Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea
-
One thing I would like to do is have 6 weeks summer holiday when my kids are off and go travelling. But my company doesn't really like anyone taking more than 2 weeks off in a row, and we only have 5 weeks in total for the year.
When I was a kid, my dad was a University lecturer, so had 2 months over summer, and we'd travel round Europe for 4 or 5 weeks every year. Time of my life. Although he seemed to find both the cost and his annoying kids fairly stressful at times....
-
I did six weeks around Europe with my kids while at CitiGroup. it was awesome.
-
I think I would rather receive full payment and save/invest those funds myself over the 4+ years. I'm more interested in employers that would allow you to take an entire year off and have your job waiting after the fact. Letting my employer keep that portion of my salary is like overpaying your taxes in the attempt to get a larger refund; you're effectively losing income.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@thwr said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
That's a good program. I've never heard of anyone in the US doing it.
Sad thing: It's specific to the German public sector and a few other sectors with collective agreements (German: Tarifvertrag)
NTG would do it. But it's not the kind of thing that Americans are very interested in. We are so conditioned that even two weeks of vacation is a big deal that taking a year off is mind boggling.
^ this. 3 weeks a year is for junior positions, extra week for every decade you complete is typical.
-
@RamblingBiped said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
I think I would rather receive full payment and save/invest those funds myself over the 4+ years. I'm more interested in employers that would allow you to take an entire year off and have your job waiting after the fact. Letting my employer keep that portion of my salary is like overpaying your taxes in the attempt to get a larger refund; you're effectively losing income.
This is the real problem fr any company. Keeping your job open a year from now. So they have to hire a temp to do your job for a year... That will likely cost them more than just your cost to the company.
-
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@RamblingBiped said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
I think I would rather receive full payment and save/invest those funds myself over the 4+ years. I'm more interested in employers that would allow you to take an entire year off and have your job waiting after the fact. Letting my employer keep that portion of my salary is like overpaying your taxes in the attempt to get a larger refund; you're effectively losing income.
This is the real problem fr any company. Keeping your job open a year from now. So they have to hire a temp to do your job for a year... That will likely cost them more than just your cost to the company.
Most companies need the capacity to have someone do your job when taking normal vacations anyway. If they can cover one, they can cover the other. Typically. It's a rare company that would not just absorb this. The other option, of course, is you saving up yourself and then quitting. That hurts the company far more, in most cases. Unless they were hoping that you would leave anyway.
I think if this is something that you can't absorb, you have other problems or are a super tiny company of just a few people. And even there, only management or key workers would be truly impactful.
-
Not really. There's a huge difference between covering for someone for 2 weeks and covering for someone for 12 months. If a company can easily survive without you for 12 months they should really question why they're employing you at all.
-
@Carnival-Boy said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
Not really. There's a huge difference between covering for someone for 2 weeks and covering for someone for 12 months. If a company can easily survive without you for 12 months they should really question why they're employing you at all.
That's definitely the American mentality. And I agree... except that's not a reason to not keep someone. They employ you, one would think, for your value to the company. I'd take the opposite approach, if you "can't" afford to have someone out for a year, you need to rethink your company's dependencies because you are overly dependent on someone that could quit, get sick or worse any minute. You should always be able to function without anyone in the company. Hard to make that true in all cases, but unless you are an owner or executive, it should be mostly true.
Being able to live without someone isn't the same as benefiting from having them. You don't hire someone only because you can't live without them, you hire them because they help the company. If you fired anyone you "could live without" you'd fire almost everyone.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
because you are overly dependent on someone that could quit, get sick or worse any minute.
Not really. If someone quits here then they get replaced. Similarly, if someone had a year out (which is common with maternity leave), then we hire a temp for a year. The issue is that there is a cost involved in hiring a temp and training them.
Think of it like a server. If our server goes down for a day then we can survive without it relatively easily. If it goes down for a month then we're going to have to get in another server.
-
That's true, but two maternity leave is something you need to be prepared for as a course of business. It's just a cost that companies have a responsibility to bear.
-
Yeah, which is basically what Dash says - a sabbatical costs the company money. But in a lot of cases, they will recover those costs because the employee will return refreshed and motivated and thus more productive.
I'm pretty much exactly mid-career. I've done 23 years, I've got 23 years to go. I could really do with a break. I'm feeling a bit stale. I may just need to change jobs, but a break to consider what kind of new job I want would be awesome.
Sadly, as already mentioned, mortgages, loans and kids get in the way.
-
@Carnival-Boy said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
Yeah, which is basically what Dash says - a sabbatical costs the company money. But in a lot of cases, they will recover those costs because the employee will return refreshed and motivated and thus more productive.
