We haven't asked because we don't want to give off the appearance of being slackers. Instead we intermittently take "sick days" or "mental health days" in a poor attempt to recharge our overspent batteries.
Europe has many fundamental differences - the influence of socialism, cultural differences that can be seen in their educational systems, business processes, employment law, less competition on a personal level - more socially integrated in their communities, the list goes on...
I believe this is the case because of our culture. American culture has this romanticism with entrepreneurialsim and doing hard work. Our culture is also obsessed with materialism. The combination of the two means people are expected to work their buts off to earn a living and make their way in the world. The power that corporations have over our society, via lobbying and laws set-up to benefit them over the individual, only reinforces these notions. American is ultimately about capitalsim and competition -- if a worker demands six weeks of vacation they will be replaced.
1. It would require more collective bargaining power than currently had by most US employees.
2. Productivity would suffer - unhealthy in the current global economic competition.
3. There's no discerbable return on investment for employers.
Americans (including me) aren't good with free time, they like structures. We like things like To Do lists that are prioritized A, B, C and then Group A is broken down to A1, A2, A3. They like vacations where you go for a week to an Amusement Park and go on all the rides, each time marking it off on the map. They go on vacations, which have itineraries and details that look like a space shuttle launch. We couldn't deal with the whole month of August off. What would we do after the 1st week? Ok, I got to get back to work now, I'm up to task A43 :-)
Most people I know have a hard time using the vacation currently available to them. Not sure if it is due to the fact that they love their work, or they are afraid of falling behind, or somewhere in the middle...
I think it has to do with ties to the corporate mentality. I do not presume to understand the European expectation of time away from work, but I do think that American positions, due to corporate downsizing and restrictions on employee head counts, put a lot more stock and responsibility into the position each employee holds. They do a very good job in explaining to employees that time off is time others have to spend to cover the activities of that missing person. This creates an expectation that corporate offices will not discuss more time. Though one or two employees won't change policy, a group offering petition or collective communication is more likely to instill a need for change. It is still questionable without a union, but it also depends on the corporate culture. In essence, Americans tend to be happier being "good employees" than trying to change the organization.
I wouldn't coach a client to "demand more vacation time" like those lucky Europeans. Seems rather victim-like. Increasingly professionals don't even know what a vacation day is.... "Oh, that's when I pack my swim trunks AND my laptop and only have two conference calls a day."
Why not architect a working situation where you are more in control? Since starting my own company 7 years ago I'm confident I've worked more hours, on an average week, than ever before. And yet I've had more days off as well.
The dirty little secret of time management is that if you don't take responsibility for your time, other people are glad to do it for you....
Because American workers are not represented by unions...there is too much fear in the American work place given the lack of Health Insurance and employment at will. P
I think there are at least two reasons: one, American employees don't feel as secure in their jobs as Europeans, so they are less likely to "rock the boat".
In addition, I think Americans are more work-ethic oriented than Europeans. At least they used to be; I'm afraid the American attitude is changing, just as the world economy may very well change the European tendency to feel entitled to their jobs.
I think simply people don't ask for it. For a level of seniority where there is an individual contract, most don't even ask for more than the 'standard'.
For the others, yes there are collective bargaining issues, and without a 'collective' like union representation, where would you even start to ask for more vacation?
No one wants to be the first one axed for starting an uprising...perhaps this question would be better put "Do you think unions will make a comeback under a Democractic Administration?"
I think its a combination of history and culture. The creation of the capital structure in the European context was integrated more in a social market economy sense. More vacation time is embedded in European culture as a result.
In America, employees do not demand more vacation time because they know its a useless argument to pursue.
Easy answer, the initial good work of unions in Europe has created this and the current situation is a legacy from pre-industrial days.
I am from Sweden, love working, but do believe that vacations are not negative for society, au contraire, without them no creativity. According to e.g. Maslow, we can focus on creativity only when our basic needs are satisfied. Too much work = no creativity.
In todays world without creativity, then you are substituted by "foreign labor". Maybe we all need more vacation to be more competitive...
I think we should look at the Japanese model. They have about one public holiday a month. The also have three long holiday's where the country basically shuts down. It makes travel more expensive at those times, but also leaves open a socially acceptable time to not be at work and spend with friends and family. If the entire office is closing, no one is covering for someone else.
