Not taking leave equals "dedication and devotion"? It's time to abandon this one-sided view丨Commentary

According to The Paper (澎湃新闻), recently, four departments in Guizhou Province, including the provincial Department of Human Resources and Social Security and the Organization Department of the CPC Provincial Committee, issued a notice on further promoting the implementation of paid leave for workers with staggered time off. The notice mentioned that employers should, in each year’s fourth quarter, set up next year’s leave plans for employees, and should abandon the one-sided view that equates not taking leave with “dedication and service.”

In a joint document issued by four departments in Guizhou, the authorities clearly called for abandoning the one-sided view that equates not taking leave with “dedication and service.” This is something that resonates deeply with countless people in the workplace, and it also punctures a long-standing misconception.

Not taking leave means being dedicated—this idea is long outdated, and even somewhat absurd. The core of dedication and service is to conscientiously perform one’s duties and create value, not to see who stays in their seat for longer or who is less willing to request leave. Equating not taking leave with dedication is, in essence, a misunderstanding of workers’ right to labor benefits, and it also ignores workers’ physical and mental health. For an employee who has been running at full capacity for a long time and who does not dare to rest, how much work efficiency can they possibly have, and how much innovative energy can they possibly generate? The answer is likely to require a big, emphatic question mark.

In reality, many workers “don’t dare” to take time off precisely because they are held hostage by this kind of one-sided mindset. In some organizations, a culture of overtime is rampant; in such places, taking leave makes you look “not motivated” and “not担当” instead. A media investigation showed that nearly 40% of workers did not enjoy paid annual leave, and nearly 70% of workers in the workplace could not finish their annual leave for the current year. When the leave system becomes mere paper benefits, the root cause lies in this distorted workplace atmosphere. Workers fear that taking leave will affect their wage income, their chances to be selected for awards and promotions, and their career advancement; so they keep putting it off and, in the end, give up on taking leave.

The significance of this notice in Guizhou lies in the fact that it openly punctures that layer of window dressing. The notice states very clearly that, in principle, paid annual leave for workers should be taken by all employees in full and with no shortfalls. For government agencies and public institutions, they should simplify the leave-application process. If leave cannot be taken due to genuine work needs, the reasons must be explained and approved by the main负责人. These provisions send a clear signal: taking leave is the norm, while not taking leave is the exception—and it must be implemented strictly. This, at the institutional level, corrects the mindset that equates “not taking leave” with “dedication.”

To dispel the misconception that “not taking leave means being dedicated,” employers and managers must first change their mindset. Some organizations use attendance duration as an important standard for evaluating employees, and even use “perfect attendance” bonuses to encourage workers to forgo leave. This approach is neither scientific nor humane. Truly excellent management values work outcomes over time spent at one’s desk; it values team effectiveness over a self-congratulatory kind of “involution.”

Rigid constraints at the institutional level are also indispensable. It is difficult to implement paid leave, and a deep-root cause is insufficient institutional rigidity and weak oversight. Some companies deliberately blur the standards for calculating length of service; others offset annual leave using other types of leave; and some force the splitting of leave time into separate periods. These “operational gray areas” need to be closed by revising relevant regulations. Recently, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security has already stated that it will push for amendments to the “Regulations on Paid Annual Leave for Employees,” so that supervision can truly “grow teeth,” and the cost of violations will be raised in a way that is truly felt. At the same time, for those instances where leave still cannot be taken due to genuine work needs, the 300% wage compensation must be implemented fully and cannot become an empty promise on paper.

Leave is not about giving up; it is to help you set off better. Your body needs to rest and recover, and your emotions need adjustment—these are basic human needs. Linking paid annual leave with statutory public holidays, traditional festivals, winter and summer vacations, and the like gives workers time to accompany their families, go out to travel, and relax both mentally and physically. This not only improves their sense of well-being, but also releases consumption potential and helps drive economic development—an outcome that benefits multiple sides.

In the final analysis, dedication and service have never been proven by overextending your body or giving up your right to take leave. We hope that more places will follow suit, and we also hope that every worker can take leave with full justification and confidence.

By Chen Guangjiang