No vacation for the American worker

There's an article in the New York Times about how Americans are taking less vacation time than ever before.

The Conference Board, a private research group, found that at the start of the summer, 40 percent of consumers had no plans to take a vacation over the next six months — the lowest percentage recorded by the group in 28 years.

If Americans are better off today than they were in the past, how come vacation time is decreasing? In an increasingly wealthy society there ought to be more time for leisure and not less.

Probably one of the reasons why happiness has decreased since the 1970s is because Americans have to work more than ever before.

I previously proposed that Americans should have six weeks of vacation. I think that if a political party picked up on the idea, it could attract a lot of votes. Why don’t the Democrats, who claim to be for the working man and woman, get behind the idea of a shorter workyear? Probably because they are too busy trying to figure out how to shortchange the worker by opening the borders to more cheap labor immigrants.

Comments

[Dennis Mangan]

Just because people aren't taking vacations doesn't mean that they aren't earning them. Lots of companies will cash out untaken vacation time. Also, if people are making more money, and some of the vacation is unpaid, as it would be for example with the self-employed, then the marginal cost of vacations has risen and hence fewer people take them.

And do you really want the government to specify the amount of vacation time? They do that in places like France, and that kind of heavy-handed regulation is partly responsible for their low economic growth.

[Half Sigma]

Dennis: "And do you really want the government to specify the amount of vacation time? They do that in places like France, and that kind of heavy-handed regulation is partly responsible for their low economic growth."

What's the purpose of "growth" anyway? As long as the U.S. is the most powerful country in the world, we can do with a little less growth and a little more enjoyment of life.

[Jody]

I'm just not a big fan of making decisions for other people which mandating 6 weeks of vacation amounts to. Just a wee bit too technocratic/paternalistic for my tastes.

[superdestroyer]

HS,

There are may reasons for not taking a "vacation."

First, many people probably do not equate going to the shore, mountains, amusement park for the day or weekend as vacation. Thus, they take days off without taking a "vacation."

Second, with two income families, it is much harder to arrangement time off at the same time for the same period of time.

Third, many companies (including my own) combine vacation and sick time. Thus, people do not take vacations because they are trying to hold on to their days off in case they get sick. Also, more people use their vacation days for things lke medical appointments, car care, school holidays, etc. Think of how many government employees you worked with how took two weeks at Christmas without really going on vacation.

Fourth, there is nobody to do the work while you are gone. Maybe in the industrial age, people were substituted for each other, but in the information age, the inbox, e-mail box and the voice message just build up while you are gone. More organizations run one person deep at each position.

And last, maybe the current culture in the US does not lend itself to people wanting to travel to other places. Places are crowded and noisy, many places have the same feel, it is expensive, and to many people, there is nothing they would want to do on vacation. To use an idea from Steve Sailer, maybe diversity killed the idea of a vacation.

[Dan Morgan]

"Why don’t the Democrats, who claim to be for the working man and woman, get behind the idea of a shorter workyear?"

If Democrats did this, the Republicans would likely nail them by saying, "look, they don't even want people to work now". So Republicans might have a better shot by saying, "look, we know how hard you work and you deserve more time off." What would the Democrats say in response?

***

"Probably because they are too busy trying to figure out how to shortchange the worker by opening the borders to more cheap labor immigrants."

I agree.

[Kirk]

I bought a new vehicle in 2001, but have never driven it past Orlando (which is only maybe three hours away).

I haven't been on a plane in ten years.

I get three weeks of vacation every year, but I don't have any place to go. So, I take a week off here or there, catch up on movies and t.v., and maybe participate in some hobbies (drinking).

I just don't see any reason to travel long distances. Unless one has tons of cash to burn, it's kind of a waste of money.

[SFG]

Jody: the reason it has to be mandated is that otherwise people will try to get ahead by taking less vacation, and soon nobody will be able to take any (as happens now).

[TJIC]

If Americans are better off today than they were in the past, how come vacation time is decreasing?

Who said vacation is decreasing? You quote something saying that people will not take vacations over the summer.

