use PTO first

mushroomHR

Management wants to change the way our employees currently use their PTO. Under the current policy employees do not have to use vacation time first before requesting time off with no pay. They do however have to use their personal days first before requesting time off with no pay.

The proposed revision to the policy is that employees will have to use all personal and vacation time (in full-day increments) first for all time off unless they are on STD or FML for their own serious health condition.

I see an administration problem with this. What if someone is off work for a few days and we make them use their PTO and pay them for it. The few days turn into a couple of weeks and the employee goes on STD and decides they don't want to use their PTO for the time away. We've already paid them for it--how can we take it back? Also, if someone is off work and given FML certification forms and we don't charge them PTO. The employee then doesn't return the certification from the doctor. They should have been charged PTO in this case but we didn't because we were waiting for the forms to be returned.

Perhaps I'm making too much of this but I think it will get to be an administrative nightmare on my part. I feel that it should be all or nothing; either use PTO for every instance or don't force the employee to use PTO before taking time off with no pay. I suggested they make employees use PTO first in all instances but allow them to keep five days in reserve if the employee uses STD. That was vetoed. Your opinions on this would be appreciated. Thanks.

LivindonSouth

I've not found this to be problematic. Seems your question initially revolved around people 'requesting time off with no pay', but then it morphed into an absence that later becomes FMLA or Short Term Disability. Then you mention employees who 'don't want to use their PTO'. If it becomes a policy, that removes the possibility you'll have 'people who don't want to use their PTO' since it won't be an option. I think you're seeing booger-bears around a corner where there are none. Simply stated, the policy should say "Employees must exhaust all available leave banks prior to an unpaid leave of absence being granted by the company".




Disclaimer: This message is not intended to offend or attack. It is posted as personal opinion. If you find yourself offended or uncomfortable, email me and let me know why.

ray a

I agree with Don, that is how we do it. For FML time off they must use only what is accrued after that they can take time off without pay. Same with disability and WC - use accrued time then the insurance kicks in after the waiting period. Really not that big of a problem.

Rockie

This is the way we handle this as well. Otherwise, if you allow people to take LWOP instead of using PTO time, they tend to build up huge leave banks and either want to take vacation time after being on a long leave of absence or else you have to pay out a large PTO sum when they terminate.

mushroomHR

I agree with you all but management wants to split it up and I think that will be a problem trying to determine when the employee must use PTO and when they don't have to. Thanks for your input.

MS HR

we recently changed and no problems were encountered.

in fact, most liked it as it showed consistency throughout the work force and no favoritism.

Judith

You may want to get management to see that employees are hired to actually come to work and do a job and that 1)time off is a "benefit" (aka privilege) and 2) it does cost them money even if it is not cash. I have this issue here and have tried to get them to understand the cost of absenteeism -- it is not an easy concept for some to get --- I think an employee is either at work, on PTO(vacation or sick), approved leave (various types required), or on leave without pay. I do not think lwop should be added days to be off during the year. Good luck and if you suceed let us know so we can attempt some of your tactics.