3 ms·
> Because it's not the sort of expense that companies normally cover. Which is precisely what my post was saying was an issue with existing policy. I find it a
by Someone1234 8y ago
> Because it's not the sort of expense that companies normally cover.
Which is precisely what my post was saying was an issue with existing policy. I find it a little odd that you'd respond to point out the norm, to a post complaining about the norm, and expect the norm to be in and of itself a justification.
Work created an additional cost via required travel. It isn't at all similar to your "clothing for meetings" example because you'd need those without the travel component. When travel itself creates additional costs: those costs should be compensated.
- ghaff 8y agoAnd I'm saying there are any number of second order expenses associated with traveling a lot. For example, I have a lawn service that I probably wouldn't need if I were at home all the time. My driveway is too long to shovel by hand anyway but even if it weren't I'd need to get a service for when I'm away in the winter. Maybe the norm is wrong and a company should cover those things. (And the kennel seems to be more directly connected to travel than my other examples.) But it's not really surprising that most don't.