People negotiate how much vacation they get. If people are choosing to trade their labor for more salary instead of more vacation, that reflects, to some degree, their relative desire for those two things. With income taxes relatively low (compared to Europe), salary is often a win. It's when taxes on income get quite large that vacation (which is untaxed) becomes more attractive.

Further, the marginal utility of vacation declines (as with all things). Six weeks of vacation? What good is that 30th day off? Not as much good as the 1st, or 10th, or 20th, certainly.

Why don't the Democrats step in and mandate a change in the compensation mixture of employees? Good question. It would demonstrably decrease the total utility in society (as if, people do not choose that package of compensation), so it sounds like it's the kind of plan that they'd be all over.

Anecdotally: I run my own company and can take however much vacation I want. I take almost none. I enjoy working, and I enjoy building something for the future. I'd like to sell my company for a lot of money, then enjoy myself with this "vacation" you speak of.

[nobody]

HS's idea is only workable if we raise signficant trade barriers so American workers would not have to compete with foreign workers who are willing to work 60 hours weeks. (Just ask those workers making Apple Ipods ). We would need to become self sufficient again. No more imported clothing, cars, electronics, oil, etc. Without competition, we all can enjoy that six weeks of vacation like the French workers currently have.

What is the point of growth? It should be obvious that a nation can not afford to maintain its supers power status without a growing economy. If we stay put the rest of the world will catch up and surpass us in a generation. The economic consequences will be huge given that the many of the American cultural exports (movies, fast food, etc) rely on its superpower status. If this country became another Mexico, people around the world will find those exports alot less atractive.

[Spungen]

Frankly, HS, I'm surprised you'd favor this idea, given your previous posts about the changing job market and economy (young men making less money, living with their parents longer; employers hiring only for the short-term). As Mangan said, countries that have these mandates also tend to have a severe shortage of jobs. The jobs there are tend to be sinecures; if you've got one, it's very hard to fire you. There's a thick line between the haves and have-nots.

And why advocate for mandatory vacation, rather than for mandatory health insurance?

[Jody]

SFG: I understand coordination failures.

I am, however, implicitly asserting that this is not a coordination failure as there is a revealed preference towards more income and less vacation.

While we complain about a lack of vacation, we don't take it which means that we are reporting something different from what we believe.

Injecting my personal preferences into the discussion, like TJLC I enjoy my work and I haven't had a real vacation in three years and that's way I want it. I find it personally appalling that others insist that they know what's best for me. I'm not legally forcing anyone else to work long hours.

In brief, mandating vacation would likely decrease my utility (and TJLC's) indicating that the proposed solution does not Pareto dominate the current situation.

Even briefer - leave those of us who still have the Protestant work ethic alone.

[SFG]

"In brief, mandating vacation would likely decrease my utility (and TJLC's) indicating that the proposed solution does not Pareto dominate the current situation."
Pffft. What about all of our utilities? Clearly the current situation doesn't Pareto dominate the proposed solution, either. (A Pareto improvement benefits at least one individual while not making anyone else worse off.)

"Anecdotally: I run my own company and can take however much vacation I want. I take almost none. I enjoy working, and I enjoy building something for the future. I'd like to sell my company for a lot of money, then enjoy myself with this "vacation" you speak of."
Sure! If you're self-employed, there's no reason not to work as hard as you can; you're working for yourself, after all. But if you're a fry cook at McDonald's or a nurse at Mass General, your extra work just goes to buy the boss a bigger yacht. Here's the secret the enterpreneurs don't realize when it comes to public policy: everyone can't be an enterpreneur. Not everyone has marketable skills, and increasing returns to scale favor big companies.

"I am, however, implicitly asserting that this is not a coordination failure as there is a revealed preference towards more income and less vacation.
While we complain about a lack of vacation, we don't take it which means that we are reporting something different from what we believe."
I think people have a revealed preference for not being fired. The job market stinks and if you take vacation you risk being fired a year down the line as the laziest worker. Vacation or no vacation isn't like deciding what size of beans to buy at the supermarket.

