PTO calculator: PTO accrual calculator for paid time off and vacation accrual

Multiply the annual PTO hours by the fraction of the year remaining. Someone starting October 1 with a 120 hour grant has 3 of 12 months left, so 120 times 0.25 is 30 hours, or 3.75 days. That is the whole calculation, and it is the reason per period accrual is easier to administer than an annual lump sum: proration happens by itself, because a person who starts in October simply receives fewer accrual events before December 31.

Lump sum grants, sometimes called front-loading, hand the full annual balance to an employee on day one or on January 1. Employees prefer them, and they remove a lot of bookkeeping. The cost is concentrated risk: a front-loaded employee can take all 15 days in February and resign in March, and in a state where PTO is wages you will have paid for time that was never earned in any meaningful sense. Front-loading also creates an awkward recovery problem, because deducting the overage from a final paycheck runs straight into state wage deduction rules.

Most teams under 200 employees land on per pay period accrual with a modest negative balance allowance, so a new hire can take a few days before they have technically earned them without the company carrying a full year of exposure. If you do front-load, front-load a prorated first year rather than the full grant, and say in writing exactly how the first partial year is calculated.

There is no federal vacation entitlement, no federal PTO entitlement, and no federal payout rule. The Department of Labor states it plainly on its vacation leave page:

"The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) does not require payment for time not worked, such as vacations, sick leave or federal or other holidays. These benefits are matters of agreement between an employer and an employee (or the employee's representative)."

US Department of Labor, Vacation Leave

Two consequences follow, and they point in opposite directions. Because federal law requires nothing, you have wide freedom to design the policy. Because the benefit is a matter of agreement, the agreement is what binds you, and in many states that written policy is enforced as a contract by the same wage payment statutes that govern salary. Freedom on the way in, obligation on the way out. Whatever your handbook promises, you will be held to it.

One related rule catches payroll teams. PTO hours are paid but they are not hours worked, so they never count toward the 40 hour threshold that triggers overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act overtime rules. An employee who takes 8 hours of PTO and works 36 hours is paid for 44 hours at straight time, with no overtime owed. The same logic is why vacation pay is excludable from the regular rate: it is not compensation for hours worked in the week.

One federal rulebook counts the identical hour the other way. For the ACA employer mandate, 26 CFR 54.4980H-1(a)(24) defines an hour of service to include every hour an employee is paid for vacation, holiday, illness, jury duty or leave of absence, so PTO pushes an employee toward the 130 hour full time line even though it never pushes them toward overtime. A part time employee can become full time for applicable large employer purposes on paid leave alone.

This is the question with real money attached, because an accrued PTO balance is a liability that walks out the door with the employee. The mechanism is always the same: does your state treat earned vacation as wages? If it does, you cannot forfeit it, and you owe it in the final paycheck. If it does not, your own written policy generally decides.

The Colorado holding is worth reading closely, because it kills the most popular workaround. Clark's Market had a policy stating that an employee discharged for any reason, or who failed to give proper notice, "will forfeit all earned vacation pay benefits." The Colorado Supreme Court held that although the state wage act does not entitle an employee to vacation pay at all, once an employer chooses to provide it, that pay "is no less protected than other wages or compensation and, thus, cannot be forfeited once earned." A forfeiture clause does not survive being written into the handbook and agreed to. It is simply void.

The lawful version of the same cost control is a cap. Instead of erasing a balance, you stop further accrual once the balance reaches a ceiling, typically 1.5 to 2 times the annual grant. An employee at the cap earns nothing more until they take time off, which produces the behavior you wanted from use it or lose it without ever touching time already earned. California permits caps explicitly; forfeiture it does not.

The usual pitch for unlimited PTO is that nothing accrues, so nothing vests, so nothing is owed when someone leaves. The balance sheet liability disappears. That reasoning is not wrong, but it only holds if the policy is genuinely unlimited, and in McPherson v. EF Intercultural Foundation, Inc. (California Court of Appeal, April 2020) it was not. Three exempt employees were told they had unlimited time off. In practice, requests needed approval, nobody was told they could take a large amount, and time off during peak season was strongly discouraged. The trial court called the policy "undefined" rather than unlimited and awarded vacation wages.

The appellate court agreed on those facts, and then did something more useful than a headline. It expressly declined to hold that all unlimited policies trigger the payout statute, and set out the conditions under which one would not:

"In concluding section 227.3 applies to EF's vacation policy, we do not hold that section 227.3 necessarily applies to truly unlimited time off policies. Such a policy may not trigger section 227.3 where, for example, in writing it (1) clearly provides that employees' ability to take paid time off is not a form of additional wages for services performed, but perhaps part of the employer's promise to provide a flexible work schedule ... including employees' ability to decide when and how much time to take off; (2) spells out the rights and obligations of both employee and employer and the consequences of failing to schedule time off; (3) in practice allows sufficient opportunity for employees to take time off, or work fewer hours in lieu of taking time off; and (4) is administered fairly so that it neither becomes a de facto 'use it or lose it policy' nor results in inequities, such as where one employee works many hours, taking minimal time off, and another works fewer hours and takes more time off."

