roberino

I used to get told that I had to use the corporate TA for flight bookings. They were only open for new bookings in US business hours, which was a pain, and I always found cheaper options for the same routing/airline online while I was talking to them and badgered them about it. In the end I got them to send me quotes for flights then booked my own online and attached their quote to my expense report to justify not using the TA. It usually saved 20-40% and one of my bonus targets is cost reduction in travel.

Badenoch

One of my clients insists all travel be booked through their corporate agent. Flight costs are typically 15-20 per cent higher than I can find on-line.

swanscn

This is pretty typical and for once there may be a good reason(s) for it.
1) The company may have a Volume Purchase Agreement (VPA) with the agency, so the more business they do the more with that agency the more money they get back. And this would not show up on a individual ticket.
2) There may be VPA's with airlines and the agency is making sure they are being met.
These are just some of the potential reasons for this.

invisible

I think I have a prime case for subj based on first-hand experience.

Friend of mine was sent from US to work at customer's location at Kuala Lumpur. The thing is - travel policy outlines min and max expenses per day for hotel, breakfast, lunch and dinner.

For first couple of days he got a room close to the customer's office so he could basically work from hotel to there. The thing was - hotel was like USD $50/night which was less than policy outlined - it should be within $100-$300/night range and he had trouble explaining why it was so low. He got the the same problem when he tried to expense $5 dinner at local hawker center.

He learned lesson quickly, immediately moved to Ritz Carlton and started using Uber XL to go to office and back, as well try to spend USD $25 for breakfast, $40 for lunch and $75 for dinner daily in fanciest places possible.

swanscn

Interesting, I originally posted in this thread in 2012 and not much has changed.
Saying a sales call can be handled via phone of WebEx maybe a be naiveté. That is not to say it can not be done I have been quite successful at doing just this. Generally my rule is if the deal is less than say $300,000 I will not be flying for a sales call. What I am attempting to do is keep the cost of the sale lower. But there are always exceptions, I completed a $4,000,000+ USD sale with never once a face to face meeting.
Back in 2012 I stated after 35 years now it is approaching 40 years and I am getting near retirement again, this time for good. It appears that as time has gone by things continue the trend line down. Here are some things that recently were announced to reduce costs.
Company paid AE card being changed to Employee paid card
Company now will require all Airfare to be on employee card instead of corporate billing
Business calls only if actual flight time greater than 10 hours and after you have made this trip 3 or more times in the previous 12 months
Just a few this last bullet is actually a improvement over the 6x requirement that I was had

mdkowals

This is a spinoff from the "ways companies make you spend more money thread" where staying the weekend in London would have saved an FT member's company some money vs. flying back immediately.


Should employers start promoting employees taking the weekend stayover?


Benefits:
1) Can be cost effective, especially for business class travelers (as discussed in the other thread).
2) Can increase productivity on multiple levels:


Say I'm flying to Belgium for a week long meeting (scheduled Monday - Friday). Without the weekend stayover, I'm going to attempt to "make the most" of every night there. I'm not going to do anything to jeopardize my career - but I'm going to push the limits of what I can explore every night of the week, causing a marginal (but hopefully unnoticeable) drop in productivity. If I know I'm sitting on 2 free days and nights on my own, I'm much more liable to maximize rest during the week and save exploration for the weekend.


In addition, every Monday - Friday meeting I've been through really starts to hit road blocks and slowly draining attention spans toward the end of the week. Why not make these meetings Wed-Tues? This allows the "host" company the early part of week one to get logistics in order, and allows the team a chance to reset before continuing with the second half of planned activities!


In short, it can save companies a bunch of money and lead to better outcomes.

EricH

This seems more than a little self-serving. What's keeping you from doing what the company sent you to do and then staying the weekend to play tourist on your own dime?

CPRich

a - You do all the work, enjoy the weekend, and charge $5,000 in expenses

b - You do all the work then fly home Friday night, and charge $7,000 in expenses.

I just don't understand those who think a is so terrible. Just like folks who hate saving energy, pollution, etc., through Green Choice programs, because the hotel saves money.

Is it just spite?

My company has had a "stay at the location as long as expenses are less than traveling home" policy for the 25 years I've been there. It's one small perk that makes being on the road 40+ weeks a year bearable. Apologies to those who hate me for that.

IMOA

I spend more than half the weekends in a year staying over somewhere internationally. Company pays hotel, per diem as normal as I'm there for work regardless of the fact it's a weekend, public holiday or whatever.

It's really not an unusual thing, I was quite surprised anyone or any company has an issue with it.

MSPeconomist

The potential issue is when the weekend falls before or after all of the business activities. If there are business obligations before and after the weekend there normally shouldn't be an issue.

Often1

What OP proposes is very common practice at many businesses. But, his reasoning and veiled threat is a sign of immaturity.

Bottom line is that many employers see the extra weekend days as a cost savings and a productivity enhancer. Because the look at the bottom line, it is a win-win.

OP's reasoning is simply flawed. The same employers look at both expense reports and productivity. For high producers, they don't care if someone has an extra drink or three. For those circling the drain (and it is often those who "push the limits") they care a whole lot and it becomes yet one more reason to suggest that they will be happier with another employer.

FatnLoud

Sorry, I can't see a veiled threat or any immaturity.

Companies I worked for never had a problem if the overall cost was lower. Even if the work was Mon-Fri, if someone wanted to go out on the previous Saturday or return on the following Sunday, that was OK

roberino

Well your maths doesn't quite add up in any case. If your meeting is Mon-Fri then you need to fly in on Sat, land on Sun and then you have a whole day to fritter away to your heart's content while also benefitting from the weekend airfare.

And if you're doing things on a work trip knowing they're going to impact your productivity then maybe you should not do them? Just sayin'...

roberino

In my team we're allowed to add the weekend as long as, A, we can show it saves costs, and B, we don't expense any alcohol or entertainment for those weekend days. If anyone above my boss asks about it he just says "It was cheaper".

deniah

"promote the weekend stayover".... you mean encourage employees to be away from home/family for longer without necessity, especially on their personal time?

no, employers shouldnt do that

employees are free to ask for it, and if it makes sense it makes sense (regardless of whether the extra stay is comped or not).

our young people do this plenty, and ive done plenty of it in my single phase. but no, it shouldnt be "encouraged"