America has traditionally been ‘labor fat” that is more people than jobs. Under those conditions employers make the rules. Remember how the first IT guys used to flaunt the dress codes? That was a tight labor market and workers made the rules.
Our culture has accepted the two week vacation as the standard and it will change when workers force a change, but that can only happen during a period of extremely low unemployment. Unlike to happen in a global economy where companies can shift work to high unemployment locations to get cheeper labor.
Companies offer things like health care, time off and other “fringe benefits” to attract workers without having to directly rase salaries. Company paid health care was a direct response to wage and price controls during World War II. Companies offered it as a sweetener when the rules blocked paying more directly.
Since companies can find workers for less in compensation packages (direct salary plus fringe benefits) we are seeing a creeping reduction in the value of the fringe benefits.
Iam seeing two dimensions admittedly subject to further research , firstly could be the American dream - too much ambition juxtaposed wth being big time spenders or extravagant , holiday aint a priority... credit cards to ofset etc, secondly could simply be a question of law - ie no clear provisions to demand the time off- its something near t that
Laziness and economic theories are shallow answers.
Dr. Clotaire Rapaille, author of "The cultural code", has a different theory: Americans are an action driven people, they live to work. That's their ethics. Their most important philosopher is Nike: Just do it.
Even after one becomes a billionaire, he/she starts a foundation (Ted Turner, Bill Gates), a political career (Michael Bloomberg, Ross Perrot) or anything that makes working meaningful. Not working is shameful, not being poor.
Europeans have an aristocratic background, even the French. Being someone is being able not to work.
America was founded by - and further populated by - immigrants fleeing the stifling status quo of the social statism like that found in Europe.
Those looking for more bennies for less work are quickly bulldozed by those around them looking to get ahead. Sounds harsh perhaps, but the results are fantastic.
I work in the global environment and more with the UK, CA and AU. Vacation or "holiday" for them is not so much a benefit as a mandate from their socialistic government. It's not so much a choice as a law for them. It was just the 1900's around the 30s-40s that unions forced businesses to go to a 5-day work week and offer benefits. Most of our states are 'at will' which means you can be let go for any reason -- that doesn't break the law. That's not the case in most other developed countries.
There's a theme in the comments here of fear, restlessness, Calvinist work-ethic, lack of leverage. It's not a sign of balance, of an ownership society, of being empowered, of a broader understanding of their overseas colleagues. Do many US workers know it's possible to be competitive, offer a great product, with a workforce with 6 weeks paid vacation? You get the leaders (bosses, politicians, coaches, etc) you deserve. The shackles are usually of our own making.
I agree with you, Zane, that there is an oppressive feeling that many American workers feel due to their own creation of an imaginary influence. We feel we have no alternative because we are taught to abide by regulations, whereas European education tends to teach in a more open-expression format. Former students of creative schools, like myself, are given the opportunity to be part of the creation process with more flexibility than traditional American schools. If only everyone was emersed in a creative atmosphere. There would be less mindless drones in the world.
Ah yes, the oppressed American worker, a virtual slave he is. Fearful of layoffs and vengeful bosses with nothing better to do than to fire the first serf who dares ask for a day off. Blah blah blah.
Bottom line is of course a basic one of free market versus a restricted market.
The more dynamic, capable and energetic workers are going to gravitate to a free market.
The less capable and/or willing tend to look for the government to mandate that their employers give them more for less.
If it weren't so, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Slave labor has proven over the centuries to be very inefficient and if the American laborer were just simply an oppressed serf quivering at the thought of his boss's glance, the American economy would more closely resemble the stagnant morass that we see in Europe (unemployment or food riots anyone?).
So again, it's just a familiar twist on the debate between free markets and centralized control. Free markets have proven their superiority time and again, and so every few years we get a angle on how to socialize capitalist markets.
i must say Mr Gardner brings in an aspect of interest to the discussion but some clarification is requisite : Is his view that workers in a free market take more vacations than workers in restricted markets? Kindlr clarify .
