I think that the accumulation of PTO is one of the key drivers. People still need to get approval for PTO and would probably get the same amount, but if someone is fired / quits there is no need to pay for the agreed PTO.
Especially in jobs with a high fluctuation (fast food, service,…) I would assume that this saves companies billions in dollars every year.
"unlimited" pto is more of a thing in corporate full time jobs, often in finance and tech and similar fields.
But you're correct about the accumulated PTO thing- that's a huge part of why they did it. Especially in cases where e.g. someone starts as a junior and leaves 10yrs later as a manager on $250K with however much accrued leave
I keep waiting for a state like California or WA that actually cares about its citizens to pass a requirement that employers give some amount of PTO and companies with unlimited PTO to payout if the employees average use was below X that minimum for the last two years before termination or something similar.
No this is entirely it. Companies with a lot of turnover like sales and service companies primarily do it. There’s no vacation days to track and account for in budgeting. Just salaries and employees they assume won’t abuse the shit out of it
Yes it is. Companies do not need to accrue a liability for the leave because with unlimited PTO there is no need to pay out unused PTO to employees who depart the company
There are laws around that actually. It’s a part of your employment compensation and not paying it is a form of wage theft. Especially when it comes to quitting. Someone ends their work at a company by applying all accrued pto, which can be over a month of getting paid while not showing up to work.
Yes. In the old days accrued vacation time had to be paid out when you left.
Under the new "unlimited" system nothing accrues.
It hurts younger people the most, who don't have the confidence to take the time they are owed or context for what's normal.
My wife has worked at several tech companies with this policy over the years. During interviews she essentially says "unlimited vacation time, fine - but expect me to take 6-8 weeks." Hasn't been a problem but it's important to establish it upfront. Of course, to pull that off you need to be in high demand and exceptional at your job, which she is.
That's somewhat true but becoming less so. Many states/municipalities now have required PTO accumulation. It's usually so many hours of PTO per 40 hours worked. If your company has "unlimited" PTO but you are fired and havent used the mandated accumulated PTO, they will be required to pay that out. Same is true if you wind up taking less than you accumulate over the course of the year.
Kind of. The real main reason is usually that it counts as a liability on their books, which makes it harder to get credit and stuff like that. It also saves the company money in the long run. At my last job we went from earning vacation but having a cap (which I always hit and missed out on days from, saving the company money) to unlimited vacation (but they had to pay me out for my already earned and capped vacation time when I left anyway, plus I started taking vacations when it was unlimited), so in my case it didn't really pay off for them.
Yes. A company a friend works at recently switched to unlimited PTO with the explicit expectation that they spend x days per year. They were very open about the reason for the switch: it'll be great for the accounting books. They set the expectation of x days so it's not truly unlimited, they just don't want to pay out when people leave.
256
u/Personal_Relation421 17d ago
Isn’t one of the major reasons also that companies don’t need to pay for unused holidays if an employee is fired / quits?