The foreign concept of "getting permission" to do things in life

[xenon5]

I was recently at a team dinner at work and was discussing how I want to go on a year-long sabbatical and do a round-the-world type trip after a few years of working.  One of my coworkers said "I don't know about that, are we even allowed to do that?" his comment started a table-wide discussion around what the company policy says around taking time off.

I let the conversation derail and didn't offer any counter-points.  Mum's the word after all.  But I've never even entertained the idea of someone telling me what I'm "allowed" to do regarding big life plans, let alone my employer!  What is this, kindergarten?

If I want to do something that would in some way affect my working arrangement, I notify my employer with plenty of notice and we figure out an arrangement.  If an agreement can't be made I do it anyway and go work somewhere else.  And even if we do work something out, I keep a contingency plan in my back pocket.

I see this type of mentality in a lot in other places too ("I have to drive a truck to impress women", "We need an extra bedroom because my in-laws won't sleep on an air mattress") and it's so foreign to me.  As long as you're within the law and not hurting anyone, why let outside forces dictate your way of life? 

[Andy_in_Aus]

I've seen this most often when people are shopping for a new car. "But we NEED a 7 seater for when the in laws/school friends come to visit/stay over".

When asked how often this is likely to be, the answer is inevitably once or twice a year. Sometimes, when they are particularly attentive, the slow creep of realisation comes across their face.

If it doesn't, I normally offer to sell them some magic beans I have in my pocket...

[sheepstache]

I see it with people who don't find success in life or are down on their luck 'even though' they did 'all the things you're supposed to do.' And I'm like, we were supposed to do things? Nobody told me!

I mean, I get that societal norms have an effect on us, I just don't relate to the concept that anyone was guaranteed a certain outcome for following certain steps. Because... who or what would be guaranteeing that? I mean if a teacher or my mother named an action and promised (or threatened) a certain outcome if I performed it, sure, I would feel confused if they didn't make good on it. But that's within the specific arenas of their control, a classroom or childhood. But who has domain over the entire world and your entire life? (I mean, ok, there's a religious answer there but I don't think these people were mad at god.)

[Doubleh]

Yup, better to ask forgiveness than permission.

One of the great things about having fu money at the least, or being fire, is the optionality it gives. If you are dependent on every pay check and can't imagine life without the next one, you feel vulnerable and can't imagine asking your employer for the opportunity to do something like this. And even if you do pick up the guts to ask (takes off cap "please, your lordship, if it wouldn't be too much trouble") chances are they will say no as you are in a position of weakness.

If you're in a position of strength the conversation is much different - "hi mr lumberg, I want to let you know that I'm going to have to go ahead and take a year's sabbatical to go travelling. I like the TPS reports here and would love to come back to my job in a years time, but if you can't accommodate that I understand and will give you my notice."  Mr lumberg will know that telling you that you can't go isn't an option, and in fact chances are he'll realise that you're valuable enough to his company to find a way to make sure you come back

[pbkmaine]

I told my boss I was moving out of state and could arrange to work remote or we could part friends. I have been working remote on a gradually decreasing schedule for the past 2.5 years.

[neophyte]

"We need an extra bedroom because my in-laws won't sleep on an air mattress"

Quite possibly one of the best arguments NOT to get a place with an extra bedroom!

[MoneyCat]

"We need an extra bedroom because my in-laws won't sleep on an air mattress"

Quite possibly one of the best arguments NOT to get a place with an extra bedroom!

You could always turn the extra bedrooom into a room for AirBnB, though.  Especially if you can build a separate entrance for it.  Just food for thought.

[sheepstache]

Of course, when picking your battles, it's easy to be like, 'oh my spouse makes me' or whatever just to elide an explanation that it's secretly what we want to do ourselves. 'Oh gosh, yeah, I'd love to go to your one-woman show about your childhood, but man my boss gets mad if I ask off on Friday nights.'

[MrsPete]

If I want to do something that would in some way affect my working arrangement, I notify my employer with plenty of notice and we figure out an arrangement.  If an agreement can't be made I do it anyway and go work somewhere else.  And even if we do work something out, I keep a contingency plan in my back pocket.

