is it cruel when company policy only allow coach on 15-hour flight, even for the CEO?
 

Obviously I cannot name the company on a public forum, but our CEO is well-known for being frugal, extremely frugal. He/she only rides in coach on long flights likes LAX-SYD and JFK-NRT. At least the policy applies to anyone from the janitorial staff all the way to the CEO him/herself. Okay, the company doesn't send janitorial staff on long trips, or any trips, but I was just using that as an example. Anyone is free to use money or miles to upgrade, of course. The one exception where the company will spring for business or even first class is when the employee has a medical or physical condition.

My question is... isn't this cruel and unusual punishment? :( To be fair, the company is a joy to work for. I would give up sex forever for lifetime employment at the company. As with anything in life, nothing is ever 100% perfect, as is the case with the company's *only* flaw is the stupid coach-only travel policy. :D

is it cruel when company policy only allow coach on 15-hour flight, even for the CEO?
 

If your company doesn't have a corporate jet, and everyone does fly economy everywhere, it is fair. It's good that you love the company. Sometimes you cannot get everything in life.

My company cuts business class for everyone VP level below, and have corporate jets for CEO level people. This is unfair and counterproductive. It is harsh enough to fly long haul for 15 hours from JFK to HKG.

My last 3 employers have only allowed Y for all employees. I have somehow managed to survive dozens of TCONs, TPACs, and TATLs, as has everyone else, to my knowledge.

Sometimes I upgrade using miles and sometimes I just pop an Ambien and down a couple of beers and wake up at my destination in a Y seat, more or less alive.

"Cruel" might be a wee bit dramatic.

I've worked with all types of policies including both "all coach" and "J over 8 hours". It may be anathema to many here, but I'd happy trade for flexibility/freedom in the overall travel policy in exchange for booking Y tickets.

The best travel situation I ever worked under was a company who said "here's your annual travel budget - spend it wisely". I appreciated the freedom and did indeed spend that budget wisely - much more conscientious about it than in a detailed/prescriptive policy-driven organization. I flew coach, even TATL, and appreciated the fact that I was empowered to make the decisions about travel.

Part of the freedom I had was to fly a day early for meetings in Europe. I was never expected to step off the plane and immediately go into meetings. If the company is demanding that, then I think it's fair game them to spring for J.

I remember a TV news show about such an employer but my mad google skills have yet to find the person. I thought it was Jeff Bezos, though he owns his own plane. In the meantime, here's a prior FT thread on a similar topic:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...ther-jobs.html

Personally, I'd put up with it, as long as I got to keep my miles and hotel points.

"Fair" is the wrong term. You and your employer have a deal to which you have both agreed. Salary, vacation, bonuses and premium travel. If you don't like the "deal" don't take it.

I see it as penny-wise pound-foolish, but perhaps the other factors, e.g., salary & vacation make up for it. If they don't, call your headhunter.

Every company has it good points and bad points. You have to weigh all factors. If that is the only drawback and it's a joy to work there and the policy is implemented evenly, it would be a non-factor for me.

My take here is..you must not have been doing this sex thing properly if that's how you feel. ;)

In any event, flying all of that in coach is the reality for 99% of the travelling public. Whether it's appropriate for a business traveller depends on the circumstances of the travel and the business associated with it. If you took the job assuming your business travel would be done in business class or better then I can see why you'd feel a bit cheated. But then you should take your talents elsewhere.

All of this. While FT has shown me the light as far as opportunities to fly long haul quite comfortably, I have to frequently remind myself that 99% of people who travel do so in coach, and make it just fine.

I give points to the CEO who walks the walk by not treating him or herself differently than the rank and file.

Not cruel but economical.

Look at the ticket prices. Economy is so much less than business class. I have flown in business class when somebody else is paying. If I pay, I almost always fly in economy. Only twice did I pay for it myself and not fly economy. Oh, not including awards but miles are intangible...:D

You pretty much answered your own question right there. If over time the scale dips in the other direction then there will be decisions to make.

I feel that the exception in the case of an employee with "a medical or physical condition" kind of knocks out being able to call the policy "cruel".

Loving your job is a luxury many people don't have. :)

I know this may be hard to believe, given what we read on FT, but a vast, vast majority of all passengers on any long flight are in coach.

Yes, really!

Sure, I've enjoyed being upstairs on EK's A380 (23K, please), but on my own nickel I did the IST-IAD, 12 hrs, in coach. As did my family. No problems, and I'm comfortable they'll be fine when we head down under. If a 10 yr-old and teen can manage, then an adult complaining about cruelty seems hyperbolic.

is it cruel when company policy only allow coach on 15-hour flight, even for the CEO?
 

I believe DISH had that policy and also required employees to share a hotel room when traveling (of course with some exceptions and loopholes like asking vendors to book the hotel to hide the reservation)
Their CEO , Charlie Ergen, was known to be very frugal but apparently led by example.

Not necessarily if the employee then needs a day either end before being capable of working to their best ability.

The cost of that is ???