Apologies to Mr. Gardner, but you can't escape the "Golden Rule" - them with the gold makes the rules. The idea that this is an issue of the "capable and energetic" vs. the "less capable and willing" sounds like something from a villain in Dickens ("Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?").
.
I've worked in international corporations for over 20 years. I've seen the incompetent and foolish advance, and the competent and energetic pushed out. The fact is, corporate culture will only tolerate so much "boat rocking", then the rabble rouser is tossed into the street, as Napolean would say, "for the encouragement of the others".
.
"If they don't like two weeks vacation, why don't they just go someplace else?" And just where would that be? Not everyone can be a teacher, and seasonal employment generally doesn't offer health benefits, or for that matter, benefits of any kind.
.
Wake up to the fact that there is no such thing as a free market. The global economy means that all markets, and especially the labor market, are affected by the policies and practices of those with global influence. Walmart and "China, Inc." have more to say about the number of weeks vacation a company offers then any American worker.
Sorry Bob, but it really does come down to the more willing versus the less willing.
Or, as some might better recognize the idea; work ethic.
In a free market, a good work ethic is rewarded.
In a more restricted market, work ethic is not commensurately rewarded.
As for your anecdotes, they suffer badly from what a logician would call a fallacy of relevance.
Incompetent and foolish people manage to advance in both the free market and the restricted market. So what?
Boat rockers? In a free market such as America’s the boat rockers have a dynamic economy to swim in, and thus they often times become the competition of that stagnant corporation they originally fled.
Back to the original point however, Americans don’t ask for more vacation because we’re not expecting anyone to give us anything. If we want “more” we simply go get more. Those that can’t or won’t get more for themselves typically fall prey to the populist politics that have ruined Europe and so many other parts of the world, but they remain in the minority as long as the working class remains a class of workers, and not a class of mere recipients; looking to see what someone might give them today.
Another thought on this topic.
The question as framed in this forum is really asking "Why don't Americans make more demands on their government to make their employers give them more vacation time?"
Americans do demand as much vacation time as possible. But within the relatively free market economy of America, not everyone is capable of having their demands met, because they are making these demands to other private citizens; namely their employers.
Our demands must be counterbalanced by what value we bring to a company.
I can make certain demands of my employer because I have skills and knowledge that are difficult to replace.
The low skilled worker cannot make such demands because the intrinsic value of his labor is relatively low, therefore he is in no position to make demands.
Such an arrangement is beneficial to both the worker and the company as it brings about the optimal balance for mutual incentives to ensure the company remains competitive in a global market, and the laborer has certain rewards to work towards. (If the company doesn't remain competitive, the low skilled worker will have a very long vacation looking for work.)
I'm sure someone could dig around this magazine's archives and find an article or two on the basic concept of the "happy employee is the productive employee."
If this is true - and I personally believe it is - then America's lack of demands to their government for market intervention is not because we are so oppressed, but because we simply don't operate that way in a free market.
Or, in other words, if we are so oppressed and fearful of losing our jobs, then our overall economic performance would be lagging. And of course, it is not. For all of the self-loathing among certain types, America is still the runaway economic superpower in the world, and we didn't achieve this status by "oppressive" work standards.
Could it in a nutshell be an underlying fact that the American system is rather more exploitative as reflected in less vacation, Mr Gardner or other discussants are kindly requested to adress this school of thought without sentiment, nothing personal about the American system i must underline ...but are these indcators of an exploitative system ? If so, then the answer is as simple as that; thank you.
Interesting though that a majority of the comments come from people who benefit from the current system. I do not see any steel workers shouting hooray...
I prefer market solutions and capitalistic systems but, honestly, everything is about bargaining power.
The american dream is a vision adopted by a whole nation but not everyone will be successful.
But, rather a nation with hardworking disappointed people than a nation with lazy free-riders.
Sweden is a country with two faces but a strategy with relatively high wages will of course force the companies to be lean and efficient. Low wages will decrease the restructuring of the economy.
To respond to Mr. Gardner - as far as "fallacy of relevance" - YOU raised the point about "dynamic, capable and energetic workers", I pointed out the fallacy of THAT argument, indicating that this dynamic, capable and energetic group have no more say in vacation demands than others.
.