Hubris.  Thing is, if you're going to work for someone else, you are giving that person some amount of control over your life.  Your employer hired you, and he probably can't afford to do without your contribution to the company for a whole year.  You're absolutely right to say you can take a sabatical and travel for a year -- it's your own business -- but you have to be ready for the reality that your current job probably won't be waiting for you when you return, and when you apply for a new job you'll need to understand that your new boss will be thinking in the back of his mind, "Is he going to leave for a year again?"  Hubris. 

[limeandpepper]

Interesting that they think about it in terms of being "allowed". I had/have FU money and the company I worked for isn't a fan of remote work, so when I wanted to do longer-term travel, I just handed in my resignation letter. It's liberating to not have to worry about what your employer thinks. Don't care if I can't go back to my old job (not even sure if I'll still be living in that part of the country when I'm back from my trip). Don't care if I just get a basic temp job upon my return, either, I've never been career-minded. I have an aunt who often quit her job to travel, she did just fine, and is now retired as well.

[netskyblue]

I don't know, it's not so much as being allowed, as in, your employer has no say in whether or not you take a year to travel.  Rather, the CW operating under the assumption that quitting was out of the question. 

I know at my job, unless you have a valid reason for FMLA, you get 2 or 3 weeks vacation (based on how long you've been with the company), and that's it.  You want more time off, you find another job.  So no, you're not "allowed" to take more time off if you wish to remain an employee.

And even if you have the money to sustain yourself/your family for that length of time and beyond, many people (those who like their job, anyway) would still not choose to leave it.  If there's still a need to work at some point in the future, there's always the fear of the unknown - sure you can get another job, but you might not like it as well.  You might not like your coworkers as well, the hours might not be as good...any number of reasons that make it worthwhile to stay put.

[mm1970]

I was recently at a team dinner at work and was discussing how I want to go on a year-long sabbatical and do a round-the-world type trip after a few years of working.  One of my coworkers said "I don't know about that, are we even allowed to do that?" his comment started a table-wide discussion around what the company policy says around taking time off.

I let the conversation derail and didn't offer any counter-points.  Mum's the word after all.  But I've never even entertained the idea of someone telling me what I'm "allowed" to do regarding big life plans, let alone my employer!  What is this, kindergarten?

If I want to do something that would in some way affect my working arrangement, I notify my employer with plenty of notice and we figure out an arrangement.  If an agreement can't be made I do it anyway and go work somewhere else.  And even if we do work something out, I keep a contingency plan in my back pocket.

I see this type of mentality in a lot in other places too ("I have to drive a truck to impress women", "We need an extra bedroom because my in-laws won't sleep on an air mattress") and it's so foreign to me.  As long as you're within the law and not hurting anyone, why let outside forces dictate your way of life?

I think some of this is related to stability.  I, for one, am kind of boring and like stability.  The idea of quitting work for a year to travel, or up and move to Central America like my neighbors plan to do next year, kind of gives me the heebee jeebies.

And with the job market being what it is, I think a lot of people want to know that they have a "job" and "income".  Of course, many people spend all they earn, so that's part of the reason.  I knew two young engineers that I worked with at one company want to take a sabbatical.  6 months to a year.  The first just quit because, well let's just face it - he wasn't the best engineer, and he was kind of unmotivated.  He traveled around the world for 10 months (and blogged about it too, I enjoyed reading it).  But he's drifted around ever since, about a decade.  He came back to town, worked a little bit, but that fell through and then he moved home to practice yoga and live with his parents (that was about 2 years ago). 

The other was pretty frugal by all accounts and wanted a 6 month sabbatical. Note: our company actually had a sabbatical policy, but it had to be approved. And they denied it.  So he quit.

I think they were shocked.  They were pretty used to "holding all the cards".  He enjoyed his time in Central America, got cancer and recovered, and has moved on to better things.

Come to think of it, one of my young coworkers at my current company quit to move to Central America too - for about a year, to teach English.  Hm.  There must be something about that place!

On a similar vein, my neighbor likes to travel a lot.  They took a 3 week trip last year and had their kids out of school, and actually got into trouble for it (you can't miss school!)  (Absenteeism is a big problem at our school in general - mostly parents who just don't get their kids there, less of the middle class trips, but the Principal doesn't want to distinguish the two, understandably.)

