|
Leperflesh posted:we now have unlimited vacation days at my job, which means nobody takes as much as they used to when we accumulated three weeks a year They also don't have to pay out any unused days when you leave.
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 02:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
Muir posted:They also don't have to pay out any unused days when you leave. That's not a legal requirement. Wasn't there a recent court decision that determined PTO was not salary and could just be taken away?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 03:30
|
|
|
Law on PTO payouts differs a ton state-to-state. Some states require it, some don't, and a lot in between.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 04:17
|
|
|
Salami Surgeon posted:That's not a legal requirement. Wasn't there a recent court decision that determined PTO was not salary and could just be taken away? Unlimited also means you have zero. Legality doesn't matter when their is nothing accrued to pay out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 05:08
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:we now have unlimited vacation days at my job, which means nobody takes as much as they used to when we accumulated three weeks a year When a past employer did that, it was my personal policy to pretend it didn't happen and take exactly as many days as before the switch. Think I was the only one though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 08:27
|
|
|
Yeah but then you might be taking more than a co-worker, and get passed up for a promotion! That's not true for me personally, my immediate manager is someone I trust a great deal and they actually would like me to go into management but I keep saying no. But more broadly and for many other companies, putting the onus on the employee to decide for themself how much vacation to take while that employee is working in any sort of competitive environment leads clearly and directly to people not taking vacation. Which is, of course, exactly the reason why companies are adopting this policy, along with getting the liability of accumulated vacation time off their books. At my company they had the gall to pitch this policy change as if it was a great benefit to us employees made out of the goodness of the c-suite's hearts, though. Pssh. Also the last two years instead of getting a raise large enough to account for inflation, I got restricted stock grants. Which, taken at the value they'll be at when I get them, do make up for the loss for me: but, they vest, so it's another incentive to stay on board for 4 more years, and of course they don't incur payroll taxes (I do have to pay income taxes on them when I sell them) so they're cheaper for the company than just giving out a raise. Companies keep finding creative ways to save money that they can pitch as magnanimous employee benefits.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 19:15
|
|
|
runawayturtles posted:When a past employer did that, it was my personal policy to pretend it didn't happen and take exactly as many days as before the switch. Think I was the only one though. I think every single bit of research about unlimited PTO has shown that people take less time off than when they were given a specific amount
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 19:28
|
|
|
When we switched to "flexible time off" I told my team to plan in advance to take at least as much time off as they were given before the switch, to view it as use-it-or-lose it now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 19:56
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2023/11/09/ibm-401-k-match-change-retirement-account/71506331007/ For example
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 20:02
|
|
|
Company-sponsored GICs that underperform the market and likely have next to no real protections beyond the company's credit? I guess people looked back at the halcyon days of pension raiding somehow
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 20:27
|
|
|
Had an employee suggest unlimited pto, in a tone like they were pulling off a score  daslog posted:https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2023/11/09/ibm-401-k-match-change-retirement-account/71506331007/ 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
If I ever got “unlimited” PTO I would just ask if it’s okay to just work 6 hours a day instead of 8, for the entire year. If it’s not ok then I guess it’s not really unlimited is it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
Yeah it's not really unlimited because if you just stop doing your job they're going to fire you. You still have to meet your performance goals, if you don't you'll get bad performance reviews and when it's time to lay someone off they'll fire the lowest performer. It's amazing that I still meet all my performance goals despite shitposting on SA all day. I guess posting posts is part of my unlimited time off, if you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 20:42
|
|
|
In a perfect world, management would stand by their lie and say that if you stay on accrued PTO you get a pay raise-- after all, management is being generous by offering unlimited PTO.Leperflesh posted:Yeah it's not really unlimited because if you just stop doing your job they're going to fire you. You still have to meet your performance goals, if you don't you'll get bad performance reviews and when it's time to lay someone off they'll fire the lowest performer. I think the bigger problem is that people feel bad about asking for any time off, and management now gets to look at PTO taken as a metric to hold down your advancement. It's not unlimited by any means, it's newly commodified PTO. You also don't get to cash in unused PTO when you leave.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
