Contract Restaurants???
Aug 26, 2012 | 2:39 pm
#31
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Northern California
Programs: UA Premier Gold, 1.5 Million Mile Flyer
Posts: 3,696
Please re-read my post. I am assuming you would be eating at home when you are home. It still costs money to eat at home. I believe that a small per diem is in order to help pay for the extra cost of being forced to eat out, not the total cost.
Aug 26, 2012 | 6:34 pm
#32
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: US
Programs: DL GE
Posts: 1,654
The cost to be an employee needs to be weighed by the employee, if you don't want to pay for meals when you're being paid to travel the compensation isn't high enough and you shouldn't take the job.
Employee meals are simply another convoluted system of rewarding employees, in my opinion it's a lot less messy to just pay the employee a wage that is considered the industry "norm" and the employee can eat ham sandwiches if he wants to while traveling for work.
I guess it really doesn't matter, eventually there will be fewer and fewer people traveling for work thanks to technological advances and also because there will be fewer and fewer jobs....
If I have an employee work 13 hours in a row(a double) should I be required to BUY their lunch? After all they would otherwise be forced to financially shell out for food while "on" the clock(during their paid lunch/dinner break)
I give people money, they do a job that may require a uniform, training, travel, gas to get to work, gas to get home, hair cuts, shaving, etc.
Frankly as a business owner and also as someone that's been an employee, cash in the pocket of the employee is better than ME or them deciding benefits.
Happy employees are productive employees, the more work that is involved to make them happy means a loss of productivity.
Employee meals are simply another convoluted system of rewarding employees, in my opinion it's a lot less messy to just pay the employee a wage that is considered the industry "norm" and the employee can eat ham sandwiches if he wants to while traveling for work.
I guess it really doesn't matter, eventually there will be fewer and fewer people traveling for work thanks to technological advances and also because there will be fewer and fewer jobs....
If I have an employee work 13 hours in a row(a double) should I be required to BUY their lunch? After all they would otherwise be forced to financially shell out for food while "on" the clock(during their paid lunch/dinner break)
I give people money, they do a job that may require a uniform, training, travel, gas to get to work, gas to get home, hair cuts, shaving, etc.
Frankly as a business owner and also as someone that's been an employee, cash in the pocket of the employee is better than ME or them deciding benefits.
Happy employees are productive employees, the more work that is involved to make them happy means a loss of productivity.
I accepted my current position (which is not grunt work as I think you might be assuming) based on a salary and benefits I negotiated. I also accepted it with the flexible travel policy in mind.
I don't have time on-site to go shopping for a weeks worth of brown bag and at-home meals, nor the ability in most cases to store/prepare them.
I am expected to manage the amount of money I get a day to provide all my meals and necessities (snacks, water, etc..). If I go over my allotment, I pay the difference. We are not expected to eat unhealthy McMeals to save money, as in the long run, my employer also provides my health insurance.
If the travel policy wasn't designed like it is, I wouldn't had accepted it.
Just my two cents..
Aug 26, 2012 | 6:50 pm
#33
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: US
Programs: DL GE
Posts: 1,654
When I am out of town I still have to provide for my family to eat, they are still going to make the same things we make when I am there in a smaller portion that you really can't relate to an actual savings.
Then, when I eat on the road, I am paying often triple what it would cost me to make it for my family along with drinks, taxes and tips...
Take for instance, I love making Fajitas. We pay around $28 for our family of five, so about $5.60 a person. If my wife makes them when I am gone you are talking about a savings of maybe $3 or $4. There is usually never any left over.
So if I go to Chili's and get fajitas, they cost what, $16, plus $2 for a drink, tax and tip you are looking at around $22 maybe? How do you logically decide what per-diem rate to enforce that would take all of this into account? How do you determine what my cost would be ($5.60) and apply it to three meals a day?
I am paid to do a job and expected to focus on getting that job done on time and to the satisfaction of the client which is what actually makes us money, not nickle and dimming our own employees to save $15 a day..
Aug 26, 2012 | 8:20 pm
#34
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Northern California
Programs: UA Premier Gold, 1.5 Million Mile Flyer
Posts: 3,696
Take for instance, I love making Fajitas. We pay around $28 for our family of five, so about $5.60 a person. If my wife makes them when I am gone you are talking about a savings of maybe $3 or $4. There is usually never any left over.
So if I go to Chili's and get fajitas, they cost what, $16, plus $2 for a drink, tax and tip you are looking at around $22 maybe? How do you logically decide what per-diem rate to enforce that would take all of this into account? How do you determine what my cost would be ($5.60) and apply it to three meals a day?