After reading your other comments, I would say you lean toward "business jingoism" - touting the advantages of the American free market system, but failing to acknowledge it's deficiencies. I challenge you to identify the failings of the system as well as it's promise. Go to wikipedia and look up "Union Busting" for the other side of the story.
.
As far as your more recent comments, what exactly is your definition of "less skilled" worker? I know at least five people, each with multiple college degrees, over 10 years experience and working in the Information Technology industry, all recently out of work through no fault of their own. In their next job, they will have to start the vacation benefit at two weeks, after enjoying three - four weeks in their last positions. All are over the age of 45, and they will have the same vacation benefit as the 18 year old McDonald's worker on their first job.
.
What a great system!
.
As far as Americans and their demands on their government - who elected you to speak for them? In the grand scheme of things, I want my government on MY side first, THEN on the side of business. The basic benefits we enjoy in the workplace - 8 hour days, five day weeks, paid sick leave, vacations, etc. where not given up easily by business. Employers had to be forced to do so, and there were cases of them defending worker exploitation at the point of a gun.
.
As the saying goes, "Communism is a system where man exploits man. In capitalism, it's the other way around."
The question is a little strange, in that it supposes the U.S. and Europe to be the world. They are together only a small part. I think Americans are recognizing that they must compete with Asia, whereas Europeans are hoping that they can insulate themselves with protection (the recent ruling against Microsoft is a good example). As Asia takes over, we may less and less often ask ourselves questions about comparing North America and Europe.
Mr. Stout is quite correct. "China, Inc." and India will represent enormous challenges to both business and labor.
.
The IT industry is already experiencing the downward pressure on worker salaries. - $25K buys a lot of engineering talent in India - not so much in the US. - Where then will business go? - In a free market, they will go where their money buys the most.
.
China is fascinating - they seem to be fusing capitalistic energy and communistic central control. - I don't know what their vacation policies are, but I do know that their workers don't have to deal with medical expenses, nor do their employers.
.
I also know, they're producing a lot of millionaires these days.
.
Hmmm. - The US and Europe will have to compete with countries that have four times their population, lots of engineering and scientific talent, low wages, but high benefits. - Going to be a tough challenge for the "Free Market".
.
Vacation benefits look like a pretty trivial thing to be talking about.
My question underlying this discussion is not being adressed, could it be the free market system is exploitative where practiced most as evidenced in declining vacations ?Does this translate to the American employees facing harder times unless the free market is to some extent regulated ? some one through more light on these concerns to enable meaningful discussion.
40 Total
March 31, 2008 at 9:46am by Sherri L. Smith
We haven't asked because we don't want to give off the appearance of being slackers. Instead we intermittently take "sick days" or "mental health days" in a poor attempt to recharge our overspent batteries.
March 31, 2008 at 9:48am by Jack Owen
Europe has many fundamental differences - the influence of socialism, cultural differences that can be seen in their educational systems, business processes, employment law, less competition on a personal level - more socially integrated in their communities, the list goes on...
March 31, 2008 at 1:00pm by Don Denz
If they could phrase a question in proper english, maybe they would get.
March 31, 2008 at 2:32pm by Kevin Ohannessian
I believe this is the case because of our culture. American culture has this romanticism with entrepreneurialsim and doing hard work. Our culture is also obsessed with materialism. The combination of the two means people are expected to work their buts off to earn a living and make their way in the world. The power that corporations have over our society, via lobbying and laws set-up to benefit them over the individual, only reinforces these notions. American is ultimately about capitalsim and competition -- if a worker demands six weeks of vacation they will be replaced.
March 31, 2008 at 2:44pm by Robert Pawlikowski
1. It would require more collective bargaining power than currently had by most US employees.
2. Productivity would suffer - unhealthy in the current global economic competition.
3. There's no discerbable return on investment for employers.
March 31, 2008 at 3:30pm by G P
Americans (including me) aren't good with free time, they like structures. We like things like To Do lists that are prioritized A, B, C and then Group A is broken down to A1, A2, A3. They like vacations where you go for a week to an Amusement Park and go on all the rides, each time marking it off on the map. They go on vacations, which have itineraries and details that look like a space shuttle launch. We couldn't deal with the whole month of August off. What would we do after the 1st week? Ok, I got to get back to work now, I'm up to task A43 :-)
March 31, 2008 at 3:40pm by Aimee Westbrook
Most people I know have a hard time using the vacation currently available to them. Not sure if it is due to the fact that they love their work, or they are afraid of falling behind, or somewhere in the middle...
