The cafeteria plan is offered in several American corporations, but it rarely (if ever) includes a time-off option; usually, it has to do with life insurance, childcare, health insurance, etc. For folks who don't need paid maternity leave, or childcare, it would be nice to offer time off as an option.

I'm not sure why bringing up inequalities or unfairness is whining; the U.S. isn't perfect, and we know it. We work to bring it closer to perfection, or at least our idea of perfection. If it weren't for that, we'd be singing "God Save the Queen", owning slaves, and denying the vote to anyone who wasn't a white male landowner.

Needabreak thinks something needs fixing; so does the gentleman on the website noted. They are doing something about it by the legal means established by the government. If the majority doesn't agree, the status quo will stay just that.

If the only answers to pointing out wrongs is to leave or drop out, why did the Founding Fathers create the legislative process? If trying to change the way things are done shows no love, then every parent who corrects his or her child must not love that child.

I'm fortunate to work for a company with a liberal vacation policy; they offer floating holidays as rewards, and
fully-paid sabbaticals (including insurance, vacation accrual, etc. as though we were working) for employees with at least five years employment.

The really sad part? There are employees who NEVER take vacations, or only a few days a year. Some people have accrued months of vacation, and CAN'T ACCRUE MORE UNTIL THEY USE UP THE MONTHS THEY HAVE ALREADY...and STILL don't take it!! Granted, some people can't go away for valid reasons (care of an invalid, saving for a house, paying off college debts, etc.), but why not take the time off and stay in town? Catch up on reading, visit a museum, lay out by a pool...I can't imagine not taking every *second* that's offered! Oddly enough, the folks who have the hardest time getting away, DO...I can't figure it out at all.

All these people shouting about "government interference". I don't hear you complaining about Corporate America taking advantage of tax breaks and free infrastructure (sewage, water, electric lines) and other incentives from local, state, and federal governments. Wake up; America is NOT a truly capitalist society. The only time you hear the Right complaining about "big government" is when the Left tries to do something positive for the ordinary citizen. You've all been brainwashed. Do you all want to get rid of public schools, public transportation, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, because those are all "socialist" programs. I didn't think so. Someone earlier pointed out that work conditions only improve after the government mandates it, or unions demand better conditions. Companies did not quit employing 10 year old children or install safer equipment out of the goodness of their hearts. Many of you would be killed in auto accidents if not for "government interference" of higher auto safery regulations. Etc. etc.

And honestly, who among you can say your life is worse off then it was 8 years ago!

And Micki, could you please back up your claim that regulations cause a decline in quality and economics?

Elvira, you're so right about some people not taking advantage of earned vacations.
This is a true story that happened in our company a few years ago. There was an executive who worked his whole life for the company. Year after year, he did not take a vacation. The company policy is, if you don't take it annually, you lose it. Anyway, when he retired, he immediately went about the process to take his wife on a long vacation including China which he had promised her for many years. He went in for a physical and they found a spot on his lungs. After some tests, it was decided that he should have surgery. Within 6 weeks, he was dead. We felt very sad about the situation especially for his widow who never got to go to China with him. If only he had taken his earned vacations years earlier he could have had additional memorable times with his wife.

We need a balancing act because family is important too.

The word "socialism" is being tossed around in this thread in a fairly careless manner. Socialism is the advocation of government regulation of both the means of production and the distribution of goods and wages. By this definition there are socialist aspects of the American economy (e.g., minium wage laws, farm subsidies, etc.) that many Americans do not find objectionable. In this sense, it is probably reasonable to say that Gore is more socialist leaning than Bush. Does this make him a better candidate for president? That's for the voters to decide.

Anyone that thinks that all Americans care about is money has got their head up their a**. How much foreign aid does the US give to other countries? Also, it's a bit disingenuous for Europeans to complain about American conservatism and American materialism when the US has provided the majority of their military defense for the past fifty years. That didn't come cheap.

Steve
Can you explain this last comment please. How have you provided the majority of European defense for the past 50 years??

Angela,

Frankly, I'm surprised you're asking this question.

Since it is getting off the original topic, I'll keep this short. Without even going into the Cold War, just consider the greatest European conflict in the recent past: the Balkan wars.

Two-thirds of the planes used for bombing in the Yugoslav campaign were American. NATO forces were nearly completely reliant upon the US military for heavy transport facilties and intelligence gathering. Europe was completely unsuccesful in resolving the Balkan conflicts because the European military potential was not considered a serious threat. Only with US intervention, were these conflicts resolved. Even diplomatically, Washington has had more of an influence on Balkan politics than Brussels.

Steve
I don't think that the States is completely altruistic in this matter, they would not commit themselves to the Balkans ect if it were not in their own interest.
Frankly I am quite upset at your posting which implies we have some second rate military machine here in the UK/Europe. I am also upset at the fact that you speak of American defence yet a number of colleagues of mine nursed casualties injured by US "friendly fire" in the Gulf War, great defence. Of course the country with a greatest number of military personnel is going to have a greater influence. This does not make that country superior in any way in terms of intelligence gathering and so forth, Please do not underestimate UK (and European)capabilities.
Anyway as you say this is really off the topic!