yeah when they switched over I was carrying the max, I think it was something like 120 accrued hours, and the policy was that from now on when you take vacation you use your accrued time until it's gone, and then go on unlimited; and you don't accrue any more. I refused to log any vacation time after that, I scheduled time with my team and on our shared calendar but I never actually logged that I was using up the accrued time. It doesn't show on my paycheck system thing any more so at some point they tacitly admitted the lie and stole it. On the other hand, I have like 30k of stock grants now. I could leave, and go work somewhere else, but I get to work from home full time, make shitposts all day, and I have a good medical plan and 6% match on the 401k. I'm fine. But man. The cheapness oozing from the c-suite of my fortune-500 multibillion dollar company is palpable sometimes. I wonder how many more mansions the CEO has this year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 20:50
|
|
|
Edit: nm trying to be less negative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 21:29
|
|
|
Speaking of being Negative, if I don't see some kind of gain on my bond funds if the Fed reduces rates next year I will be an unhappy camper.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 21:33
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:Yeah it's not really unlimited because if you just stop doing your job they're going to fire you. You still have to meet your performance goals, if you don't you'll get bad performance reviews and when it's time to lay someone off they'll fire the lowest performer. I’m pretty sure I could get the same amount of work done, if not even more, if I knew I could just show up at 7am and leave 6 hours later. I know I definitely do not do 8 full hours of work in a day. Nobody does. E: wasn’t being entirely serious though. I’m aware of that one trick with unlimited PTO that companies do. I mean it would still be worth asking if unlimited PTO means I can work 30-32 hour weeks as long as I got my poo poo done though of I ever got a job offer I wasn’t too particular excited about. Boris Galerkin fucked around with this message at 23:11 on Dec 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 23:00
|
|
|
There are jobs where they do: like on manufacturing lines, or in farming, or similar. But us privileged desk jockeys absolutely do not. Nobody who has access to the Internet while working actually works full time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 23:11
|
|
|
daslog posted:https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2023/11/09/ibm-401-k-match-change-retirement-account/71506331007/ Isn't this just a now old-school cash balance DB plan? Looks like their old DB plan way overfunded. is the thought behind it that they are able to spend that surplus on a new DB plan that they couldn't on their 401k?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2023 23:53
|
|
|
Can anyone point me to a good vanguard etf that has great long-term returns in a growth market that isn’t fully in tech? I imagine my 401k is already leveraged a lot in that direction, and I have a good amount of money in a non-retirement account where I’m holding decent amounts of nvda, intc, Apple etc. VONG looked good till I looked at the portfolio breakdown . . . I think my largest leveraged sectors ATM based on assets are housing, tech, and maybe energy?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
Ubiquitus posted:Can anyone point me to a good vanguard etf that has great long-term returns in a growth market that isn’t fully in tech? I imagine my 401k is already leveraged a lot in that direction, and I have a good amount of money in a non-retirement account where I’m holding decent amounts of nvda, intc, Apple etc. "growth" is an academic term for factor-weighting of funds or portfolios, did you want a growth factor ETF that is also underweight tech and consumer discretionary? that may be hard to find or did you just want something s&p 500-ish but underweight tech or not containing tech, to make your overall cross-account holdings look more like the s&p?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 00:33
|
|
|
esquilax posted:Isn't this just a now old-school cash balance DB plan? Pretty much yes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 00:43
|
|
|
I'm recently divorced, and I'm about to receive a lump sum settlement. It's nothing high-roller; about one year's salary. I'm going to need to draw against it for living expenses, though, and I need to stretch it until at least retirement (another twenty plus years). I'll also be receiving a monthly child support allocation, but that will end in a few years. I will need access to the funds regularly, but no more than monthly (when the bills come due). I'm looking for a high yield savings instrument that doesn't penalize for occasional withdrawals (fewer than once a month). I don't expect to need to pull money out in a hurry, so I don't think I need an ATM card. I'm not sure how much I'll be depositing regularly; that depends on the liquidity. If I can't get money out easily, I'll need to do the child support deposits into my basic checking account, but if I can get to it when I need it, it can go into savings. I want to link to my external checking account and do everything via ACH. My Credit Union has terrible rates, but they're a local brick-and-mortar and that's useful to me. It looks like everything suggested by Motley Fool in the 4.75% to 5.1% ranges are about the same. I'm getting the sense that I'm overthinking it, maybe. What's the best way to make a pot of money grow enough to stretch, while still being easily accessible?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 00:58