March 31, 2008 at 3:57pm by Joe Ryder
I think it has to do with ties to the corporate mentality. I do not presume to understand the European expectation of time away from work, but I do think that American positions, due to corporate downsizing and restrictions on employee head counts, put a lot more stock and responsibility into the position each employee holds. They do a very good job in explaining to employees that time off is time others have to spend to cover the activities of that missing person. This creates an expectation that corporate offices will not discuss more time. Though one or two employees won't change policy, a group offering petition or collective communication is more likely to instill a need for change. It is still questionable without a union, but it also depends on the corporate culture. In essence, Americans tend to be happier being "good employees" than trying to change the organization.
March 31, 2008 at 6:09pm by Brock Stout
They have bought too many toys from China, so cannot possibly afford to meet the debt payments if they take more vacation.
March 31, 2008 at 6:42pm by gerald martin
we like our jobs
March 31, 2008 at 6:49pm by Richard Drake
Vacations are a time where you fall behind, where your sales numbers dive to zero, where you "miss out" on everything going on.
March 31, 2008 at 7:45pm by Andy Kaufman
I wouldn't coach a client to "demand more vacation time" like those lucky Europeans. Seems rather victim-like. Increasingly professionals don't even know what a vacation day is.... "Oh, that's when I pack my swim trunks AND my laptop and only have two conference calls a day."
Why not architect a working situation where you are more in control? Since starting my own company 7 years ago I'm confident I've worked more hours, on an average week, than ever before. And yet I've had more days off as well.
The dirty little secret of time management is that if you don't take responsibility for your time, other people are glad to do it for you....
March 31, 2008 at 7:58pm by Pierre Ferrari
Because American workers are not represented by unions...there is too much fear in the American work place given the lack of Health Insurance and employment at will. P
March 31, 2008 at 8:25pm by Jonni Anderson
I think there are at least two reasons: one, American employees don't feel as secure in their jobs as Europeans, so they are less likely to "rock the boat".
In addition, I think Americans are more work-ethic oriented than Europeans. At least they used to be; I'm afraid the American attitude is changing, just as the world economy may very well change the European tendency to feel entitled to their jobs.
March 31, 2008 at 9:13pm by Ian Leong
I think simply people don't ask for it. For a level of seniority where there is an individual contract, most don't even ask for more than the 'standard'.
For the others, yes there are collective bargaining issues, and without a 'collective' like union representation, where would you even start to ask for more vacation?
March 31, 2008 at 10:31pm by Christopher Moakley
No one wants to be the first one axed for starting an uprising...perhaps this question would be better put "Do you think unions will make a comeback under a Democractic Administration?"
April 2, 2008 at 11:55am by Michael Edwards
I think its a combination of history and culture. The creation of the capital structure in the European context was integrated more in a social market economy sense. More vacation time is embedded in European culture as a result.
In America, employees do not demand more vacation time because they know its a useless argument to pursue.
April 2, 2008 at 6:52pm by Andreas Lindgren
Easy answer, the initial good work of unions in Europe has created this and the current situation is a legacy from pre-industrial days.
I am from Sweden, love working, but do believe that vacations are not negative for society, au contraire, without them no creativity. According to e.g. Maslow, we can focus on creativity only when our basic needs are satisfied. Too much work = no creativity.
In todays world without creativity, then you are substituted by "foreign labor". Maybe we all need more vacation to be more competitive...
April 3, 2008 at 8:57am by Terry Coniglio
I think we should look at the Japanese model. They have about one public holiday a month. The also have three long holiday's where the country basically shuts down. It makes travel more expensive at those times, but also leaves open a socially acceptable time to not be at work and spend with friends and family. If the entire office is closing, no one is covering for someone else.
