Originally Posted by
Nhilar
Your implication is that these people should not be hired. Which if the dietary reasons are due to religious (no pork, no meat, exedra) or medical (no gluten, carbs, etc.) would be very illegal to bring up in an interview (USA).
It's not illegal for a potential hire to bring that up in an interview. It's only illegal for the employer to decide not to hire someone because of their religion.
It is very unreasonable that because you are a cheapo and have no care about what you shove down your gullet to expect other people should behave as you do. Travel is very expensive for an employee, far more expensive than most people realize, far more than companies reimburse. It has been demonstrated that the additional costs are 1) Opportunity costs of not being home 2) Extra wear and tear on clothing (statistically proven) 3) Extra health implications cause by long flights (statistically proven) 4) Cast to provide luggage 5) Unreimbursed time for packing, unpacking, local travel, etc. Are you are complaining that someone wants to eat in a fashion that they are satisfied with and that they would otherwise if not at home?
Of all the overblown arguments you've made against business travel, the one I bolded is the most ridiculous.
If business travel is that onerous to you, then don't take a job that requires travel. Problem solved.
Most people can deal with long flights and "unreimbursed packing time" (another ridiculous complaint). The FF miles and visits to other cities on the company's dime are worth it.
What makes business travel irritating (besides things out of everyone's control, like bad weather or rude airline employees) is whiny complaining picky high maintenance co-workers. Fortunately I never had to deal with that.