She's planning another trip during school time, and said "I'm just going to call them in sick.  What would YOU do?"  I said, "I dunno, truthfully, I don't take my kids out of school."

[mm1970]

"We need an extra bedroom because my in-laws won't sleep on an air mattress"

Quite possibly one of the best arguments NOT to get a place with an extra bedroom!

Yup. I just put people up in a hotel.  It's once every 2-3 years.

[MoneyCat]

When you become FI, then you don't have to get permission for anything anymore (other than what is required by the government under law).  Before then, however, your decisions are affected by employers, so you do have to get permission.  It's just another reason to work hard to achieve FI.  FI is real freedom.

[GetItRight]

This is not a foreign concept at all for me...

From my employer? No way. Although I'm not thrilled with the politics at work I like what I do for the most part. When I go on vacation though I generally use most of my time in one shot. It's not a vacation request form, it's a vacation form and I'm informing you I'll be out of the office for a month. If I have less than that in PTO, fine, don't pay me whatever the difference is but I won't be in the office. Of course I'm accessible to some extent when things arise and can do most of my job remotely so it's not a big deal to me. I don't have to, but to me it's a moral issue of I was hired to do a job so when I step back for a bit I have an ethical obligation to prepare before my leave and deal with anything that comes up while I'm away. That may be anywhere from a minute to pass along info to someone else to deal with it or hours to resolve a problem. It's the right thing to do, so that's what I do but I won't grind away every day like normal unless the situation warrants it, in which case add however long that is to my vacation. Interestingly enough the company fired most of my department and I'm pretty much flying solo, despite me disappearing for a month every year.

Now, getting permission from the government to do things in life and how I am allowed to live my life... That's one I've become very familiar with. I don't harm anyone or their property, try to mind my own business, and prefer to be left alone. What I've discovered is the government will always force their way in over some mundane thing and threaten violence against me, extort money, and uproot my life. Mind you I've never harmed anyone, their property, or even dodged taxes. This is one you can't fight whether you're FI or not. They have infinitely more resources and if you resist the end result is you are dead or in a cage and of course penniless.

I'm not FI but the idea of getting permission for how to live my life from my employer seems insane to me. I'm paid to do a job, I do my job well and go the extra mile when necessary. Getting permission from government? There's no choice, you do what you're told, jump through the hoops, pay the taxes, and live how you're told to... Or else. One thing I want most? For the government to leave me the hell alone.

[netskyblue]

I envy those of you who have jobs where you can take off periods of time and all's well.  I broke my femur this year and was off for 3.5 weeks, and all hell broke loose.  Mine's not a job that can go undone, and the multiple people they had doing my work were literally making themselves sick trying to keep up on my work AND their work.

I'm sure it's different in different jobs, but I'm not one of many at mine, I am the only one who does what I do, and business could not go on if my work didn't get done.  And it would damage the business for people to try to do my job in addition to their own long-term, because it's just not possible for all the work to GET done.

So it's not just about "permission."  Walking away from the job without having a trained, full-time replacement ready to step in would be as damaging as if I hacked into the computer system and disabled the database for the amount of time I'd be gone. 

[Paul der Krake]

If an employer can't afford to have one of their employees not be at his desk for a month because nobody else knows how to do his job, they can't afford to have that employee at all.

[limeandpepper]

If an employer can't afford to have one of their employees not be at his desk for a month because nobody else knows how to do his job, they can't afford to have that employee at all.

Exactly, that's bad management.

Even if a company manages to "trap" an employee into not taking leave, they're still going to be in big trouble if the following happens: 1) serious illness, 2) serious accident, 3) the employee finally has enough and quits?

[Doubleh]

If an employer can't afford to have one of their employees not be at his desk for a month because nobody else knows how to do his job, they can't afford to have that employee at all.

Exactly, that's bad management.

Even if a company manages to "trap" an employee into not taking leave, they're still going to be in big trouble if the following happens: 1) serious illness, 2) serious accident, 3) the employee finally has enough and quits?