I'm pretty much exactly mid-career. I've done 23 years, I've got 23 years to go. I could really do with a break. I'm feeling a bit stale. I may just need to change jobs, but a break to consider what kind of new job I want would be awesome.
Sadly, as already mentioned, mortgages, loans and kids get in the way.
Two kids, two mortgages.... worked for 26 years... I know how it is.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@RamblingBiped said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
I think I would rather receive full payment and save/invest those funds myself over the 4+ years. I'm more interested in employers that would allow you to take an entire year off and have your job waiting after the fact. Letting my employer keep that portion of my salary is like overpaying your taxes in the attempt to get a larger refund; you're effectively losing income.
This is the real problem fr any company. Keeping your job open a year from now. So they have to hire a temp to do your job for a year... That will likely cost them more than just your cost to the company.
Most companies need the capacity to have someone do your job when taking normal vacations anyway. If they can cover one, they can cover the other. Typically. It's a rare company that would not just absorb this. The other option, of course, is you saving up yourself and then quitting. That hurts the company far more, in most cases. Unless they were hoping that you would leave anyway.
I think if this is something that you can't absorb, you have other problems or are a super tiny company of just a few people. And even there, only management or key workers would be truly impactful.
Of course I can't speak for most companies, only mine own. When I'm on vacation, they put off projects and changes. They even put off minor issues until I return. There is backup available in the form of a consulting company that can send people in to work on pretty much anything that is requested. I suppose my company could in fact survive that way for a whole year, but I'm not sure they'd be very happy about it. I'm guessing that they would call those people in enough to get the costs to be the same as my cost to the company (including all the non salary costs) during that year, if not significantly more.
-
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@RamblingBiped said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
I think I would rather receive full payment and save/invest those funds myself over the 4+ years. I'm more interested in employers that would allow you to take an entire year off and have your job waiting after the fact. Letting my employer keep that portion of my salary is like overpaying your taxes in the attempt to get a larger refund; you're effectively losing income.
This is the real problem fr any company. Keeping your job open a year from now. So they have to hire a temp to do your job for a year... That will likely cost them more than just your cost to the company.
Most companies need the capacity to have someone do your job when taking normal vacations anyway. If they can cover one, they can cover the other. Typically. It's a rare company that would not just absorb this. The other option, of course, is you saving up yourself and then quitting. That hurts the company far more, in most cases. Unless they were hoping that you would leave anyway.
I think if this is something that you can't absorb, you have other problems or are a super tiny company of just a few people. And even there, only management or key workers would be truly impactful.
Of course I can't speak for most companies, only mine own. When I'm on vacation, they put off projects and changes. They even put off minor issues until I return. There is backup available in the form of a consulting company that can send people in to work on pretty much anything that is requested. I suppose my company could in fact survive that way for a whole year, but I'm not sure they'd be very happy about it. I'm guessing that they would call those people in enough to get the costs to be the same as my cost to the company (including all the non salary costs) during that year, if not significantly more.
If they are handling it well and putting off projects, likely the cost would be lower. How much more painful would it be if you burned out and quit or found a different job? Or had a baby and took extended leave? Or a family medical emergency?
If you leaving isn't crippling, then neither is having the temp handle things.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@Carnival-Boy said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
Yeah, which is basically what Dash says - a sabbatical costs the company money. But in a lot of cases, they will recover those costs because the employee will return refreshed and motivated and thus more productive.
I'm pretty much exactly mid-career. I've done 23 years, I've got 23 years to go. I could really do with a break. I'm feeling a bit stale. I may just need to change jobs, but a break to consider what kind of new job I want would be awesome.
Sadly, as already mentioned, mortgages, loans and kids get in the way.
Two kids, two mortgages.... worked for 26 years... I know how it is.
You know how it is... I have to laugh at that - I'm not sure when your income spiked to the 1% or better level, but that just puts you on a different level. And once at that level, the need for a mortgage is completely personal choice, not need - and that can be said for a much lower number than an income level of 1% (meaning your income could be at the 2% or higher level).
-
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@Carnival-Boy said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
Yeah, which is basically what Dash says - a sabbatical costs the company money. But in a lot of cases, they will recover those costs because the employee will return refreshed and motivated and thus more productive.
I'm pretty much exactly mid-career. I've done 23 years, I've got 23 years to go. I could really do with a break. I'm feeling a bit stale. I may just need to change jobs, but a break to consider what kind of new job I want would be awesome.
Sadly, as already mentioned, mortgages, loans and kids get in the way.
Two kids, two mortgages.... worked for 26 years... I know how it is.
