DFW Mustang Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Other half of bitter
Joined
·
7,141 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
My dad has worked for the city of dallas for 30 years......he is planning on retiring in June 2003- just 6-7 more months. He wants to stay that long to save up a little more to buy a new car. He has quite a bit of sick time saved up over those years- which have carried over and he will/supposed to be paid when he retires, it comes out to about 1/2 of his annual salary. Now Laura Miller wants to put a cap on it and won't allow anyone to carry over so many days and only be paid for a max of 15 days of sick time unused. I don't have a big problem with that- but let it go into effect for the new employees, not the ones that already have counted on that money from their sick time and saved it up purposely for that reason. Not fair at all. He is already having to retire earlier than planned since they would cut his salary and pension if he stayed, now this? He might have to retire in a few weeks if he wants to keep his sick pay, which sucks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
893 Posts
Thank Fox 4

They busted a bunch of folks that the city was paying when they werent working, like the retirees, they would have almost a year of sick time saved up and take all the sick time their last year of working, thus leaving the position "un-fillable" by someone who needs work, and costing the tax payers money cause that person was not there, the city was paying them a salary, and paying someone else to do the job they werent there to do.

All had to do with the city raising folks taxes cause they were over budget, and if they would have had a "normal" sick plan, like MOST of corporate america, they would not have been able to carry over almost a year of time off and someone could have had a job filling in where the retiree left off.

My company doesnt allow you to carry over more than 40hrs to the next year.

Use it or Lose it, no offense, but its not free money to pile up till you want to retire and get a fat check, someone needs that job, and the person taking off 6 months and no one getting the job in their place hurts everyone.

P.S. I dont believe it should be retroactive, I feel like you do, it should apply to all NEW employees starting on xxx date. The folks that currently have "earned" that time should be allowed to use it according to policy during that period.
 

·
Worship me
Joined
·
34,345 Posts
I don't think they should be able to change the rules in the middle of the game...sounds like its time for a lawsuit. What if they wanted to do that with vacation? fuck all that.

If they want to clean shi tup down at city all there are tons of other things that need attention....
 

·
Other half of bitter
Joined
·
7,141 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Re: Thank Fox 4

97GTLunatic said:
They busted a bunch of folks that the city was paying when they werent working, like the retirees, they would have almost a year of sick time saved up and take all the sick time their last year of working, thus leaving the position "un-fillable" by someone who needs work, and costing the tax payers money cause that person was not there, the city was paying them a salary, and paying someone else to do the job they werent there to do.

All had to do with the city raising folks taxes cause they were over budget, and if they would have had a "normal" sick plan, like MOST of corporate america, they would not have been able to carry over almost a year of time off and someone could have had a job filling in where the retiree left off.

My company doesnt allow you to carry over more than 40hrs to the next year.

Use it or Lose it, no offense, but its not free money to pile up till you want to retire and get a fat check, someone needs that job, and the person taking off 6 months and no one getting the job in their place hurts everyone.

P.S. I dont believe it should be retroactive, I feel like you do, it should apply to all NEW employees starting on xxx date. The folks that currently have "earned" that time should be allowed to use it according to policy during that period.
I totally agree, it is ridiculous to have allowed them to carry over that much.....they are idiots for allowing that to happen to begin with and should have capped it like most companies do. you are right here. BUT it should not punish those that were just abiding by the policy as it was.....not fair to change the rules in the middle of the game. Change it from here on out- but not retroactive. New employees should abide by the cap and currect employees should to, but don't take away what they have built up, just cap what they earn going into the future. I mean, he would have taken the time off if he had known they were going to take away what they promised him.......My dad has worked like a dog for them for 30 years and now they are treating him like shit. He didn't want to retire this year, he is only 53, but due to the pay cuts, he doesn't have a choice.
 

·
No Cerveza... No Trabajo
Joined
·
21,924 Posts
That sucks. I guess he should call in sick from now until retirement! Same crap happened to my dad and brother regarding vacation.

Neither of them have a full understading what 2/3/4 weeks off a year does for you. So they never did. Dad had 52 weeks vacation. Older brother had 15 weeks of vacation. All carried over over the years.

Both their companies made a similiar directive, use it or lose it before the end of the year.