Absolutely. Not to mention that where I work, in banking in Europe, it's a legal requirement that everyone take a mandatory two weeks off each year during which they are not permitted to dial info the server, use email or talk to the office. Logic being that it is very hard to perpetrate a fraud that can operate without your involvement for two whole weeks - in fact refusing to take time off is seen as a key risk flag for fraud.

An employee could easily be out of the office for longer than this due to unforeseen sickness or injury so the inability to cope with absence is simply a reflection of poor management.

[vern]

Good for you Xenon!

It seems that most people in this world prefer being told what to do.*  You're on the right track.

*Present company excluded of course!

[Artemis67]

"We need an extra bedroom because my in-laws won't sleep on an air mattress"

Quite possibly one of the best arguments NOT to get a place with an extra bedroom!

Yup. I just put people up in a hotel.  It's once every 2-3 years.

Same here! And I prefer staying in hotels when I visit most people--that way, I can stay up really late, shamelessly hog the bathroom, and enjoy some quiet time alone before and after a long day of socializing and activities.

I recently told someone that my mom would be staying in a nearby hotel when she came down to spend a weekend with me.

"Oh, my mother would never let me get away with that!" she replied. Her place is a 1BR/1BA condo, right across the street from a decent hotel. Every visit from her mom leaves her frazzled and miserable. But she's never even suggested to her mom that she stay across the street--she's already sure she'll take offense and say no. And since her mom has never broached the subject, she automatically assumes it's closed, and the answer is no.

She not only needs permission, but she needs permission to ask permission.

[xenon5]

So it's not just about "permission."  Walking away from the job without having a trained, full-time replacement ready to step in would be as damaging as if I hacked into the computer system and disabled the database for the amount of time I'd be gone.

Even then I don't think it's unworkable.  If I was going to go away for a whole year I'd want to start planning long in advance.  I'm not just going to quit willy nilly without a plan or notice.  With a year's notice, that would be plenty of time to find a suitable replacement and train them.

[xenon5]

but you have to be ready for the reality that your current job probably won't be waiting for you when you return, and when you apply for a new job you'll need to understand that your new boss will be thinking in the back of his mind, "Is he going to leave for a year again?"  Hubris.

Maybe that's true, but it depends on what kind of job we're talking about.  Independent contracting and telecommuting is common in my line of work, though I prefer going the salaried route while I'm building up my skills or longer if I continue to enjoy it.  If I had an issue finding salaried work, I could work for different clients in chunks of a few months or a year or two at a time, and they probably won't care if I can prove I know my stuff. 

But who knows if I'll really do it or when.  Maybe I'll be enjoying my job too much to want to leave or my values will change and I'll want to raise a family instead.  Maybe I'll decide to postpone the trip until FI, since I'll get a little more value out of my working years that way.  The point is for now it's a dream I can work slowly towards and I'm not willing to put up a mental wall that says "nope, can't do that, not allowed.  Go directly to jail, do not pass Go."

[MgoSam]

Yeah, all too often, we can either wait for our chance or we can just step up and take it anyways.

Microsoft's CEO faced a lot of criticism, and rightly so imo, for saying that female employees shouldn't ask for raises, but that if they worked hard they would be paid adequately. It is entirely possible that for the CEO this happened, but it doesn't work that in the real world for the vast majority. If you stay silent, you risk being ignored.

[Kaspian]

I see it with people who don't find success in life or are down on their luck 'even though' they did 'all the things you're supposed to do.' And I'm like, we were supposed to do things? Nobody told me!

I mean, I get that societal norms have an effect on us, I just don't relate to the concept that anyone was guaranteed a certain outcome for following certain steps. Because... who or what would be guaranteeing that? I mean if a teacher or my mother named an action and promised (or threatened) a certain outcome if I performed it, sure, I would feel confused if they didn't make good on it. But that's within the specific arenas of their control, a classroom or childhood. But who has domain over the entire world and your entire life? (I mean, ok, there's a religious answer there but I don't think these people were mad at god.)

