of their gross pay. In my wife’s case that would be about $10 a month more. That is not very much for giving up 22 days, but it is something. When I worked for the university just before an employee retired they would start to burn up the sick time.
It never occurred to me to regard “sick days” as extra leave entitlement regardless of the truth. You can’t plan when you’re sick.
But the position in this country may be affected by statutory requirements for when the government steps in to cover sick pay. Anything more than (I think) three days and you have to have a doctor’s certificate. If you just want a duvet day you take it off your ordinary annual allowance, and if it’s unplanned, well, that’s up to your boss to decide how inconvenient that is for everyone else, and act accordingly. If you keep taking lots of three day “sickness” breaks, the employer can still ask for proper medical investigation and confirmation.
In Australia I think it is just about universal that your sick leave accrues over the years. I would have hundreds of days accumulated. I haven’t had a sick day for something like 7 years. The fact that they are there obviously doesn’t foster any desire to take them.
I can’t figure out all of you guys that never get sick. I get probably eight colds a year, and most of those have at least one day when I’m going to be utterly worthless and disgusting to be around. Sure, I could drag myself into work in a haze, spewing snot and fighting coughing fits, but who benefits from that? Not my employer, and not the people around me.
Add a kid that also gets sick into the mix, and an annual exam for me and a few well-baby visits for the kid, and it’s tough to accumulate much.
If you never get sick, count your blessings. Some of us really do get sick.
Absolutely. Which is why sick leave should (in my view) be taken seriously as just that, and not an extra entitlement regardless of circumstances (which would in a sense “devalue” the genuinely sick days.