You know how it is... I have to laugh at that - I'm not sure when your income spiked to the 1% or better level, but that just puts you on a different level. And once at that level, the need for a mortgage is completely personal choice, not need - and that can be said for a much lower number than an income level of 1% (meaning your income could be at the 2% or higher level).
I was very poor until 2006 with only a brief burst of high income in 2000-2001 when I was managing at OilNavigator and IBM. I worked for peanuts before and after that. Way below industry averages. And I started in 1989. And I had a mortgage after 2003. I definitely know how it is. For several years we had to live on me making $5K a year and my wife pulling in the bulk of our income working the front desk at a hotel overnight.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@scottalanmiller said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
@RamblingBiped said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
I think I would rather receive full payment and save/invest those funds myself over the 4+ years. I'm more interested in employers that would allow you to take an entire year off and have your job waiting after the fact. Letting my employer keep that portion of my salary is like overpaying your taxes in the attempt to get a larger refund; you're effectively losing income.
This is the real problem fr any company. Keeping your job open a year from now. So they have to hire a temp to do your job for a year... That will likely cost them more than just your cost to the company.
Most companies need the capacity to have someone do your job when taking normal vacations anyway. If they can cover one, they can cover the other. Typically. It's a rare company that would not just absorb this. The other option, of course, is you saving up yourself and then quitting. That hurts the company far more, in most cases. Unless they were hoping that you would leave anyway.
I think if this is something that you can't absorb, you have other problems or are a super tiny company of just a few people. And even there, only management or key workers would be truly impactful.
Of course I can't speak for most companies, only mine own. When I'm on vacation, they put off projects and changes. They even put off minor issues until I return. There is backup available in the form of a consulting company that can send people in to work on pretty much anything that is requested. I suppose my company could in fact survive that way for a whole year, but I'm not sure they'd be very happy about it. I'm guessing that they would call those people in enough to get the costs to be the same as my cost to the company (including all the non salary costs) during that year, if not significantly more.
If they are handling it well and putting off projects, likely the cost would be lower. How much more painful would it be if you burned out and quit or found a different job? Or had a baby and took extended leave? Or a family medical emergency?
If you leaving isn't crippling, then neither is having the temp handle things.
I don't consider myself irreplaceable, I'm certainly not. But being gone a whole year? Why do I want to hire in a temp for a year, one I'll have to train, etc (costs money) and they will be at minimum slow at the job for several months while they learn it.
If a company is going to go through that, why not just keep them after they hired them and make you go find another job?
I understand the "they like you, they feel you bring value to the company" idea, I understand what you're saying about maternity leave (but isn't that only 3-4 months in the US max?), but those things only go so far.
I want to love the idea that many full time longer employment type companies (meaning companies that typically have an employee stay with them for 10+ years, so I'm not talking BK or McDs here) have this type of plan - a year long sabbatical - but I'm really trying to see how the company deals with it. I guess I'm not altruistic enough for this situation, I don't expect companies to just take it on the chin.
-
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
I don't consider myself irreplaceable, I'm certainly not. But being gone a whole year? Why do I want to hire in a temp for a year, one I'll have to train, etc (costs money) and they will be at minimum slow at the job for several months while they learn it.
If the issue is that YOU don't want to take a year off, that's a totally different issue than if it is crippling for your employer.
-
@Dashrender said in Is a Mid Career Sabbatical a Good Idea:
If a company is going to go through that, why not just keep them after they hired them and make you go find another job?
If that's a real fear, why haven't they done that already?
But honestly, this is one of the reasons why MSPs carry a lot of advantage over one man shops. They can have people take vacations, go on sabbatical, move up the ladder, learn new things and so forth without requiring that everything get shaken up and starting over.
-
Speaking of vacations - I wonder how most people do vacations?
A vacation for me is getting the heck out of dodge and, as the saying goes, sucking the marrow out of life. For example, my up coming trip to Europe will be fly to the UK, visit 3-4 cities outside of London, driving an average of 4 hrs a day (mostly middle, southern UK) then 4 days in London for a convention (most of which will be spent on my feet for 18-24 hours a day), then to Dublin to rent a car to drive to the west coast (4+ hours) spend one night there, then drive back, fly to Amsterdam, visit the sites for 3 days (this will be the relaxing part), then fly to Berlin, another 2 days seeing sites, Fly/train to Hamburg, 2 days site seeing, then home.
This will not be a very relaxing trip, so when I return to work, I won't be revitalized as they say.
So in a case like this, having a whole year to do that trip instead, that would be awesome, and likely I would return revitalized because I was able to slow down and do more of a Scott type trip.