McPherson v. EF Intercultural Foundation, Inc. (2020)

Read as an operational checklist, that is demanding. Two of the four conditions are about what you actually do, not what the handbook says. Condition three requires that people can really take the time, which means an unlimited policy where the average employee takes nine days a year is evidence against you. Condition four requires fairness across employees, which means the common real-world outcome of unlimited PTO, where conscientious staff take less than everyone else, is itself the inequity the court named.

If you run unlimited PTO and you have California employees, the practical response is to measure usage, publish a minimum expectation, and keep the written policy explicit that the time is a scheduling flexibility rather than earned compensation. If usage data shows your unlimited policy functions as roughly two weeks with extra steps, you have an accrual policy with no records, which is the worst of both designs.

Plenty of companies make new hires wait 90 days or six months before PTO is available. That is allowed even in California, and the California cases are precise about why. A policy that says employees do not earn vacation during an initial period is enforceable, because no vacation pay is earned, so none vests. A policy that says employees accrue vacation during the waiting period but forfeit it if they leave early is not, because it takes back something already earned.

The court in Minnick v. Automotive Creations, Inc. put the other half of the rule in a single sentence: "once an employee becomes eligible to earn vacation benefits he or she is simultaneously entitled to payment for unused vacation upon separation." There is no second vesting event and no additional condition you can attach afterward. Eligibility and entitlement arrive together.

So the drafting rule is narrow and easy to get right. Write that employees earn no paid vacation until they complete the stated period, in those words. Do not write that they accrue it and lose it. The two policies feel identical to a new hire and are opposite in court.

PTO is compensation, and it should be priced like compensation. The usual American design is a tiered grant that scales with tenure, commonly starting somewhere between 10 and 15 days and stepping up at three, five and ten years, with separate sick leave where state or local law requires it. Resist the urge to benchmark this against whatever a competitor posted on a careers page. The published source for paid leave provisions by industry, employer size and tenure is the Bureau of Labor Statistics National Compensation Survey, which is the same statistical program behind the wage data on our BLS salary data page.

The arithmetic that matters for budgeting is simple and routinely skipped. Fifteen days of PTO is 120 hours against 2,080, or 5.8 percent of paid time producing no output. On a $90,000 salary that is about $5,200 a year. Add the paid rest periods that several states require and the number climbs further; the same logic applies to the paid time built into federal and state break laws. None of that is a reason to offer less. It is a reason to put PTO into the fully loaded cost of a role before you set the range, rather than discovering it in a variance report.

This is also where PTO connects to pay bands. If two companies pay the same base salary and one offers 10 days while the other offers 20, they are not paying the same. When you build defensible salary bands the market data underneath them is base pay, so leave has to be handled as a deliberate, separate layer of the salary structure rather than an afterthought. A generous PTO grant is a legitimate reason to sit slightly below market on base, but only if you say so out loud and can show the arithmetic.

One classification note. Exempt employees are paid a fixed salary for the week regardless of hours, so partial day PTO deductions for exempt staff are governed by the salary basis rules rather than by your PTO policy. Deducting from an exempt employee's accrued PTO bank for a partial day absence is generally permitted; deducting from their pay usually is not. If you are unsure which of your people that applies to, start with exempt versus non-exempt classification.

In a payout state, the accrued PTO balance is wages, and that has a knock-on effect people miss during a reduction in force. Wages already owed buy you nothing in a separation agreement. Money an employee is already entitled to cannot serve as the consideration for a release of claims, so paying out a PTO balance and calling it severance does not purchase a waiver. The balance is owed either way. Real severance pay has to be something additional.

Timing is a separate question governed by state final pay rules, which often differ depending on whether the employee quit or was discharged, and which frequently carry penalties measured in days of pay. If a group separation is coming, work out the total accrued PTO liability before you model the severance budget, and check the notice obligations under the WARN Act at the same time. Companies routinely discover the PTO number after the offer letters have gone out.

• Best PTO policy for small business

  Accrual against unlimited, with the cost of each.

• Compa ratio calculator

  Where a salary sits against its band midpoint.

• Overtime calculator

  Regular rate and time and a half, and why paid leave never counts toward the 40 hour line.

• Wagelist for small business

  Pay bands without a compensation department.