> We should have no sympathy for 'balance sheet' or accounting reasons for anything.

I don't see what sympathy has to do with it. The state of the balance sheet is a concrete concern for investors, and therefore for companies seeking investors, independently of whether you have sympathy for it or not.

> Regardless of how much vacation time is on the books as a liability, the company's cash flows are exactly the same.

Possibly, but so what? The statement of cash flows matters, of course -- particularly in the short term -- but investors care ultimately about value, not cash flow. (After all, borrowing money produces a positive cash flow the same as selling product does, the difference is that the former also accumulates liability.)

Sympathy may have been a poor choice of word. What I meant was: accounting considerations should not have any bearing on how companies treat employees. Especially when the 'accounting' is not something that actually affects the money coming in/out of the company.

The liabilities may matter to investors, but that doesn't mean that they actually affect the business. If I have all of my vacation days left or none, there is zero impact on the the company's business. Value is not effected at all.

> The liabilities may matter to investors, but that doesn't mean that they actually affect the business.

If they affect investors, they (1) effect the current owners, serving whose interests is the whole purpose of having a business, and (2) they affect the company's ability to secure financing and the terms of that financing, which affects every aspect of its business.

So, no, you're just plain wrong here.

> If I have all of my vacation days left or none, there is zero impact on the the company's business.

It has exactly the same impact on a company's business as any other debt, which is substantially more than none.

> The liabilities may matter to investors, but that doesn't mean that they actually affect the business. If I have all of my vacation days left or none, there is zero impact on the the company's business. Value is not effected at all.

That's completely untrue. If you are billed out at some rate X, then having 2 weeks of vacation coming up this year directly impacts future value vs having 0 vacation days. That's X * 2 * 40 hours of future value. It affects value in the same way that any debt affects value.

Right, but if I'm understanding all this correctly, unused vacation time exists as outstanding debts that can be called in as soon as an employee departs.

In theory, that could be enough to tank a company that otherwise might've (somehow) survived the departure of their employees.