Both of them said, "see ya' next year!".

First dad negoiated 4 day work weeks until the end of the year + 100% paid in a check at the end of the year.

Then my brother did the same.

Laura Miller is a lunatic. A freakin' newspaper columnist who feels she can now run a city.
 

·
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
Joined
·
10,859 Posts
It's kinda hard to be a supporter for either side on the issue.

One one side, you have a policy that encourages people to come to work EVERYDAY and not call in sick. In the end it becomes a nice benefit. Limiting people to, lets say, 5 sick days a year and 15 MAX saved encourages them to use those days so they won't lose them.

On the other side, sick days are supposed to be used ONLY for time when you are sick or incapacitated. It's not supposed to be a retirement benefit. I believe you can bank your sick time in the federal government but you cannot sell that much of it back (if any) someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that.
 

·
No Cerveza... No Trabajo
Joined
·
21,924 Posts
Sgt Beavis said:
It's kinda hard to be a supporter for either side on the issue.

One one side, you have a policy that encourages people to come to work EVERYDAY and not call in sick. In the end it becomes a nice benefit. Limiting people to, lets say, 5 sick days a year and 15 MAX saved encourages them to use those days so they won't lose them.

On the other side, sick days are supposed to be used ONLY for time when you are sick or incapacitated. It's not supposed to be a retirement benefit. I believe you can bank your sick time in the federal government but you cannot sell that much of it back (if any) someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that.
That's fine and dandy, if that is the policy when you are saving up the time.

If Mr. Smith has 5 sick days a year and he NEVER calls in sick for 20 years, but 10 others that were hired on the same day and call in sick 5 days per year for 20 years, Mr. Smith worked harder (with all things being equal) for 20 years. If the policy said, they carry over and Mr. Smith is excited about the prospect and for 20 years saves his days.... then some lunatic decides with a signature to take it away. Its wrong.
 

·
Christian Woman
Joined
·
5,467 Posts
They definitely need to grandfather in the folks who are counting on it due to previous policies...but I will admit, that policy is pretty ludicris...I think the 40hr cap rolled over per year is fair, infinitely being able to roll them is rediculous if you ask me...
 

·
No Cerveza... No Trabajo
Joined
·
21,924 Posts
TAMUz06 said:
They definitely need to grandfather in the folks who are counting on it due to previous policies...but I will admit, that policy is pretty ludicris...I think the 40hr cap rolled over per year is fair, infinitely being able to roll them is rediculous if you ask me...
I don't think any sick days should be carried over. Hell, the company I work for now doesn't keep track of it. If your sick, stay home (oops, I'm already home!).

Actually, we don't track much vacation either. I take off when I want. But, when stuff needs to get done, they know I'll work it. Of course, we become quite aware of excessive days off, since being a small company, someone needs to pick up the slack (even if they are gone just a day). Bonuses, raises and such are all dependent on your production.

The fun of working for a small company!
 

·
Christian Woman
Joined
·
5,467 Posts
01WhiteCobra said:
The fun of working for a small company!
Exactly - as a company gets bigger there is no way to just be that lax, you have to draw a line somewhere...most now just have PTO time, in hours. I think it's a good concept, the company won't dictate what you use your PTO time for, whether you take a vacation, are sick, etc...it all comes out of the same pool of hours.
 

·
Other half of bitter
Joined
·
7,141 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
TAMUz06 said:
They definitely need to grandfather in the folks who are counting on it due to previous policies...but I will admit, that policy is pretty ludicris...I think the 40hr cap rolled over per year is fair, infinitely being able to roll them is rediculous if you ask me...
It is totally ludricrous.......i guess they didn't think about it or care until their budget tightened......and they started to feel the repercurssions of all the people who are just now 'cashing out' their sick days......what idiots....they should have had a cap on it to begin with.....but yes, they should grandfather the current ones in.
 

·
Merry HoHo
Joined
·
32,791 Posts
i work for the city of denton, and we can only carry, 120 sick and 320 vacation. after that you loose it. there is a pool that you can put your hours in for those who have unforseen leave of absent that they can use. but i like my time off,considiting we do not get a christmas bonus or anything it is a small compisation. but believe that should make it a NEW policy and leave the old employees alone.
 