Incidentally, what part of the country does everyone live in? HS is a New Yorker, as am I. Is it easier to be an enterpreneur in red states?

[Jody]

Incidentally, what part of the country does everyone live in?
I'm in VA.

What about all of our utilities?

I'm not proposing forcing you to do anything or to force your business to change its contract with you.

If you want more vacation and are willing to sacrifice pay, it's not hard to get a different job. If it's your priority, then live it. But don't force others to live your priorities.

In all seriousness, if extra vacation time is your desire. I hear the public education system is hiring like everywhere in the US.

[Jack]

Half Sigma is COMPLETELY right on this issue. I've thought of the same thing, that is, the Democrats finally doing something for the common man and encouraging vacation or a shorter work week. Maybe not six weeks, but is four too much? I get two weeks of vacation a year and five sick days. In my opinion it's reasonable for both to be doubled. In the private sector, it's obvious that us workers breaking our backs benefits the CEO buying more boats and beach houses, not us. It's about time white-collar private sector workers organized like unions do, or at least put pressure on politicians. As HS showed, not only do young workers make less than before, but we don't even have time to refresh. I don't know why more guys my age (28) don't understand this. They are dutifully working their asses off while I read HS' blog.

[Jody]

Jack: if you want more vacation, negotiate for it. You do negotiate for your salary, correct? So negotiate your benefits and if you don't like the contract, look for a different job.

That way, you get what you want, and I can get what I want. (and that, btw, is the Pareto optimal solution)

[mvpy]

HS is dead wrong. Completely. They take more vacation in Europe cos the unions have demanded it. In America, where theres freedom to choose, people work more. If you oppose that voluntary choice, then thats profoundly illiberal and elitist. Also, if people want to work fewer hours, then theres ways to effectuate the wish: different careers; part time work; retire earlier etc.
Whats more, work of course gets you more goods. In the US, I think, theres a lot more to buy and less product mkt regulation. People in the US apparently value material stuff more; hence our gdp per capita is, on average, 30% higher than Europe. Thats the other side to working more - hardly unattractive.

[SFG]

Yah, but since as HS has documented, only relative status matters...everyone just winds up with more junk but nobody's actually happier.

Obviously the society having more stuff is important if you're dirt poor but at this point...

[rose]

Here's a comment I never thought about: "To use an idea from Steve Sailer, maybe diversity killed the idea of a vacation."

Interesting thought, and from my experience I tend to agree. I lived in L.A. for most of my life. One can take a mini-trip around the world in the various ethnic neighborhoods and festivals in L.A. So who needs to travel with all the inconvenience that entails, especially in an age of terrorism?

However, I have noticed that corporations seem to expect an awful lot more from their employees these days than they did in my day. I worked 8 hours and was then free to live my life. If I worked overtime I was paid for it. When my children come here to visit me, they not only are tied to their computers, but also their cell phones, even though they are technically "on vacation", and they don't get paid for it. It really does seem to me they seldom get a chance to truly refresh because technology keeps them tethered, and the corporations expect it.

[mvpy]

"Yah, but since as HS has documented, only relative status matters...everyone just winds up with more junk but nobody's actually happier."

To whom? Sure, theres some who forever seek higher status, but not all. Also, the entire "relative status" thing is pretty bogus, in my view. Why dont we just all go back and live in caves if thats the case? Thatd surely eliminated the negative externality of status seeking, right.
Also, aRe you saying the reason you want a car is to show off? As opposed to its convenience. See, I think people push this entire "Jones" thing too far.

Jack: if you want more vacation, negotiate for it. You do negotiate for your salary, correct? So negotiate your benefits and if you don't like the contract, look for a different job.

I wouldn't have a problem with taking a hit in my salary for up to $10K to get up to about 5 weeks per year. The problem is that many employers would never permit their employees to do that. It's one of the reasons why government employment is so tempting for me. The pensions and vacations are worth the shittier pay, IMHO, despite the loss of prestiege, buying power, and attractiveness to females.