^^ This!  People often ask why I didn't get married, have a house, buy a car.  "Sorry, didn't get the 'life instruction' book at birth I guess.  I didn't know I was failing at life.  Can I borrow yours?"  The scary thing is, I don't think people can even differentiate what are "societal norms" (i.e., a roadmap to a boring, vanilla, Sears catalog life like all the other drones) and what are advertising/corporate constructs of what a normal life should be.  How many of those things we're told we need to do/buy have just been invented by people trying to sell you shit and it's slowly become ingrained in our culture.? Think Mother's Day/Father's Day/Valentine's Day by the card companies only on a global scale determining how we live our lives 365 days a year.

[gimp]

...government...

Don't hold back now, speak your mind. What're you annoyed about specifically?

I pay my taxes, don't kill people, and drive almost within the speed limit. They don't really ask much more of me. What're you getting told to do?

[Cecil]

I see it with people who don't find success in life or are down on their luck 'even though' they did 'all the things you're supposed to do.' And I'm like, we were supposed to do things? Nobody told me!

I mean, I get that societal norms have an effect on us, I just don't relate to the concept that anyone was guaranteed a certain outcome for following certain steps. Because... who or what would be guaranteeing that? I mean if a teacher or my mother named an action and promised (or threatened) a certain outcome if I performed it, sure, I would feel confused if they didn't make good on it. But that's within the specific arenas of their control, a classroom or childhood. But who has domain over the entire world and your entire life? (I mean, ok, there's a religious answer there but I don't think these people were mad at god.)

^^ This!  People often ask why I didn't get married, have a house, buy a car.  "Sorry, didn't get the 'life instruction' book at birth I guess.  I didn't know I was failing at life.  Can I borrow yours?"

I wouldn't assume those people are judging you or thinking you've failed. Perhaps they are just interested in knowing what you *do* value, since you clearly have different values than most people.

[scottish]

This...

Getting permission from government?    There's no choice, you do what you're told,

I'm wondering too.   The government doesn't ask me to do much more than pay taxes.   Where do you live getitright?

[Beric01]

I know an employee who bought a luxury car (with her own money) just because she occasionally has to entertain guests on company business. It's one thing if the company were covering it, but the only reason she bought it was for the company, and it's not like she's getting paid more to own it. I just don't get it. Why let others rule your life?

[Daisy]

A friend/travel-partner/coworker (yes, she's all three in one!) and I were talking about planning a trip to Africa at some distant point in the future. I told her this would be a minimum 4 week trip, as with all of the cost and travel time to get there I would see it as a once in a lifetime opportunity and try to see as much as possible on the continent at one time. Realistically, it would require more than 4 weeks. But nonetheless after I mentioned it she said "but you know you have to ask special permission to get more than 3 weeks off in a row...no way management would go for that."

I've mentioned to her before my wish to FIRE before I turn 50 (4 years away). She would like to as well but she spends like a madwoman and isn't too educated on financial things. She's thinking closer to 60. I've tried to throw some information and hints her way but I don't think it's registering.

So I'm thinking way past being employed for this trip and not having to get permission from any job to go...but since she is one of our managers as well I didn't go into such great detail. It's my little secret that I will plan a trip there sometime, and I won't rush my way through it. She can meet me there for 3 short weeks if she'd like while I extend my trip for longer. ;-)

I too think it is unreasonable to expect a company to not be upset at your leaving for so long. They hired you to do a job and if you are missing for 6 months, well that puts a damper on their plans as well. My company used to be a little better in allowing leaves of absence (not that many people took advantage of it), but the current layoff environment is not fertile ground for these kinds of things. However, asking for a leave of absence at the right time (my being ready for FIRE) might be a good way to get myself put on the layoff list with a nice severance package...hee hee...

[Scandium]

I don't see anything especially strange about your CWs response. I ask my employer permission for things (or at least let them know) because I'd like to continue working there. They pay me for my work, and I tell them in advance when I'm taking vacation for example. Sure if I don't want to work there anymore I could do whatever I want (like disappear for 3 weeks without warning), but that seems like a lot of hassle for the "empowering feeling" of being a jerk.

[limeandpepper]

The OP never said he was going to do something irresponsible like quit without notice. Merely that, with the power of having amassed FU money, he doesn't need permission to go on a sabbatical - he will still let them know in advance, but if the company doesn't approve it, he could just quit, if he really wants to. I'm surprised at a few responses here suggesting he is being arrogant. To me it sounds perfectly in line with the reason why we appreciate having FU money, something that is generally regarded favourably around these parts, or so I thought.

