The story is told by a reader who works for a company that provides a standard amount of Paid Time Off (PTO) to all employees. For two years in a row, the reader never took a proper vacation, only long weekends, because their manager always insisted that “Winter is our busiest season, don’t disappear” every December. The reader sacrificed holidays like Christmas, New Year’s, and even their birthday.
This year, the employee decided they’d had enough and submitted a request for a two-week vacation, from December 26th through January 5th. They had sufficient accrued hours, their work was ahead of schedule, and they provided six weeks’ notice.
However, the manager denied the request within five minutes, citing the reason: “We need people who are committed during end-of-year crunch time.”
When the employee asked if someone else had already taken those dates, the manager said no, stating he just “preferred everyone stay available,” and added the dismissive comment, “Some people use PTO wisely. Some don’t.”
The very next morning, the employee was called to a meeting with Human Resources (HR) concerning a “recent conflict over time off.”
In the meeting, the employee calmly presented the facts: their lack of vacation in years, their updated workload, the fact the request was compliant with policy, and the manager’s refusal to offer any alternatives.
When HR pressed the manager to define why the dates were “not ideal for the team,” he couldn’t provide a concrete reason. Then, HR revealed a crucial fact the employee was unaware of:
Four other people in the department had recently had their winter PTO approved, all after the employee submitted their request.
The manager appeared surprised and had no defense. HR immediately approved the employee’s time off and stated they would be “reviewing department procedures.”
A week later, HR called the employee back with the results of their investigation. It was determined that there was no scheduling issue, no staffing shortage, and no valid reason for the denial of the vacation request.
The manager had been blocking the employee’s vacations simply because he didn’t like them—the denial was personal, not professional. HR confirmed this wasn’t the first time the manager had targeted someone, suggesting a pattern of abusive behavior.
The employee was granted their time off, and the manager was disciplined as a result of the HR investigation.