Just an observation from someone who is over 50- we work a lot harder here in the USA than they do in Europe. I was shocked when viewing the work days of my European relatives (two different countries.)We are also a country with many immigrant groups who have over-worked themselves for years to get ahead in a new country. FOR A REASON. You CAN improve your social, economic situation/ class here. Change jobs until you get the PTO time you want. Please, no more federal government entitlement programs. Have you ever tried getting service in their offices and seen what the work ethic is? They make United look swift. Yes, American "work" hours have made lots of garbage but they also have probably saved the
free world a few times.

Angela,

I wasn't trying to make you mad or upset. Moreover, I have tremendous admiration for the British courage and capability that was demonstrated during World War II. My point is about economics, not national character. It seems that a fair number of American allies have been willing to let their defense capabilities deteriorate because they believe that the US will back them up in times of crises.

At the risk of sounding defensive, what selfish motive do you beleive that the US had in becoming involved in the Balkan conflicts? The only one I can vaguely think of is Mr. Clinton trying to distract the American public from one or more of his countless ongoing scandals.

Steve,
Thank You for your message.
I meant that the States (in my opinion) would not get involved for purely selfless reasons, I don't think any country would. There would have to be some advantage also for them, primarily to protect their own interests, also as you say it does unfortunately seem that US involvment sometimes coincides with a Clinton scandal!!
I realise that you didn't mean to get me upset, it is quite a emotive subject though.
Angela

Just to say
I really enjoy the discussions on this site. It is worth the occasional upset!

Back to the original topic: legislation to require businesses to give a certain number of vacation days. Who is going to pay for these days?

Good point. Who IS going to pay for these vacation days?

Note to Elvira - I hope you weren't saying that any country that sings "God Save the Queen", also condones the owning of slaves and denies the vote to anyone who isn't a white male landowner!
(I'm assuming you didn't mean that.)

Amazing how a question on more vacation generates all these responses. Obviously a very emotional topic for many people - I really am amazed.

But... just for a moment. Could we please get back to the origival post? If Congress passes a bill that mandates businesses (i.e. employers)must give a certain number of days as "vacation," WHO is going to pay for these days?

I already have too much government in my life; don't want it in my vacation. The question about who will pay may be the same as always: the middle class.

I have worked flex time for years and it's a huge boost for me. I work four slightly longer days, then finish at 1 p.m. the other day. That afternoon is spent either doing errands, relaxing, bicycling, attending a movie, cooking, etc. I am usually really charged up after an afternoon off!

It certainly appears that Angela and Steve have made a match! Maybe you two should meet, you certainly seem to be like thinkers!

I work for an American company in the UK. They are the best employers I've ever had & work is like one long vacation !

It's pretty simple. If you want more vacation time, TAKE IT! In the 11 years I've been out of college, I've had 9 jobs (never been fired--just trying to find more money!), and have taken unpaid vacation at each. I win because I get more vacation time, my employer wins because I only take the extra vacation when the work allows AND the employer doesn't have to pay me for those days.

Here in the U.S., we make higher salaries than any where else in the world. We also get less vacation time. Why not even things out by taking unpaid leave? And I know a lot of the complainers will just say "My boss/company won't let me." Have you ASKED? I've NEVER been turned down. And I have friends in most fields that have done the same thing, so don't tell me it's not possible for most people.

I worked in the UK for 2 years. I had 23 days vacation time, the week off between Christmas and New Years, an additional 2 days off per month in "flexi" time, and I hated EVERY second I was at that job. The only way I survived was because of the vacation. My husband, who emigrated from the UK to the US, also hate working in the UK, and we both used every second of vacation time available to us. We don't have as much time back here in the U.S., but we also enjoy our work, find it challenging, are promoted based on our abilities, and are compensated well for it. In the UK (I worked in the public sector, he was in the private), we were surrounded by people who were promoted to management simply because they had some sort of random qualification, who had no idea how to treat the staff they managed (the people my husband supervised actually cried when he left (men and women) because he was the only one in the office who ever treated them like human beings), and the directors/owners had no incentive to improve things because "that's the way things have always been done." When my husband told one of his partners that I was unhappy working there, he was told "Give her a baby. It will settle her down." He was also told "American women--you have to keep them happy. Irish women are used to being miserable."

Whew! So you see, I'm happy with my 16 days of vacation, because I've already made it 25 days this year.

Just to clarify what June writes about the superiority of the health systems of other countries, let me inform the ignorant that these countries, most of which are northern European and especially Scandanavian, must pay much heavier taxes than we do in America to pay for their extravagant health systems. In Scandanavia, taxes tend to take up 60% of gross national product while they take up 40% in America. I'd rather have more freedom to spend my own money, thank you. If I might continue my screed, I find your average Scandanavian has the habits of the eternal child, always wanting the government to step in and baby them. Scandanavians are docile and have no drive.