[limeandpepper]

This thread is about pretty much the same kind of thing, i.e. the power of FU money (in fact, to an even more extreme level) and no one criticizes it. Funny that. http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/epic-fu-money-stories/

[rockstache]

On a similar vein, my neighbor likes to travel a lot.  They took a 3 week trip last year and had their kids out of school, and actually got into trouble for it

What does "got into trouble for it" mean? I mean, what can they do to you? If she was going to take her kids out of school for a semi educational trip, I think the principal should make allowances for that, it is vastly different than parents who don't get their kids to school because of neglect. We did it occasionally when I was a kid and the teachers loved it. We wrote reports about what we saw and did and kept up with classes by getting the work ahead of time. I wouldn't send my kid to a school that didn't want to be flexible to work *with* me to enhance their education benefits.

[Scandium]

The OP never said he was going to do something irresponsible like quit without notice. Merely that, with the power of having amassed FU money, he doesn't need permission to go on a sabbatical - he will still let them know in advance, but if the company doesn't approve it, he could just quit, if he really wants to. I'm surprised at a few responses here suggesting he is being arrogant. To me it sounds perfectly in line with the reason why we appreciate having FU money, something that is generally regarded favourably around these parts, or so I thought.

I don't have FU money, but  I could still just quit if I wanted to take a year off. I'd just have to find another (or the same) job when I came back. I don't "need" permission for anything, but I do it because it's a decent thing to do.

[limeandpepper]

I don't have FU money, but  I could still just quit if I wanted to take a year off. I'd just have to find another (or the same) job when I came back. I don't "need" permission for anything, but I do it because it's a decent thing to do.

The OP:

If I want to do something that would in some way affect my working arrangement, I notify my employer with plenty of notice and we figure out an arrangement.  If an agreement can't be made I do it anyway and go work somewhere else.  And even if we do work something out, I keep a contingency plan in my back pocket.

"Notifying with plenty of notice".... Sounds pretty decent to me. And before anyone jumps in, people may consider that to be "asking permission", but to me, "notifying" is not exactly the same thing as "asking for permission".

[Scandium]

I don't have FU money, but  I could still just quit if I wanted to take a year off. I'd just have to find another (or the same) job when I came back. I don't "need" permission for anything, but I do it because it's a decent thing to do.

The OP:

If I want to do something that would in some way affect my working arrangement, I notify my employer with plenty of notice and we figure out an arrangement.  If an agreement can't be made I do it anyway and go work somewhere else.  And even if we do work something out, I keep a contingency plan in my back pocket.

"Notifying with plenty of notice".... Sounds pretty decent to me. And before anyone jumps in, people may consider that to be "asking permission", but to me, "notifying" is not exactly the same thing as "asking for permission".

Ok, but anyone can quit their job at any time, FU money or not. So then I'm not quite sure what the OP is criticizing. He said he'd ask permission (or figure out an arrangement). Well so would I. That only means I'd prefer to keep my job, not that I'm beholden to them. Ah whatever

[limeandpepper]

Ok, but anyone can quit their job at any time, FU money or not. So then I'm not quite sure what the OP is criticizing. He said he'd ask permission (or figure out an arrangement). Well so would I. That only means I'd prefer to keep my job, not that I'm beholden to them. Ah whatever

I think the point he was making is that it didn't even occur to his CW that quitting was an option (which suggests that they think they are beholden to their job). For example, when my co-workers and I talked about doing long-term travel, the question "Are we even allowed to do that?" never came into the conversation. Instead, it was more like, "What are your plans and when will you do it?" We just assumed someone who wants to do that would have saved enough money and be prepared to quit their job.

But yeah, never mind, whatever. We will just agree to disagree... or even, it seems, kind of agree. :)

[mm1970]

On a similar vein, my neighbor likes to travel a lot.  They took a 3 week trip last year and had their kids out of school, and actually got into trouble for it

What does "got into trouble for it" mean? I mean, what can they do to you? If she was going to take her kids out of school for a semi educational trip, I think the principal should make allowances for that, it is vastly different than parents who don't get their kids to school because of neglect. We did it occasionally when I was a kid and the teachers loved it. We wrote reports about what we saw and did and kept up with classes by getting the work ahead of time. I wouldn't send my kid to a school that didn't want to be flexible to work *with* me to enhance their education benefits.

