American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Vacation, too. As a Canadian working for a US company on a US-based team with a US-based direct manager, my manager was completely dumbfounded at the Canadian HR policy limiting the amount of vacation that I could carry over and that I could get forced to take vacation if I didn't use the amount necessary to meet that threshold before a certain date. In Alberta, if the employer doesn't force you to take it, you lose it... you can then take them to the labour board over it, but it seems completely idiotic.

I think the big difference in the Canadian system compared to the US is that in the States employers are not required to allow you to take your vacations the same way they are in Canada.

If the American system required employers to allow their employees to use any accrued vacation pay you could end up with a scenario where an employee could bank enough time to take a year off and that would most likely create a hardship for the employer. That’s the most likely reason why it’s different here.

The part you wrote about losing your vacation pay if your employer doesn’t force you to use it is a little misleading. They are required by law to pay you your vacation pay. While it’s possible(and I don’t doubt that it happens) for an employer to try and not pay an employee their vacation pay it’s no different than if said employer were to refuse to pay you your overtime correctly, you would have to go to employment standards to fight them. A similar process would apply in the United States.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I think the big difference in the Canadian system compared to the US is that in the States employers are not required to allow you to take your vacations the same way they are in Canada.

If the American system required employers to allow their employees to use any accrued vacation pay you could end up with a scenario where an employee could bank enough time to take a year off and that would most likely create a hardship for the employer. That’s the most likely reason why it’s different here.

The part you wrote about losing your vacation pay if your employer doesn’t force you to use it is a little misleading. They are required by law to pay you your vacation pay. While it’s possible(and I don’t doubt that it happens) for an employer to try and not pay an employee their vacation pay it’s no different than if said employer were to refuse to pay you your overtime correctly, you would have to go to employment standards to fight them. A similar process would apply in the United States.

It varies across the board. I would guess my employer is somewhat typical for a large org of professional workers in the US. I've been here a long while, so get 256 hours of PTO to be used for sick or vacation. We can carry over up to 80 hours every year, and get paid out for 40 hours on top of that. We encourage everyone to use their PTO and if we notice high balances above the carry over by September, we usually work to ensure they use the time. We also have a concept of short term disability so that if you are seriously ill, the first 4 days go against pto, and then STD kicks in to pay 100% for weeks 2-10, 80% for 11-18 and 60% for 18-26, and you can use pto hours to supplement those if you are in the 80%/60% category. We also get an additional 8 weeks of full paid leave per calendar year for approved events like having a baby (mother or father) or caring for for a relative (We didn't have that when we were having babies though ). We have no actual sick days though.

[ResAlien]

Nm

[dobbles]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

It varies across the board. I would guess my employer is somewhat typical for a large org of professional workers in the US. I've been here a long while, so get 256 hours of PTO to be used for sick or vacation. We can carry over up to 80 hours every year, and get paid out for 40 hours on top of that. We encourage everyone to use their PTO and if we notice high balances above the carry over by September, we usually work to ensure they use the time. We also have a concept of short term disability so that if you are seriously ill, the first 4 days go against pto, and then STD kicks in to pay 100% for weeks 2-10, 80% for 11-18 and 60% for 18-26, and you can use pto hours to supplement those if you are in the 80%/60% category. We also get an additional 8 weeks of full paid leave per calendar year for approved events like having a baby (mother or father) or caring for for a relative (We didn't have that when we were having babies though ). We have no actual sick days though.

Thats the most generous time off policy I have seen in my life. I've actually never been at a place that uses a PTO bank though my wife has in healthcare. In my workplaces its been common to start at 2 weeks vacation and then after time or if you are management get up to 15 or 20 days. At my current job I have been here 5 years and am a director so I get 22 or 23 days off. Sick usually varies but is between 10 and 20 days a year. So your 32 days PTO is definitely on the senior end of what I have seen. My wife works in a rehab hospital and they get around 10 hours PTO per check so roughly 260 hours a year, but that also includes their holidays as they are open 365 days a year.

The big difference in our places though is short term disability and maternity leave. Never have either of us been at a place where STD was an included benefit. It has always been something we have had to add on and pay for ourselves. We also have not worked at a place where either of us received and paid leave after having our kids.

We are both educated white collar professionals and have worked in Illinois, South Carolina, and Oklahoma.

[Rutuu]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

It varies across the board. I would guess my employer is somewhat typical for a large org of professional workers in the US. I've been here a long while, so get 256 hours of PTO to be used for sick or vacation. We can carry over up to 80 hours every year, and get paid out for 40 hours on top of that. We encourage everyone to use their PTO and if we notice high balances above the carry over by September, we usually work to ensure they use the time. We also have a concept of short term disability so that if you are seriously ill, the first 4 days go against pto, and then STD kicks in to pay 100% for weeks 2-10, 80% for 11-18 and 60% for 18-26, and you can use pto hours to supplement those if you are in the 80%/60% category. We also get an additional 8 weeks of full paid leave per calendar year for approved events like having a baby (mother or father) or caring for for a relative (We didn't have that when we were having babies though ). We have no actual sick days though.