Be that as it may, good for you that your employer is willing to spend more for your meals.
Aug 27, 2012 | 8:13 am
#35
Join Date: May 2009
Location: SIN (with a bit of ZRH sprinkled in)
Programs: KrisFlyer Gold
Posts: 9,605
As an employer, I logically decide you are going to get $20-25 a day per diem. Maybe slightly higher in certain cities. It's not an exact science. If you negotiate a higher amount, I will negotiate it right out of your base pay. I don't expect you to be able to eat breakfast, lunch, and a $22 dinner every day without chipping in yourself. I never expected it for myself, and I am far from alone. My employees over the years have by and large considered traveling for work to be a privilege not a burden. Special perks are rarely if ever asked for.
Be that as it may, good for you that your employer is willing to spend more for your meals.
Be that as it may, good for you that your employer is willing to spend more for your meals.
My former and my current employeer do pay me whatever I spend on any restaurant I choose, up to a certain limit. (Which is generous enough) I'm free to choose if I eat a good steak and have a nice wine, or if I prefer some unhealthy junk food and lots of beers.. employeers shouldn't act as nannys.
I think a fixed day expenses isn't such a great idea - my former work had some departments running on it, and some (like mine) where we got reimbursed up to a certain limit of on the road.. you can imagine the discussions we had, when we were on a trip and had people from several departments with different policies..
So, have a limit which allows the workers on travel duty to eat good, but not splurge, is what I find correct. That means maybe having 10-15 limit for lunch, 20-30 for dinner, if you like to eat more expensive, please, go ahead, but the company don't need to pay it all.
Aug 27, 2012 | 8:54 am
#36
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 129
I'm looking at it from the basis that employee meals ARE calculated into the overall cost of doing the business, which does affect the rest of your compensation.
I treat my employees like humans, I pay them, they do work, we hang out occasionally. The one thing I don't let them do is walk all over me when it comes to business, because a unprofitable business isn't a business it's a charity.
Would you rather have the per diem set for dining out or have it tacked onto your paycheck so you can decide whether you want to go to Chiles or brown bag it?
They also shouldn't be required to act as sugar daddies.... But employees nowadays are more entitled than ever, so it is what it is.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, and when there is it comes with strings attached and a cost of some kind.
Aug 27, 2012 | 12:57 pm
#37
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,944
I have been doing the weekly travel thing for ~15 years ... and have
seen lots of changes in the name of "expense control." Recently, meal
caps were swizzled (reduced) and declared to be per-diems. That works
better for me, since I tend to seek the local hole-in-the-wall establishments
that do something special (and I can pocket the difference).
Now we are being told to use our per-diem at restaurants with which the
company has negotiated rebates ... and to log/report the meal expense
by using the corporate credit card but reporting it as non-reimbursable.
Uh, okay, it's the new rule. Got it.
Anyone else dealing with such tortured per-diem re-definition and logic?
I am so not looking forward to next week's trip, where the preferred
restaurants are:
- Dennys
- Texas Roadhouse
- Outback
- Carrabbas
- Bonefish
It may be time to claim Kosher or Halal dietary restrictions. <g>
seen lots of changes in the name of "expense control." Recently, meal
caps were swizzled (reduced) and declared to be per-diems. That works
better for me, since I tend to seek the local hole-in-the-wall establishments
that do something special (and I can pocket the difference).
Now we are being told to use our per-diem at restaurants with which the
company has negotiated rebates ... and to log/report the meal expense
by using the corporate credit card but reporting it as non-reimbursable.
Uh, okay, it's the new rule. Got it.
Anyone else dealing with such tortured per-diem re-definition and logic?
I am so not looking forward to next week's trip, where the preferred
restaurants are:
- Dennys
- Texas Roadhouse
- Outback
- Carrabbas
- Bonefish
It may be time to claim Kosher or Halal dietary restrictions. <g>
> Is it still a "per diem" if they tell you where you have to eat?
They're still calling it "per diem." But that's not the GSA defn of per diem.
> If you don't eat at one of these places, do you get less than
> the normal per diem?
I asked that question ... and got a lot of mumbling about, "we think many
people are now eating cheaper and pocketing the difference." (Doh!) "We
expect you to eat at the contract restaurants ... Not following expense
reporting guidelines is considered falsifying an expense report." <Gulp>
When I asked if I could not-claim a per diem in order to avoid any possible
worries about falsifying an expense ... resulted in an eye-roll and no direct
answer.
