Vacation fears

June 15, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Attorneys are notorious for putting off vacation time or even bringing work with them while on vacation, but will the current state of the economy lead to an increase in work on vacation or even no vacation at all? According to a recent CNN.com article, some people are worried that if they take a vacation during this recession, they may not have a job to come back to. A survey released in May by CareerBuilder found nearly 20 percent of respondents said they were afraid of losing their jobs if they go on vacation or feel guilty in being away from the office.

The fear is once your company realizes the office can function without you, you are seen as expendable. Another possibility is people want to be seen as dedicated workers and now is not the time to take a vacation when they economy is in trouble.

Granted, law offices don’t run exactly the same way as other businesses, but who’s to say this hasn’t crossed a managing partner or law firm executive’s mind? A legal secretary takes a week off and returns to work only to learn that the firm’s decided to downsize after finding ways to be more efficient. Perhaps firm leaders realized the firm could do the work with fewer people after someone’s been on vacation.

Attorneys aren’t as vulnerable given the structure of the law firm, but if an attorney isn’t pulling his or her weight, it may become more noticeable when he or she is out of the office and someone else is helping out.

The irony of it all is that a vacation is probably needed by most workers now more than ever because many are overworked due to staff layoffs. Vacations help recharge and re-energize workers, and help with physical and mental health. According to the CNN.com article, the workers interviewed plan on taking long weekends for vacations instead of a week or more at a time.

What do you think about this article? Is it just the view of a few paranoid people or is this a valid fear?
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  2. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

  3. This outbreak illustrates the absurdity of the extreme positions taken by today's liberalism, specifically individualism and the modern cult of endless personal "freedom." Ebola reminds us that at some point the person's own "freedom" to do this and that comes into contact with the needs of the common good and "freedom" must be curtailed. This is not rocket science, except, today there is nonstop propaganda elevating individual preferences over the common good, so some pundits have a hard time fathoming the obvious necessity of quarantine in some situations....or even NATIONAL BORDERS...propagandists have also amazingly used this as another chance to accuse Western nations of "racism" which is preposterous and offensive. So one the one hand the idolatry of individualism has to stop and on the other hand facts people don't like that intersect with race-- remain facts nonetheless. People who respond to facts over propaganda do better in the long run. We call it Truth. Sometimes it seems hard to find.

  4. It would be hard not to feel the Kramers' anguish. But Catholic Charities, by definition, performed due diligence and held to the statutory standard of care. No good can come from punishing them for doing their duty. Should Indiana wish to change its laws regarding adoption agreements and or putative fathers, the place for that is the legislature and can only apply to future cases. We do not apply new laws to past actions, as the Kramers seem intent on doing, to no helpful end.

  5. I am saddened to hear about the loss of Zeff Weiss. He was an outstanding member of the Indianapolis legal community. My thoughts are with his family.

ADVERTISEMENT