The school gets paid per child per day of school attended.

If absenteeism is very bad (which it is for our school), that affects the budget (I don't like it either - it's not like we let teachers stay home!  Our costs are the same.)

You basically get written up, it goes in your file, you get reported to the district, etc. (I only know this because my son was incorrectly marked absent one day and we kept telling the district HE WAS IN FIRST GRADE HE DID NOT CUT SCHOOL.)

In any event, our district allows transfers between public school, and many of my friends (and I) transferred our kids into this school. She could lose her transfer.

[mm1970]

If I want to do something that would in some way affect my working arrangement, I notify my employer with plenty of notice and we figure out an arrangement.  If an agreement can't be made I do it anyway and go work somewhere else.  And even if we do work something out, I keep a contingency plan in my back pocket.

Hubris.  Thing is, if you're going to work for someone else, you are giving that person some amount of control over your life.  Your employer hired you, and he probably can't afford to do without your contribution to the company for a whole year.  You're absolutely right to say you can take a sabatical and travel for a year -- it's your own business -- but you have to be ready for the reality that your current job probably won't be waiting for you when you return, and when you apply for a new job you'll need to understand that your new boss will be thinking in the back of his mind, "Is he going to leave for a year again?"  Hubris.

Well I don't necessarily think it *is* hubris.  It's probably sometimes a fine line between "self confidence" and "hubris".  But if you are self confident, good at your job, and have a good network of people - then it's not hubris.  Getting another job won't be a problem.  (I know a few people who have done this, and have considered it myself.  I mean, MMM was pretty good at his job, could probably go back any time.)

Where it becomes "hubris?"  I've worked with some people whose own opinions of their abilities did not match their abilities.  They quit work to get a raise somewhere else, tried to come back a couple of years later, and were told "no thanks".

[EscapeVelocity2020]

I also think there is a huge difference between being a contractor (or 'having a contractor mentality') and working for an 'operating company'.  If you flip the question on it's head, it is about how you would want to be treated.  I have worked for both types of employer and certainly feel treated better by the latter.  If you are happy with contractor mentality, and value being free to hop around (realizing that this might also mean more unplanned time off at some point, and possibly a shorter career), then having the resume that goes with it ins't a negative (unless that is common in your field, YMMV).

[Rural]

On a similar vein, my neighbor likes to travel a lot.  They took a 3 week trip last year and had their kids out of school, and actually got into trouble for it

What does "got into trouble for it" mean? I mean, what can they do to you? If she was going to take her kids out of school for a semi educational trip, I think the principal should make allowances for that, it is vastly different than parents who don't get their kids to school because of neglect. We did it occasionally when I was a kid and the teachers loved it. We wrote reports about what we saw and did and kept up with classes by getting the work ahead of time. I wouldn't send my kid to a school that didn't want to be flexible to work *with* me to enhance their education benefits.

The school gets paid per child per day of school attended.

If absenteeism is very bad (which it is for our school), that affects the budget (I don't like it either - it's not like we let teachers stay home!  Our costs are the same.)

You basically get written up, it goes in your file, you get reported to the district, etc. (I only know this because my son was incorrectly marked absent one day and we kept telling the district HE WAS IN FIRST GRADE HE DID NOT CUT SCHOOL.)

In any event, our district allows transfers between public school, and many of my friends (and I) transferred our kids into this school. She could lose her transfer.

Or the parents could be jailed for violating the mandatory school attendance laws. Happens here occasionally, though I think in cases more extreme than a single trip.

[dividendman]

I would just like to note that you don't need permission for anything you are capable of doing since by definition you can do it. The question is the consequences.

For some things you are capable of it is very important to get permission (like copying copyrighted material or transporting weapons across a border).
For most things you are capable of it may not be that important to get permission since there is little or no consequence and in fact nobody may be attempting to restrict you from doing said activity.