|
|
|
Hungry Squirrel posted:I'm recently divorced, and I'm about to receive a lump sum settlement. It's nothing high-roller; about one year's salary. I'm going to need to draw against it for living expenses, though, and I need to stretch it until at least retirement (another twenty plus years). I'm not following the "1 year of salary needs to last me 20 years" bit. But any good HYSA bank is probably fine. Ally or CIT are two I hear often from reasonable sources.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 01:06
|
|
|
Ubiquitus posted:Can anyone point me to a good vanguard etf that has great long-term returns in a growth market that isn’t fully in tech? I imagine my 401k is already leveraged a lot in that direction, and I have a good amount of money in a non-retirement account where I’m holding decent amounts of nvda, intc, Apple etc. Consider direct indexing, perhaps?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 01:07
|
|
|
daslog posted:Speaking of being Negative, if I don't see some kind of gain on my bond funds if the Fed reduces rates next year I will be an unhappy camper. There is no realistic scenario that rates go down and prices don't go up. It's just math. BND is up for the past month, and has positive total returns YTD as well. I think a lot of people don't really understand how bond funds work and/or they aren't the right investment option for them. Certainly I could make a case for individual bonds instead of funds, or short duration instead of longer (but, no one wanted short duration when the Fed funds rate was near zero, myself included). Personally, I'm happy with my bond funds. Prices are down a little bit, but yields are close to the highest they've been in the past decade. The drop in price also let me realize a bit of loss to reduce this years taxes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
CubicalSucrose posted:I'm not following the "1 year of salary needs to last me 20 years" bit. Yeah, I'm not great at articulating. The lump sum was based on assorted mathematical gymnastics to determine how much money I need to live off of, after accounting for my actual salary. So, it's about 60k, but it's meant to be a source of supplemental income until I can access my pension (and possibly after, since my pension isn't amazing). I'll absolutely need to use the funds, but I'm going to try really hard to use as little as possible, as slowly as possible, and if I can grow the pot, it will make my future a lot easier. Edit for clarity: the calculation was based on supplemental income sufficient to cover until my kid turns 18. But, I'm not going to stop needing food and a mortgage until well after that. So, I'm getting what I need to cover six years of bills, but I'm really needing to use it for a lot longer. I don't want to get into the budgeting that goes along with all this; I just need to make the cash I have work as hard as possible. Hungry Squirrel fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Dec 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 01:15
|
|
|
Dunno if it is worth trying to do a brokerage account, and put some of the money in longer term investments and some in shorter term. It's easy enough to top up your checking account from a brokerage account. But maybe that's too much for someone who's not even had an investment account before, and is entering a stressful financial period in their life. Hope it goes as well as it can
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 01:19
|
|
|
FYI as of 2020ish (geez, what world changing event happened I wonder) the Fed no longer limits free withdrawals from HYSAs. Different banks have different policies on this. It looks like Ally has increased withdrawals from 6 to 10 a month, removed the fees incurred going over that, but their fine print says they will close accounts that regularly withdraw too frequently. SoFi on the other hand does not care and encourages you to put 100% of your balance into the HYSA and turn on the automatic overdraft thing which automatically transfers increments of $100 into the checking account at time of debit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 01:29
|
|
|
drk posted:There is no realistic scenario that rates go down and prices don't go up. It's just math. BND is up for the past month, and has positive total returns YTD as well. I understand the inverse relationship, I just hate seeing that lifetime negative percentage on the index bond fund I've been purchasing for 15 years in my 401k. Edit: it's now a lifetime return of 0.7% 
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 01:42
|
|
|
daslog posted:I understand the inverse relationship, I just hate seeing that lifetime negative percentage on the index bond fund I've been purchasing for 15 years in my 401k. You've paid a temporary cost (on paper) to get higher distributions in the future. Higher coupons are unambiguously better *if* you have the right duration. I get not liking to see negative numbers on your "safe" asset, but long term investments can really only be evaluated in the long term. If your bond fund has 5 years of duration, the appropriate timeframe to judge its returns is 5 years (or so, funds're complicated). I think what a lot of people want out of bond funds is some non zero return with zero chance of losing value. That investment is available, people just don't like what it looks like when rates are low.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 02:06
|
|
|
