How much is vacation worth to you?

Great post. I think one's response all depends on what is most pressing in life. I can't speak for anyone else, but like you, I'd immediately go for extra vacation time over an increase in salary. The only challenge, however, is actually being able to take that time off. I worked for a few years before going back to school for my PhD. Even though I had three weeks of vacation time a year, I never actually got a chance to take it because I was so busy at work and my manager wouldn't always approve of my requests because I was in the middle of projects. I know several other people who are in similar situations. Now, once I graduate, I'm going to focus more on protecting my time versus a higher salary. As you point out, time is the most precious resource.

On the other hand, I can see how some people might opt for the higher salary. If you've just bought a new house and have a staggering amount of debt, a person might decide the extra $$ is worth it. A friend of mine stayed on at her job as a project manager for about 8 years because she just couldn't let go of the money. Then, once she paid off most of her mortgage, she took a job as a HR manager at a new company. The company wasn't able to pay her a high salary, but instead offered her 8 weeks of vacation to start. She took a 40-50% pay cut, but had an extra 4 weeks off a year. I'd say that's not a bad deal. But, she only took the offer because she said her financial situation wasn't so pressing.

I'm with you Ryan, always opt for the extra vacation. A pay raise, while nice, comes out to much less than expected after taxes, etc. Bottom line you can't really put a price on paid time off. The more the better!

Just finishing Tim Ferriss book 'The four hour work week', which speaks to this topic in detail. It's a great read, I wish I had read it 10 years ago.

Hans – That sounds like a great deal to me. Assuming, of course, that you financial situation is pretty good. Also, great point about not being able to take the time off even if you have it. I'm sure that's a huge issue for everyone. I think the only way to get around that is to not completely check out on vacation. Stay on top of your emails, maybe work one or two mornings from home, this will help with being able to find the time.

Scott – The Four Hour Work Week was my favorite book of the year. Everyone should read it.

-Ryan

Interesting topic, I agree and would love more time off myself.

A coworker of mine recently "negotiated" an extra week of vacation in lieu of his annual raise. This, in my opinion was a mistake.

Using your $50,000 example and knowing that our company typically awards 3.5 – 5% annual raises, this negotiation cost him $1750 – $2500 or two weeks of pay. It's no doubt why the company immediately agreed.

I think the best approach is to know if it's possible, how much vacation time is "right" for you and negotiate it at the time of hire or in future reviews after your value to the company has been establised.

I agree completely with the sentiment. My only nitpicky spot is that normally the extra vacation wouldn't come with a 1000 dollar drop. Judging from what I've seen the drops normally come in the 2500 to 5000 dollar range at the level of salary you're talking. At those amounts the time value of money factors into the equation a lot more and in the early years of my career I'd probably be pretty hardpressed to not take the money. Of course stuff like this is most of the reason I choose to work for myself…

As Brad mentioned, companies understand the math behind salaries and vacations and I doubt we'd ever get that unfair advantage.

hey guys, I agree, a company is probably not going to give us that unfair advantage. But even if they gave you a week of vacation and subtracted 2 weeks of pay, in this scenario you're only losing out on about $50 each paycheck.

This does make the decision a little more difficult, but my time is still worth more!

Has anyone ever tried to negotiate this at an entry level position? I'm curious to hear what kind of responses they received.

Interesting article and great comments. Two thoughts immediately occur to me: one, management must always make this a choice (vacation vs. salary increase), rather deciding that vacation increases should be a one-size-fits-all corporate policy come review time. Somehow I think folks would be less enthused about it if vacation time was the only choice; it smacks of the "stock options" increases that bit us so firmly in the behinds during the 1990s: only the company benefitted, never the employee.

Second, I've often wondered about how GenY is going to leverage their work/life balance needs (implying more time off, per this article) with their entrepreneurial bent (implying 12-hour-plus days, per most other articles). It doesn't help to negotiate for additional vacation time if you end up leaving it on the table year after year. I'll be keeping an eye on this issue.

Ryan,

I take the opposite position because I think your math is making some assumptions. For example that extra pay could be the money you put into your 401k to max it out this year. With an employer match that 2000 dollars or more that you're giving up turns into 4000 dollars or more (not to mention what happens due to the beauty of compound interest).

Now as for time being worth more, I'll be frank, if you're working as an employee and you're getting paid on anything less than 100% commission, you're time is always going to be worth more than what you get paid for it. The only way to get full value for your time is to do something where your output is directly quantifiable, like working for yourself. Otherwise there are too many variables within the corporate structure that make it impossible for a person to ever get paid the full amount their time is worth. Though one could possibly argue that the employment market is efficient and that their time is only worth the money the choose to accept for it. Of course, thats another tangent altogether.

In general though I think you're leaving a few variables out when you're making the calculations of how much this time off is actually worth.

I would take the higher salary, because I rarely use all my vacation days every year anyway.

My firm (and I'm sure many others do) actually let you buy an extra week of vacation, so, in essence, yeah, I've tried it.

I would take the days off in a heartbeat. Trying to make vacations work between my family, my newly started business, and music festivals is not very easy on 80 hours of paid time off. Getting the extra week will allow for more 3-4 day weekends which could make all the difference in the world.