·
No Cerveza... No Trabajo
Joined
·
21,924 Posts
SNEAKY said:
i work for the city of denton, and we can only carry, 120 sick and 320 vacation. after that you loose it. there is a pool that you can put your hours in for those who have unforseen leave of absent that they can use. but i like my time off,considiting we do not get a christmas bonus or anything it is a small compisation. but believe that should make it a NEW policy and leave the old employees alone.
Damn, thats alot of days to save up! Must be a huge liability on the books.

I do think its cool that they allow you to bank them for those who have some lengthy illness or such.
 

·
Merry HoHo
Joined
·
32,791 Posts
01WhiteCobra said:
Damn, thats alot of days to save up! Must be a huge liability on the books.

I do think its cool that they allow you to bank them for those who have some lengthy illness or such.
its an employs choice. you have to put in to get any out.
 

·
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
Joined
·
10,859 Posts
01WhiteCobra said:
That's fine and dandy, if that is the policy when you are saving up the time.

If Mr. Smith has 5 sick days a year and he NEVER calls in sick for 20 years, but 10 others that were hired on the same day and call in sick 5 days per year for 20 years, Mr. Smith worked harder (with all things being equal) for 20 years. If the policy said, they carry over and Mr. Smith is excited about the prospect and for 20 years saves his days.... then some lunatic decides with a signature to take it away. Its wrong.

Absolutely, you are correct. I was just making a small point about the two sides of the issue. It's total BS to make this thing retroactive. Maybe it's ok if the person has only been there for a couple of years. Maybe it's ok if you freeze how much they've accumulated but don't let them earn anymore. But it's flat out wrong to take it away.

BTW, how many people here think Lora Miller changed her stripes shortly after becoming Dallas Mayor? She seems more and more like Ron Kirk everyday. Da Bitch ain't gonna get re-elected IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
Don't companies have that policy so that if you break your leg or something else major and you are out for 8 weeks you still get a check?? I was under the impression that the reason you can accumulate so much sick time was that if you were out for an extended period thats what you use to get paid. I'm not really sure of laws or the way most places do business, but what happens at a company without the carry over policy if you have to be out for extended periods of time?? Is workman's compensation something that a company has to participate in or is it some state/federal progam???

BTW...I think if your dad accumulated all those hours and that was the policy when he hired in, then by god he should get paid for those hours. Or like someone else mentioned, call in sick for the next 6-8 months.

Fuck Laura Miller!!
 

·
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS!
Joined
·
10,859 Posts
TomThrust said:
Don't companies have that policy so that if you break your leg or something else major and you are out for 8 weeks you still get a check?? I was under the impression that the reason you can accumulate so much sick to be out for extended periods of time?? Is workmtime was that if you were out for an extended period thats what you use to get paid. I'm not really sure of laws or the way most places do business, but what happens at a company without the carry over policy if you have ;an's compensation something that a company has to participate in or is it some state/federal progam???

BTW...I think if your dad accumulated all those hours and that was the policy when he hired in, then by god he should get paid for those hours. Or like someone else mentioned, call in sick for the next 6-8 months.

Fuck Laura Miller!!
Workmans comp is an insurance program. Sometimes it is run by a state, sometimes a private company. Texas' program is state run. It pays you when you are injured "ON THE JOB" so you can recover. However it is limited in the time you can have it and you never collect 100% of your regular pay. Back in Virginia, you could only collect upto 75% of your paycheck with a cap somewhere around 25K per year. Workman's comp is funded by employers who have to pay the state.

BTW, I always recommend that people get short and long term disability or supplimental coverage to protect your income if you are injured on or off the job. It could potentially save you from bankruptcy or losing your house.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,716 Posts
That sucks if the city of Dallas does this to your dad. I really beleive they would grandfather him in.

I am a Federal employee(USPS) we can carry over as much sick leave as we want. But annual leave we can only carry over 440hrs. Management can carry over 560 hrs.

I work with a guy who has over 3,100 hrs of sick leave built up!!

I beleive being under the FERS retirement system(which I am on) you do lose the sick leave if you do not use it, but I think you can apply it towards retirement.

Btw not all federal employees have the same rules when it comes to annual and sick leave carry overs.

Mike89lx,01 Cobra
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top