pmchem posted:"growth" is an academic term for factor-weighting of funds or portfolios, did you want a growth factor ETF that is also underweight tech and consumer discretionary? that may be hard to find I think I’m looking for the former, and I can definitely understand why that would be hard to find in today’s economy . . . That said, I’m not looking to have my holdings be more s&p like, I just think I’m over leveraged in tech and I’m trying to fix that while still having good/aggressive returns. If I could find something S&P-like with good returns I would certainly consider it
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 05:30
|
|
|
CubicalSucrose posted:Consider direct indexing, perhaps? Interesting, I wasn’t aware this was an option, thanks. Have you used a direct index? Seems like through Vanguard at least they only offer it as a service to money managers? Am I reading that incorrectly?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 05:38
|
|
|
Ubiquitus posted:I think I’m looking for the former, and I can definitely understand why that would be hard to find in today’s economy . . . The nice thing about a market weight portfolio is it doesnt matter if growth or value performs better in any given year - you own both. If you want to tilt away from megacap tech, thats understandable. If I was starting from scratch today, I would certainly look at AVUS as a core holding (or VTI+AVLV), with the understanding that a tilt is going to underperform the market some years, maybe most years. Definitely dont expect "good/aggressive returns" in the short term. Ubiquitus posted:Interesting, I wasn’t aware this was an option, thanks. Have you used a direct index? Seems like through Vanguard at least they only offer it as a service to money managers? Am I reading that incorrectly? Direct indexing is a tax nightmare in a taxable account, and probably a bad idea in a tax advantaged account too. If you want to factor tilt and understand it, go for it. Direct indexing to get "total market minus those companies i dont like" is probably not a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 05:50
|
|
|
drk posted:Direct indexing is a tax nightmare in a taxable account, and probably a bad idea in a tax advantaged account too. If you want to factor tilt and understand it, go for it. Direct indexing to get "total market minus those companies i dont like" is probably not a good idea. This makes me think of people who advocate for "total index funds that don't contain fossil fuel companies". Do they think that this is going to somehow to "hurt" the oil companies or whatever? Its like they don't realize that when you buy stock its not coming from the company, but from some other random investor. It also strikes me as a good way to handicap your returns long term.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 22:50
|
|
|
Ubiquitus posted:Interesting, I wasn’t aware this was an option, thanks. Have you used a direct index? Seems like through Vanguard at least they only offer it as a service to money managers? Am I reading that incorrectly? I've never done it because it seems really laborious and I've got total market or S&P500 options at low costs available in all of my accounts. One useful exercise would probably be to figure out what your ideal portfolio looks like, starting from scratch. In terms of sectors or tilts or whatever. And then once you have a target allocation, post your current funds and account types, and the thread can provide a good series of transactions and funds to get you to where you want to be. "I think I'm overweight tech" is really ambiguous and sets off some yellow flag alarm bells when I hear it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
Antillie posted:This makes me think of people who advocate for "total index funds that don't contain fossil fuel companies". Do they think that this is going to somehow to "hurt" the oil companies or whatever? Its like they don't realize that when you buy stock its not coming from the company, but from some other random investor. It also strikes me as a good way to handicap your returns long term. I mean, it does "hurt" them so far as the demand for their stock is lower, and as a result, that other random investor will have to sell it to someone else, presumably for less money. As effective as my dad's continued boycott of Exxon after the Valdez.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2023 00:12
|
|
|
Antillie posted:This makes me think of people who advocate for "total index funds that don't contain fossil fuel companies". Do they think that this is going to somehow to "hurt" the oil companies or whatever? Its like they don't realize that when you buy stock its not coming from the company, but from some other random investor. It also strikes me as a good way to handicap your returns long term. Their stock sees reduced demand which drops the price and the value of the stock, but that'll be a drop in the bucket I'm sure. The only thing that would actually affect the fossil fuel company would be regulation or Very Angry Rich People, really. That being said, you can probably sleep better knowing your retirement isn't in the hands of fossil fuel companies, even if your overall portfolio performance is maybe slightly lower or whatever. That being said, it might be a bigger net positive if you take the dividends/returns from that stock and invest in their competitors, or charity or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2023 00:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 19:55 |
|
|
Residency Evil posted:I mean, it does "hurt" them so far as the demand for their stock is lower, and as a result, that other random investor will have to sell it to someone else, presumably for less money.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2023 00:48
|
|