At the time, I did not think to ask about Kosher or Halal dietary restrictions. <g>
They're still calling it "per diem." But that's not the GSA defn of per diem.
> If you don't eat at one of these places, do you get less than
> the normal per diem?
I asked that question ... and got a lot of mumbling about, "we think many
people are now eating cheaper and pocketing the difference." (Doh!) "We
expect you to eat at the contract restaurants ... Not following expense
reporting guidelines is considered falsifying an expense report." <Gulp>
When I asked if I could not-claim a per diem in order to avoid any possible
worries about falsifying an expense ... resulted in an eye-roll and no direct
answer.
At the time, I did not think to ask about Kosher or Halal dietary restrictions. <g>
Aug 27, 2012 | 3:30 pm
#38
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: ORD
Programs: Hertz 5*, United Gold (Soon to be gone), Hilton Diamond
Posts: 383
As an employer, I logically decide you are going to get $20-25 a day per diem. Maybe slightly higher in certain cities. It's not an exact science. If you negotiate a higher amount, I will negotiate it right out of your base pay. I don't expect you to be able to eat breakfast, lunch, and a $22 dinner every day without chipping in yourself. I never expected it for myself, and I am far from alone. My employees over the years have by and large considered traveling for work to be a privilege not a burden. Special perks are rarely if ever asked for.
Be that as it may, good for you that your employer is willing to spend more for your meals.
Be that as it may, good for you that your employer is willing to spend more for your meals.
Aug 27, 2012 | 3:46 pm
#39
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,253
Any business which operates as you suggest one should, will lose its best people to competitors and be stuck circling the drain with the rejects.
Traveling for business is neither a privilege nor "cool" after a short period of time. Employees should not be spending their own money supporting business activities and the good ones won't. The bad ones will do whatever they are asked because they've got nowhere to go and a lousy company circling the drain is better than unemployment --- barely.
Traveling for business is neither a privilege nor "cool" after a short period of time. Employees should not be spending their own money supporting business activities and the good ones won't. The bad ones will do whatever they are asked because they've got nowhere to go and a lousy company circling the drain is better than unemployment --- barely.
Aug 27, 2012 | 4:12 pm
#40
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 129
Good employees know what they're worth and understand that they don't need bogus benefits if they're being paid what they're worth.
"Good" employees should resent being given per diems and instead should just opt for better pay.
A good employee knows he's replaceable but knows how to leverage his benefits towards maximum compensation. A good employer pays his employees well and treats them with respect but knows how to manage costs.
Aug 27, 2012 | 4:13 pm
#41
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ACT/GRK/DAL/ABI/MIA/FLL
Programs: OMNIArchist, OMNIArchy!, OMNIIDGAS
Posts: 23,478
Aug 27, 2012 | 4:15 pm
#42
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ACT/GRK/DAL/ABI/MIA/FLL
Programs: OMNIArchist, OMNIArchy!, OMNIIDGAS
Posts: 23,478
As an employer, I logically decide you are going to get $20-25 a day per diem. Maybe slightly higher in certain cities. It's not an exact science. If you negotiate a higher amount, I will negotiate it right out of your base pay. I don't expect you to be able to eat breakfast, lunch, and a $22 dinner every day without chipping in yourself. I never expected it for myself, and I am far from alone. My employees over the years have by and large considered traveling for work to be a privilege not a burden. Special perks are rarely if ever asked for.
Be that as it may, good for you that your employer is willing to spend more for your meals.
Be that as it may, good for you that your employer is willing to spend more for your meals.
What company do you run, I want to put a huge line through it....
Aug 27, 2012 | 4:58 pm
#43
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Northern California
Programs: UA Premier Gold, 1.5 Million Mile Flyer
Posts: 3,696
Aug 27, 2012 | 7:34 pm
#44
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ACT/GRK/DAL/ABI/MIA/FLL
Programs: OMNIArchist, OMNIArchy!, OMNIIDGAS
Posts: 23,478
Small outfit. 1 to 5 employees. Believe it or not, there are loads of people who would even take a cut in pay to be able to travel for work with hotel and transportation paid for. I have been that guy for 30+ years. Paid travel is a huge perk in itself for many. Proven every time I have advertised a job. I would not consider hiring someone for a traveling job who considered travel to be a burden. Actually I did once. It didn't work out.
Aug 27, 2012 | 8:43 pm
#45
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Northern California
Programs: UA Premier Gold, 1.5 Million Mile Flyer
Posts: 3,696