What this thread is really about is limiting the consequences of not getting permission from your employer by being as self sufficient as possible - which I think we all can agree is a good idea. There little need to ask permission if you are 100% self sufficient because even the most severe penalty (being dismissed) will have little impact on your life.

[mm1970]

Or the parents could be jailed for violating the mandatory school attendance laws. Happens here occasionally, though I think in cases more extreme than a single trip.

They are talking about fines.  The law states you get fined after a certain # of absences (I'm sure it's more than 2 weeks), but it's not enforced.

[xenon5]

What this thread is really about is limiting the consequences of not getting permission from your employer by being as self sufficient as possible - which I think we all can agree is a good idea. There little need to ask permission if you are 100% self sufficient because even the most severe penalty (being dismissed) will have little impact on your life.

Yes, this is where I'm thinking.  I already know I have the ability to show up for work tomorrow, interrupt a random meeting and start dancing on the table.  That doesn't mean it'll end well!  I'm making the implicit assumption that I wouldn't be a jerk and just leave on a dime because burning bridges is an unnecessary negative consequence for everyone involved.

In the short term, yes, I trade my time at predictable, scheduled intervals for a wage and I can't go around making arbitrary scheduling demands.  I'm talking big picture, years-long term.

The reason I don't see setting up an arrangement on the same level as asking for permission is because I would have already gone into the negotiation knowing what the worst case scenario is and accepting the risk because I can afford to do so.  I would already know the value of leaving for good and planning my leave exactly the way I want versus the value of the least favorable compromise I would be willing to agree to.

[arebelspy]

Good thread.

You never need permission to do anything.

http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/10/22/theres-something-you-need-to-know-about-the-rules/

If you're willing to deal with the consequences, you can do anything you want.

Often there are no consequences, or they're much less than people think.

[eyePod]

"We need an extra bedroom because my in-laws won't sleep on an air mattress"

This is the exact reason that we don't have an extra bedroom and only provide an air mattress! Well, we have an extra bedroom for now but hopefully will fill it with at least one more kid.

[ozzage]

I once wanted to go travelling for 4 months (in April), and I told my boss 5 months in advance (in November) that i was going to do that, which I felt was decent enough notice. He was a good guy and had travelled earlier so kinda understood.

I wondered the whole time why they weren't hiring a replacement (we needed more staff anyway!) and then in late February he told me that I couldn't go any more, and that they would pay to refund me for my flights or I could take 6 weeks but not the whole 4 months. Basically they'd been too disorganised to organise cover for me and they'd suddenly realised that I was about to disappear for four months!

Anyway, I told them it had been nice working there and i was sorry to go. The next day they told me I could go travelling anyway and they looked forward to seeing me when I got back. I didn't have FU money really, but I certainly cared more about travelling than the job, even though it was what you'd consider a "career" job.

As another example, my wife and I took a year off (much later) to go around the world. Her job only gave max. 2 months at month as a "sabbatical", so she quit. They asked her to get in touch when we were coming back and when we returned they offered her a new position with a promotion.

Being a bit brave can really pay off. You don't really need to ask permission. Just have some balls and know your own value.

[pagoconcheques]

On a similar vein, my neighbor likes to travel a lot.  They took a 3 week trip last year and had their kids out of school, and actually got into trouble for it (you can't miss school!)  (Absenteeism is a big problem at our school in general - mostly parents who just don't get their kids there, less of the middle class trips, but the Principal doesn't want to distinguish the two, understandably.)

She's planning another trip during school time, and said "I'm just going to call them in sick.  What would YOU do?"  I said, "I dunno, truthfully, I don't take my kids out of school."

Schools in the USA typically receive a daily amount per head from the district, likely the state, and maybe even the federal government.  Unexcused absences DO hit the school's bottom line. 

It turned out our kids, who liked school as much as vacation, didn't want to miss school.  We often ended up just pulling them out for one or two days before or after winter or spring break, mostly so we could take long-distance trips and book flights on less expensive days.  Once we understood the funding background to the issue, we simply had a "wink-wink" conversation with an administrator and called the kids in sick, even if we had to do it in the middle of the night from overseas. 

[arebelspy]

Anyway, I told them it had been nice working there and i was sorry to go.

Hah!  I love it.  :D