This feels like a policy from an industry where we as a society have to accept 3-5% inflation every year forever, because they refuse to innovate (or can't because of the above) to increase productivity.

Oh man I can't wait for Ai / robots.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Rutuu

This feels like a policy from an industry where we as a society have to accept 3-5% inflation every year forever, because they refuse to innovate (or can't because of the above) to increase productivity.

Oh man I can't wait for Ai / robots.

Prices will surely fall once we lower labour costs.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Because the country is being run so well. The most gullible are alive and well it would seem.

Says the guy pulling for Walker and Trump

[photon]

House Republicans are going to try and get congressional testimony from Twitter employees mentioned in the "Twitter Files".

Fascistastic.

I mean I don't really understand why Republicans insist that Hunter Biden dick pics should be on Twitter in violation of Twitter's revenge porn rules, but I bet they're not going to explain that at their hearings.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by photon

House Republicans are going to try and get congressional testimony from Twitter employees mentioned in the "Twitter Files".

Fascistastic.

I mean I don't really understand why Republicans insist that Hunter Biden dick pics should be on Twitter in violation of Twitter's revenge porn rules, but I bet they're not going to explain that at their hearings.

They probably just want to see the dick pics themselves, and this is the best plan they could come up with.

I say let them fill their boots on stupid meaningless tripe while the Dems get on with business.

[photon]

Hah I guess people were going through the links that the Biden campaign had been reporting and figuring out what they originally were.. one of them was James Woods, and Woods says he's going to sue Twitter over it. Turns out, yes, Woods had posted a meme made with a dick pic.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

The part you wrote about losing your vacation pay if your employer doesn’t force you to use it is a little misleading. They are required by law to pay you your vacation pay.

I'm just relaying what Alberta Employment Standards told me when I asked. Basically for a salaried employee there was no requirement to pay out vacation, rather the employer is simply required to force you to take your vacation. When asked "and if they don't?" the reply was "Well, they have to".

I wasn't exactly confident in the person I spoke with at AB Employment Standards after that answer, but interestingly I can't find any language covering the situation I talk about in the employment standards code.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I'm just relaying what Alberta Employment Standards told me when I asked. Basically for a salaried employee there was no requirement to pay out vacation, rather the employer is simply required to force you to take your vacation. When asked "and if they don't?" the reply was "Well, they have to".

I wasn't exactly confident in the person I spoke with at AB Employment Standards after that answer, but interestingly I can't find any language covering the situation I talk about in the employment standards code.

The problem with calling employment standards is if you call about the exact same issue 3 times and speak with 3 different people, you’re probably going to get 3 different answers.

I’m not saying you’re wrong when you say that you might have to make a complaint to get what you’re seeking, what I’m saying is that you can say the same thing about any scenario where your employer isn’t following the rules.

For a salaried employee it depends on your individual employment contract, but I believe the rule of thumb is that if you don’t receive additional vacation pay during the year then the amount owed to you upon termination is dependent on the percentage of your salary that covers your vacation pay.

[TorqueDog]

I figured that was the case, which is annoying given they're supposed to be the experts on the matter.

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

For a salaried employee it depends on your individual employment contract, but I believe the rule of thumb is that if you don’t receive additional vacation pay during the year then the amount owed to you upon termination is dependent on the percentage of your salary that covers your vacation pay.

I'm not talking about 'upon termination' though, I'm talking about "I didn't use all my vacation at the end of the calendar year and you will only let me carry over 5 of my 10 days left".

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

I figured that was the case, which is annoying given they're supposed to be the experts on the matter.

I'm not talking about 'upon termination' though, I'm talking about "I didn't use all my vacation at the end of the calendar year and you will only let me carry over 5 of my 10 days left".

Well in that case your most likely options are unfortunately to either accept what they’re doing or fight it and risk being terminated for being a “troublemaker”.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Yoho

Because the country is being run so well. The most gullible are alive and well it would seem.

You do know that the majority of the damage to the economy is a result of the economic and tax policy of the Trump administration? Biden has had one cycle where his economic and tax policy could be implemented, so we are not yet sure of the actual outcome of those policies. Economic policies routinely take two years to impact the economy. It's why the first two years after a Republican president the next guy has traditionally had to recover from an economic disaster, and then why after Democrats the economy is singing along. The only one that this doesn't track with is Reagan after Carter, but since WWII, it's been consistent. The only thing Republicans are good at is tugging at the patriotic heartstrings of a bunch of rubes and running scare campaigns. Again, been consistent since the Willie Horton ad ran in 1988.

