I don't think there's any magic dust sprinkled on pax in business class that neutralizes jet lag. Granted, J will yield a less frazzled passenger than Y, but there's still an effect of long-haul travel.

Again, things are not binary; there's a continuum involved. Kind of like what will get someone fired.

I will be happy to be corrected provided that the corrector provides documentation but I do not think this is a IDB and I do not think that many airlines would comp a hotel room if the passenger refused a Y seat and compensation of the difference in fare.

It would be nice if employees were so honorable as not to charge their expenses for the extra day but my experience says if they think they can get away with charging, they will.

I actually agree with you but I've read enough on FT to have drawn the conclusion that many business travelers believe that they must have J or F to be able to work after a long flight. If the employee needs 24 hours to recover, why spend $1000s more for F/J? Are you saying that you would have to allow 48 hours for recovery if Y and 24 for F/J for a long international flight? Given that the difference can be $5K-$18K between Y and J or F for some long flights, that employee would have to make a lot of money to justify 24 hours less recovery time.

Sorry but we have to agree to disagree here. Whether or not something could get you fired or thrown in jail or sued, IMO, is not the standard by which someone should comport oneself.

I may be overly sanctimonious but, IMO, that is a very low standard and below the standard of a civilised person.

While I disagree that this is a nil for the employer, please explain how this is a nil for the employee. The way it was explained, he wanted to meet with his cousin and got to do so. That is at least a +0.5 for the employee?

OK, let's call it a VDB. When I've taken an overnight VDB, the airline has thrown in a hotel room.

And I've taken an overnight VDB (or just a voluntary overnight delay due to IROPS) on many occasions over the years...I was always cautious to *not* charge anything back to a client/employer related to the delay. While I always have been and continue to be ethically comfortable with volunteering my seat on oversold flights, I recognize that it's my decision and I wouldn't project associated costs back on anyone else.

It was a stylised example to make a point...

The hotel room is comped, and it's not +1/-1 to anybody. You made the best of a bad situation by visiting a cousin when you couldn't get home in time for the weekend.

It is good to see that your ethical standards are higher than those on this board who had advocated that if it is not a fireable offense, it is acceptable.

In the end, we all have to do what we are comfortable with. While I am not religious, I do believe in karma so I do not do to others what I would not want done to me.

The problem with this kind of statement is that I can envision another "stylised example" where the hotel room is not comped (because the employee is not elite) and the employee submits food and incidental costs for reimbursement because he did not think that would get him fired. In this thought exercise, I will assert that he was stuck in a terrible marriage and, in addition, to seeing his cousin, has a mistress with box seats at an NBA game (or the Kirov or what have you) in the city where he was stuck.

In my "stylised example" it is employer -something, employee +a lot.

Under all assumptions except [all expenses are comped or paid by the employee], the employer loses something. I consider the assumption that the employer incurs NO additional costs to be unlikely. I am struggling to see how there is any win for the employer here.

The employee's gain or loss depends on what would have been done at home on that Saturday although we already know that he wanted to spend time with his cousin so there is already a slight positive to staying over.

Also, your statement that "you couldn't get home in time for the weekend" is not a true statement. The Y passengers got home at the same time as the J/F passengers. You could have returned home on schedule in Y.

Actually, my 'stylised' example is precisely what I have done many times. Instead of flying home on the Friday night I'll come back on the Saturday (or Sunday) and enjoy wherever I am (at my own expense). I've been an employee (both in big, international companies as well as in family-run businesses) and no one had ever asked or questioned this, and if they had asked I would have told them what I do in my own time is my business. No one loses, and there's no 'scamming' anyone. I don't know what Kafka-esque companies some of the people on this board work for, but you wouldn't catch me there.

Maybe you don't understand (or don't want to). The point is that the employer is no worse off. Nothing else should matter.

Jet Lag + virtually no sleep for 12 hours is a whole lot worse than Jet Lag + 6-8 hours sleep on the plane. That's why it makes a difference.

Not sure where you got those numbers. On a route that is $1k for Y you can usually get business for around $3-4k.

I think I understand and I agree with your conclusion that, if the employer is no worse off, it does not matter what the employee does. In fact, employer 0/employee + is a better situation than nil/nil and I would have no further response if that were always true. What you don't seem to understand or don't want to understand if that many employees will make the employer worse off and, in the process, gain something. In fact, reading this thread would lead one to believe that some posters will push the limits as far as they can go as long as they do not think they will get fired. You yourself said this is a "stylized example." While my example of the guy with the mistress and Kirov is unlikely, undoubtedly stuff like that happens so it is a valid "stylized example" too. Why do you dismiss that and assert your version of the example as truth?

Also, is there a reason that you did not respond to my noting that your statement that "you could not get home for the weekend" is false (Post #232)? Maybe you can't or don't want to understand that you made something up there?

Emirates just now.

ORD to BOM Depart 29 Jan, Return 3 Feb
$1209, lowest economy fare
$5,201, lowest business fare
$15,552, lowest first fare

A salaried employee would have to make ~$1M/year to justify one lost day at the J fare and correspondingly more to justify the F fare. I'm struggling to see the justification in terms of dollars and cents.

I think it has become an entitlement for corporate America to travel J long-haul. That is OK but call a spade a spade.

??? In post 232 you say the hotel is comped in the stylised example you gave. Now you say you pay for all additional costs.

It is fun to see how the story/"stylised example" evolves...just like a fairy tale. If this is a fairy tale, you should have take your flying carpet home on Friday! :)