3 ms·

What? Why? Wtf?

by sigi45 8y ago

What? Why? Wtf?

CaptainZapp 8y ago
I'm also slightly surprised by the first two replies. Expenses should definitely not be a method to get back at your employer for perceived and real sleighs. Probably, if your employer steals from you this problem should be corrected at source and not via expense claims. For what it's worth: I think that (as a for example) an Amazon employee stands in the queue for half an hour, in order to get security checked, and is not paid for that that's wage theft. Plain and simple. No matter if the courts disagree. Nevertheless you shouldn't fib expenses (as if those folks could) to get back at your employer.
- dmurray 8y ago
  The GP might be suggesting that it benefits both the employer and the employee here. The employee gets a better tax treatment and the employer can have a permissive approach to expenses when it might be politically difficult to officially give a raise.
  - CaptainZapp 8y ago
    Ah, OK. Thanks. For what it's worth: I didn't downvote. Nevertheless there seems to be an attitude in certain circles that expenses ar a form of free for all. My assumption is that you have a relationship with your employer, which pays you for work provided. If something stinks in that relationship then it's the stink, which should be removed. I'm aware that this is an idealized view. Especially in the US where courts seem to be overly employer friendly, or, even worse, where employees are completely shafted by mandatory arbitration clauses.
    - candiodari 8y ago
      You are assuming the employer - at least the first level manager, but more likely all the way up - isn't aware of this, and approves. Allowing expenses as pay is very common, widely practiced and normal. From buying books to hotel room stays to letting family travel along for long trips (and providing entertainment for them). Seems to happen all the time. Hell, isn't the white house an example of it ? (I would also like to point out that buying meat for a snake might simply be a mistake. I certainly would have tried feeding a python something dead first, wtf)
  - detaro 8y ago
    Although an official policy of being permissive with what expenses are covered seems like it'd be better than "we look away when you lie on your expenses claim". Legal safety for the employee, more fairness among employees. E.g. the first example in the article of someone having the company pay for dog care during business travel seems something that'd be fairly easy to justify as a policy.

What? Why? Wtf?

by sigi45 8y ago

What? Why? Wtf?

I'm also slightly surprised by the first two replies. Expenses should definitely not be a method to get back at your employer for perceived and real sleighs. Probably, if your employer steals from you this problem should be corrected at source and not via expense claims. For what it's worth: I think that (as a for example) an Amazon employee stands in the queue for half an hour, in order to get security checked, and is not paid for that that's wage theft. Plain and simple. No matter if the courts disagree. Nevertheless you shouldn't fib expenses (as if those folks could) to get back at your employer.

dmurray 8y ago
The GP might be suggesting that it benefits both the employer and the employee here. The employee gets a better tax treatment and the employer can have a permissive approach to expenses when it might be politically difficult to officially give a raise.
- CaptainZapp 8y ago
  Ah, OK. Thanks. For what it's worth: I didn't downvote. Nevertheless there seems to be an attitude in certain circles that expenses ar a form of free for all. My assumption is that you have a relationship with your employer, which pays you for work provided. If something stinks in that relationship then it's the stink, which should be removed. I'm aware that this is an idealized view. Especially in the US where courts seem to be overly employer friendly, or, even worse, where employees are completely shafted by mandatory arbitration clauses.
  - candiodari 8y ago
    You are assuming the employer - at least the first level manager, but more likely all the way up - isn't aware of this, and approves. Allowing expenses as pay is very common, widely practiced and normal. From buying books to hotel room stays to letting family travel along for long trips (and providing entertainment for them). Seems to happen all the time. Hell, isn't the white house an example of it ? (I would also like to point out that buying meat for a snake might simply be a mistake. I certainly would have tried feeding a python something dead first, wtf)
- detaro 8y ago
  Although an official policy of being permissive with what expenses are covered seems like it'd be better than "we look away when you lie on your expenses claim". Legal safety for the employee, more fairness among employees. E.g. the first example in the article of someone having the company pay for dog care during business travel seems something that'd be fairly easy to justify as a policy.