Originally Posted by corporatejay

How do you know his cognitive functions weren't impaired?

Because they do cognitive function testing after strokes.

[Yoho]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

You do know that the majority of the damage to the economy is a result of the economic and tax policy of the Trump administration? Biden has had one cycle where his economic and tax policy could be implemented, so we are not yet sure of the actual outcome of those policies. Economic policies routinely take two years to impact the economy. It's why the first two years after a Republican president the next guy has traditionally had to recover from an economic disaster, and then why after Democrats the economy is singing along. The only one that this doesn't track with is Reagan after Carter, but since WWII, it's been consistent. The only thing Republicans are good at is tugging at the patriotic heartstrings of a bunch of rubes and running scare campaigns. Again, been consistent since the Willie Horton ad ran in 1988.




Because they do cognitive function testing after strokes.

No I don’t know that…

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/10/25/p...sis/index.html

“ He has no choice but to talk about the economy in the home stretch of the midterm elections -- it's the issue, given near 40-year high inflation and high gas prices, that worries voters most.
But by doing so, he's drawing attention to his own and Democrats' biggest liability -- their failure to fix things already and accusations that they made it worse.”

[Duruss]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

They probably just want to see the dick pics themselves, and this is the best plan they could come up with.

I say let them fill their boots on stupid meaningless tripe while the Dems get on with business.

Easy for you to say it's not your dick picks they want


The internet needs to spam the GOP with dick pics over this.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Yoho

No I don’t know that…

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/10/25/p...sis/index.html

“ He has no choice but to talk about the economy in the home stretch of the midterm elections -- it's the issue, given near 40-year high inflation and high gas prices, that worries voters most.
But by doing so, he's drawing attention to his own and Democrats' biggest liability -- their failure to fix things already and accusations that they made it worse.”

That did nothing to counter my point. All the Republicans are doing is bemoaning the current state, not identifying why that current state exists. The reality is we are in the ####show we are in because of $2 trillion of tax cuts and then a $953 billion PPP loan scam where half the money was forgiven. That monetary policy is what fueled inflation. That almost $3 trillion of free money to the rich, coupled with global affairs, caused things to over-heat. So while the Republicans continue to bleat about inflation and the economy, it is a symptom of the disease they themselves thrust onto the economy. But keep posting useless articles bemoaning the issue rather than trying to understand it and get to the root cause.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

You do know that the majority of the damage to the economy is a result of the economic and tax policy of the Trump administration? Biden has had one cycle where his economic and tax policy could be implemented, so we are not yet sure of the actual outcome of those policies. Economic policies routinely take two years to impact the economy. It's why the first two years after a Republican president the next guy has traditionally had to recover from an economic disaster, and then why after Democrats the economy is singing along. The only one that this doesn't track with is Reagan after Carter, but since WWII, it's been consistent. The only thing Republicans are good at is tugging at the patriotic heartstrings of a bunch of rubes and running scare campaigns. Again, been consistent since the Willie Horton ad ran in 1988.

The events of 2016-present have no historical equivalency. There have been so many unprecedented events and moving pieces.

The Trump tax cuts were a bit evil (but not unique) in benefiting wealthy more than poor. But they were also (cleverly?) evil in redistributing wealth from blue to red states with SALT cap. Those parts didn't really hurt the economy. The fact that they were unfunded without any cuts in spending at a time of an already overheating economy was the problematic problem for the long term economic outlook. It started the ball rolling on inflation and took away tools to smooth the dip in the inevitable downturn.

Then there was the COVID economy, and it is almost impossible to unpack the impact of the events and government interventions on the economy during that period. Trump's words and actions did lead to a lot more death than was necessary though.

Once the dust settle on all that and the country tried to return to normal and the Russian war was thrown into the mix, there was an obvious inflation problem.

I'd argue that Biden's administration and the Federal Reserve have done a remarkable job of curbing inflation without creating a debilitating recession (so far). Employment is staying strong, inflation is settling, housing market is normal. The economy is obviously fragile, but it's hard to say it is objectively bad.

Yeah, YOHO can point to people saying things were cheaper under Trump, so their life was better, and I know that is as simple as it gets for a lot of people. Another couple years of a loose cannon Trump would have likely been a disaster for the economy as he no longer had anyone in his administration who could navigate the nuanced challenges the economy was facing.

All that said, Biden didn't win many votes for his administrations nuanced handling of the economy. The overturning of Roe v Wade made politics real for a lot of people on the sidelines, and Trump's meddling in picking loser candidates were the big difference makers.

[gallione11]

I wrote up a large rant, but deleted it. The only point I disagree with is the housing market. It's complete crap right now if you didn't get in two years ago or earlier. This is not to say I want the GOP back in, but first time buyers right now are in an extremely difficult place. We've been looking to buy for the last year + but prices have doubled or tripled in that time.