April 3, 2008 at 12:30pm by Kenneth Hammond-Aryee
becuase they not lazy as compared to their european conterparts
April 11, 2008 at 9:13am by Allen Laudenslager
America has traditionally been ‘labor fat” that is more people than jobs. Under those conditions employers make the rules. Remember how the first IT guys used to flaunt the dress codes? That was a tight labor market and workers made the rules.
Our culture has accepted the two week vacation as the standard and it will change when workers force a change, but that can only happen during a period of extremely low unemployment. Unlike to happen in a global economy where companies can shift work to high unemployment locations to get cheeper labor.
Companies offer things like health care, time off and other “fringe benefits” to attract workers without having to directly rase salaries. Company paid health care was a direct response to wage and price controls during World War II. Companies offered it as a sweetener when the rules blocked paying more directly.
Since companies can find workers for less in compensation packages (direct salary plus fringe benefits) we are seeing a creeping reduction in the value of the fringe benefits.
April 12, 2008 at 10:23am by Charles Matovu
Iam seeing two dimensions admittedly subject to further research , firstly could be the American dream - too much ambition juxtaposed wth being big time spenders or extravagant , holiday aint a priority... credit cards to ofset etc, secondly could simply be a question of law - ie no clear provisions to demand the time off- its something near t that
April 14, 2008 at 12:01pm by Marcelo de Paulos
Laziness and economic theories are shallow answers.
Dr. Clotaire Rapaille, author of "The cultural code", has a different theory: Americans are an action driven people, they live to work. That's their ethics. Their most important philosopher is Nike: Just do it.
Even after one becomes a billionaire, he/she starts a foundation (Ted Turner, Bill Gates), a political career (Michael Bloomberg, Ross Perrot) or anything that makes working meaningful. Not working is shameful, not being poor.
Europeans have an aristocratic background, even the French. Being someone is being able not to work.
April 16, 2008 at 10:27pm by Ray Gardner
Culture.
America was founded by - and further populated by - immigrants fleeing the stifling status quo of the social statism like that found in Europe.
Those looking for more bennies for less work are quickly bulldozed by those around them looking to get ahead. Sounds harsh perhaps, but the results are fantastic.
April 23, 2008 at 11:49am by Shirley Abeel
I work in the global environment and more with the UK, CA and AU. Vacation or "holiday" for them is not so much a benefit as a mandate from their socialistic government. It's not so much a choice as a law for them. It was just the 1900's around the 30s-40s that unions forced businesses to go to a 5-day work week and offer benefits. Most of our states are 'at will' which means you can be let go for any reason -- that doesn't break the law. That's not the case in most other developed countries.
April 23, 2008 at 3:33pm by Zane Safrit
There's a theme in the comments here of fear, restlessness, Calvinist work-ethic, lack of leverage. It's not a sign of balance, of an ownership society, of being empowered, of a broader understanding of their overseas colleagues. Do many US workers know it's possible to be competitive, offer a great product, with a workforce with 6 weeks paid vacation? You get the leaders (bosses, politicians, coaches, etc) you deserve. The shackles are usually of our own making.
April 23, 2008 at 4:44pm by Joe Ryder
I agree with you, Zane, that there is an oppressive feeling that many American workers feel due to their own creation of an imaginary influence. We feel we have no alternative because we are taught to abide by regulations, whereas European education tends to teach in a more open-expression format. Former students of creative schools, like myself, are given the opportunity to be part of the creation process with more flexibility than traditional American schools. If only everyone was emersed in a creative atmosphere. There would be less mindless drones in the world.
April 23, 2008 at 7:51pm by Ray Gardner
Ah yes, the oppressed American worker, a virtual slave he is. Fearful of layoffs and vengeful bosses with nothing better to do than to fire the first serf who dares ask for a day off. Blah blah blah.
Bottom line is of course a basic one of free market versus a restricted market.
The more dynamic, capable and energetic workers are going to gravitate to a free market.
The less capable and/or willing tend to look for the government to mandate that their employers give them more for less.
If it weren't so, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Slave labor has proven over the centuries to be very inefficient and if the American laborer were just simply an oppressed serf quivering at the thought of his boss's glance, the American economy would more closely resemble the stagnant morass that we see in Europe (unemployment or food riots anyone?).