Yeah, assuming you make $50,000 a year. Try posing that question to someone who makes $25,000 (a little more realistic for the majority of America's cities for entry-level), lives paycheck-to-paycheck and couldn't afford the airfares to even leave town for a vacation. I'll take the $50 per month and put it towards my cell phone bill…

I'm 23 and have a full 20 days of vacation. I did not need to negotiate this, it is actually standard in my department. The strange thing is that I went the first 2 months of my job under the impression (given by HR) that I had only 2 weeks. So I took the job with that understanding. When I learned I had 4 week, I was ecstatic.

I wouldn't trade it for the world. We all know how fast vacation days can go, and this year I was able to take two full week-long vacations, and that is more valuable than any increase in pay. If I leave and move to a new position, losing out on those days is going to be my main concern, not pay. I also have the option to buy vacation, at a 1:1 ratio of my pay, so essentially just additional unpaid vacation. This needs additional approval, but because I'm looking at taking 4 full weeks off in a row to summit a few mountains over the next couple years, it means I don't have to quit my job every spring in order to have a month off before I start in a new role. That's a lot more valuable than pay.

I agree, to me time is most valuable. Having enough vacation time to see other places or visit friends/family but also being able to take a day for myself when I need it is important to me. Though as Holly states, that $50 a month does add up more if you're making significantly less than $50K a year. But even so, i think my time and freedom to use it elsewhere occasionally is worth more to me than that extra cash every paycheck.

I don't think employers realize how hard it is to fit in everyday things sometimes like doctor appointments and car tune ups. Even just the flexibility to run to a doctors appointment for a couple of hours and not requiring you to take a full 1/2 day of vacation is SO significant. An employer that helps a person live their life outside of work I think is going to reap the benefits of happier employees. Knowing that I don't have to use all my vacation time on freakin' doctor appointments and errands is such a stress relief… And I can worry about other things – like how to better my job. Everyone wins, I think.

I have to echo Brian's comments above… this post doesn't take into consideration the employer's perspective of the issue. A straight time-for-pay trade is a distortion of the real calculation — at least for any company with a normal business model. Revenues per employee had better exceed expenses per employee!

If I extend the example it will be clearer. Suppose you're a consultant making 52k a year. You want to 'buy' a week off for a grand. Simple right?

Except that the company charges you out at $1000 a day. (a not unreasonable rate in the consulting industry). So really for that extra week you just cost the company $5k. How about we start the discussion at $6k off your number instead. [the example is the same even if you aren't billed out -- whatever you're doing is worth more than whatever you're getting paid for doing it, other wise there's no rational reason for the company to employ you]

And what if bonuses are calculated based on base salary? And what if pay raises are too? This is costing you a lot more than you think it is. And as a manager, who am I inclined to favor when it comes around to awarding bonuses and raises — or promotions — the guy who wants more time off and wants to work less? I don't think so.

Unless you are a star performer at the top of the curve, you are hurting your pocketbook and career by asking for this.

In an entrepreneurial/startup situation it is even more exaggerated.

sorry, Brad's comments above. I'm a goof.

The question might not be "should you" but rather "can you." Don't get me wrong, more vacation time would be great, but most of my colleagues (myself included) have a difficult time taking even 15 days of vacation in a given year in addition to days missed around official holidays.

Early in your career, it's tough to be out because you're trying to get up to speed, put your stamp on the job, and deliver results. As you progress into leadership roles, it's also tough because you're a key decision maker who is directly responsible for managing a project, staff, etc.

Although 20-25 days of vacation sounds great, ask yourself if you think you'll be able to take all of that time off while still being a peak performer before you broach the subject with a potential employer.

Although 20-25 days of vacation sounds great, ask yourself if you think you'll be able to take all of that time off while still being a peak performer before you broach the subject with a potential employer.
@ Shawn – I agree completely, not everyone is able to take that time off. But I don't think it's that hard to plan around. I'm a huge fan of real vacations. Not "I'm on vacation but logging in and doing work for 4 hours a day" vacations. I used about half my days this year for long weekends, weddings, graduations, those sorts of things, but I also took two week long vacations. One I was at the top of a mountain, where I wouldn't have even taken a call. I guess the understanding is that it took the entire week before that to transition smoothly my portfolio over to my backup, and even then most of my colleagues knew I'd be out.
A lot of people in my dept carry over days (which they lose) because they say it's too much work to be out, catch up, etc. But I think it's possible, especially if you have a backup you know will go the distance for you to have a successful and more or less seamless transition in the vast majority of roles.

I was just having this conversation my mentor on Friday. I would rather make $1000 less and have 4 more days of paid vacation. I think its a win-win situation because the company saves $200 on what they are paying me and I get more relaxation time – which is well worth it to me. Often I have to choose between travel to visit family or relax at home. Additional vacation time would allow me to have a little more of both without the guilt of choosing one over the other.

Interesting posts,

I have just been offered a position that would equate to £750 pa increase, with an extra 12 working days off compared to present position. No brainer some will say!

Present company are about to announce pay deal for this year which will probably be 4.5%, and at my present level allows flexi-. time -overtime, so far this year I have amassed six days flexi lieu and converted ten days to overtime payments. How do you balance out all of that.

The new position is supposedly only 37hrs a week yet the interviewer stated quite publicly that he expects to see a commitment level of 50hrs plus a week, with no overtime, (norm for public sector in UK)