So again, it's just a familiar twist on the debate between free markets and centralized control. Free markets have proven their superiority time and again, and so every few years we get a angle on how to socialize capitalist markets.
April 24, 2008 at 3:36am by Charles Matovu
i must say Mr Gardner brings in an aspect of interest to the discussion but some clarification is requisite : Is his view that workers in a free market take more vacations than workers in restricted markets? Kindlr clarify .
April 24, 2008 at 8:41am by Robert Pawlikowski
Apologies to Mr. Gardner, but you can't escape the "Golden Rule" - them with the gold makes the rules. The idea that this is an issue of the "capable and energetic" vs. the "less capable and willing" sounds like something from a villain in Dickens ("Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?").
.
I've worked in international corporations for over 20 years. I've seen the incompetent and foolish advance, and the competent and energetic pushed out. The fact is, corporate culture will only tolerate so much "boat rocking", then the rabble rouser is tossed into the street, as Napolean would say, "for the encouragement of the others".
.
"If they don't like two weeks vacation, why don't they just go someplace else?" And just where would that be? Not everyone can be a teacher, and seasonal employment generally doesn't offer health benefits, or for that matter, benefits of any kind.
.
Wake up to the fact that there is no such thing as a free market. The global economy means that all markets, and especially the labor market, are affected by the policies and practices of those with global influence. Walmart and "China, Inc." have more to say about the number of weeks vacation a company offers then any American worker.
April 24, 2008 at 6:16pm by Ray Gardner
Sorry Bob, but it really does come down to the more willing versus the less willing.
Or, as some might better recognize the idea; work ethic.
In a free market, a good work ethic is rewarded.
In a more restricted market, work ethic is not commensurately rewarded.
As for your anecdotes, they suffer badly from what a logician would call a fallacy of relevance.
Incompetent and foolish people manage to advance in both the free market and the restricted market. So what?
Boat rockers? In a free market such as America’s the boat rockers have a dynamic economy to swim in, and thus they often times become the competition of that stagnant corporation they originally fled.
Back to the original point however, Americans don’t ask for more vacation because we’re not expecting anyone to give us anything. If we want “more” we simply go get more. Those that can’t or won’t get more for themselves typically fall prey to the populist politics that have ruined Europe and so many other parts of the world, but they remain in the minority as long as the working class remains a class of workers, and not a class of mere recipients; looking to see what someone might give them today.
April 25, 2008 at 1:40am by Ray Gardner
Another thought on this topic.
The question as framed in this forum is really asking "Why don't Americans make more demands on their government to make their employers give them more vacation time?"
Americans do demand as much vacation time as possible. But within the relatively free market economy of America, not everyone is capable of having their demands met, because they are making these demands to other private citizens; namely their employers.
Our demands must be counterbalanced by what value we bring to a company.
I can make certain demands of my employer because I have skills and knowledge that are difficult to replace.
The low skilled worker cannot make such demands because the intrinsic value of his labor is relatively low, therefore he is in no position to make demands.
Such an arrangement is beneficial to both the worker and the company as it brings about the optimal balance for mutual incentives to ensure the company remains competitive in a global market, and the laborer has certain rewards to work towards. (If the company doesn't remain competitive, the low skilled worker will have a very long vacation looking for work.)
I'm sure someone could dig around this magazine's archives and find an article or two on the basic concept of the "happy employee is the productive employee."
If this is true - and I personally believe it is - then America's lack of demands to their government for market intervention is not because we are so oppressed, but because we simply don't operate that way in a free market.
Or, in other words, if we are so oppressed and fearful of losing our jobs, then our overall economic performance would be lagging. And of course, it is not. For all of the self-loathing among certain types, America is still the runaway economic superpower in the world, and we didn't achieve this status by "oppressive" work standards.
April 25, 2008 at 3:18am by Charles Matovu
Could it in a nutshell be an underlying fact that the American system is rather more exploitative as reflected in less vacation, Mr Gardner or other discussants are kindly requested to adress this school of thought without sentiment, nothing personal about the American system i must underline ...but are these indcators of an exploitative system ? If so, then the answer is as simple as that; thank you.
April 25, 2008 at 5:50am by Andreas Lindgren
Interesting though that a majority of the comments come from people who benefit from the current system. I do not see any steel workers shouting hooray...
I prefer market solutions and capitalistic systems but, honestly, everything is about bargaining power.
The american dream is a vision adopted by a whole nation but not everyone will be successful.
But, rather a nation with hardworking disappointed people than a nation with lazy free-riders.
/AL
April 25, 2008 at 5:59am by Andreas Lindgren
Sweden is a country with two faces but a strategy with relatively high wages will of course force the companies to be lean and efficient. Low wages will decrease the restructuring of the economy.
/AL
April 25, 2008 at 8:38am by Robert Pawlikowski
To respond to Mr. Gardner - as far as "fallacy of relevance" - YOU raised the point about "dynamic, capable and energetic workers", I pointed out the fallacy of THAT argument, indicating that this dynamic, capable and energetic group have no more say in vacation demands than others.
.
After reading your other comments, I would say you lean toward "business jingoism" - touting the advantages of the American free market system, but failing to acknowledge it's deficiencies. I challenge you to identify the failings of the system as well as it's promise. Go to wikipedia and look up "Union Busting" for the other side of the story.
.
As far as your more recent comments, what exactly is your definition of "less skilled" worker? I know at least five people, each with multiple college degrees, over 10 years experience and working in the Information Technology industry, all recently out of work through no fault of their own. In their next job, they will have to start the vacation benefit at two weeks, after enjoying three - four weeks in their last positions. All are over the age of 45, and they will have the same vacation benefit as the 18 year old McDonald's worker on their first job.
.
What a great system!
.
As far as Americans and their demands on their government - who elected you to speak for them? In the grand scheme of things, I want my government on MY side first, THEN on the side of business. The basic benefits we enjoy in the workplace - 8 hour days, five day weeks, paid sick leave, vacations, etc. where not given up easily by business. Employers had to be forced to do so, and there were cases of them defending worker exploitation at the point of a gun.
.
As the saying goes, "Communism is a system where man exploits man. In capitalism, it's the other way around."
April 25, 2008 at 9:07am by Andreas Lindgren
As Robert Pawlikowski pointed out, not only less skilled people face this situation of downsizing/decreasing benefits etc.
What a marvellous democratic kiss of death.
Simplistic solution (but hey, it´s friday afternoon...), choose companies that stand up for basic hygiene factors. Forget about the rest.
All countries with insurance policies/retirement money arranged by the employer will face a larger diversity among people without any logical reason.
The government has to establish national norms regarding this in order to avoid these problems.
The individuals freedom of accepting bad agreements will create a job dumping economy, isn´t it so?
/AL
April 25, 2008 at 9:23am by Brock Stout
The question is a little strange, in that it supposes the U.S. and Europe to be the world. They are together only a small part. I think Americans are recognizing that they must compete with Asia, whereas Europeans are hoping that they can insulate themselves with protection (the recent ruling against Microsoft is a good example). As Asia takes over, we may less and less often ask ourselves questions about comparing North America and Europe.
April 25, 2008 at 10:11am by Robert Pawlikowski
Mr. Stout is quite correct. "China, Inc." and India will represent enormous challenges to both business and labor.
.
The IT industry is already experiencing the downward pressure on worker salaries. - $25K buys a lot of engineering talent in India - not so much in the US. - Where then will business go? - In a free market, they will go where their money buys the most.
.
China is fascinating - they seem to be fusing capitalistic energy and communistic central control. - I don't know what their vacation policies are, but I do know that their workers don't have to deal with medical expenses, nor do their employers.
.
I also know, they're producing a lot of millionaires these days.
.
Hmmm. - The US and Europe will have to compete with countries that have four times their population, lots of engineering and scientific talent, low wages, but high benefits. - Going to be a tough challenge for the "Free Market".
.
Vacation benefits look like a pretty trivial thing to be talking about.
April 26, 2008 at 2:13am by Charles Matovu
My question underlying this discussion is not being adressed, could it be the free market system is exploitative where practiced most as evidenced in declining vacations ?Does this translate to the American employees facing harder times unless the free market is to some extent regulated ? some one through more light on these concerns to enable meaningful discussion.