Igloo Won't Pay For Your Meat Expenses

[L00b]

17 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

It is clear from some of the self-important replies on the thread that some people are missing the clear principle here.

(...)

 It is equally clear, that several posters have zero experience of working life on expenses, particularly in a client-facing role, and the vegetarian proselytes amongst them notwithstanding 

 

Quid of the legality of Igloo's expense policy (an issue made redundant by the consensual workforce...for now), I expect would-be employees and clients to vote with -respectively- their applications and wallets, once made aware it.

[Guest makapaka]

4 hours ago, L00b said:

 It is equally clear, that several posters have zero experience of working life on expenses, particularly in a client-facing role, and the vegetarian proselytes amongst them notwithstanding 

 

Quid of the legality of Igloo's expense policy (an issue made redundant by the consensual workforce...for now), I expect would-be employees and clients to vote with -respectively- their applications and wallets, once made aware it.

Riddle me this. 

21 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

I would like the firm to actually set out why they think it's perfectly acceptable to deny the expense claim for a ham sandwich when they are are willing to pay an expense claim for a cheese sandwich.

There are any number of advantages to the planet from reducing the amount of meat we consume. 
 

So they are encouraging that via their expenses policy - which is a really good idea - in fact if all companies did it the positive impact would be huge.

 

 

[ECCOnoob]

4 hours ago, makapaka said:

Riddle me this. 

There are any number of advantages to the planet from reducing the amount of meat we consume. 
 

So they are encouraging that via their expenses policy - which is a really good idea - in fact if all companies did it the positive impact would be huge.

 

 

There are many number of advantages to the planet by not travelling around the country to flog their business products but Igloo still makes their employees do it.

 

Do you think if an employee refused to travel because of their so called "principles" they would be so supportive.  

 

Just jumping on the bandwaggon.

 

[Guest makapaka]

6 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

There are many number of advantages to the planet by not travelling around the country to flog their business products but Igloo still makes their employees do it.

 

Do you think if an employee refused to travel because of their so called "principles" they would be so supportive.  

 

Just jumping on the bandwaggon.

 

Maybe so.

 

but it’s a lot easier to reimburse for a cheese sandwich than change  business culture as a whole.

 

whats the problem - people don’t only eat meat and they can eat meat any other time.

[rachelmum]

On 23/02/2020 at 23:09, makapaka said:

Why do you agree with them setting limits

on alcohol but not meat?

 

isnt that discriminatory against people that drink alcohol?

You can still get reimbursed just have a vegetarian option.

But surely that is discriminating and dictating company choices against human choices. I don't think we are going to agree maybe you've been brainwashed I really don't know. I prefer to live a life where as an adult who knows what I like and enjoy eating I can make the choice to eat what I want. It may be a vegetarian choice it may be meat,  variety is the spice of life after all  😊

On 24/02/2020 at 18:56, Robin-H said:

Would a company that didn't pay food expenses at all be discriminating against people that eat food? 

Wouldn't be much of a  company if they don't pay business expenses. Working for them would be more of a charity volunteering type role. 

[Guest makapaka]

12 minutes ago, rachelmum said:

I prefer to live a life where as an adult who knows what I like and enjoy eating I can make the choice to eat what I want.

You can do all that. You just can’t do it if you want to claim the money back for it  from your employer cos they’re not advocating it.

 

just like you can’t get money for other things back off them if you choose to do it but they don’t agree with it.

Edited February 25, 2020 by makapaka

[rachelmum]

1 minute ago, makapaka said:

You can do all that. You just can’t do it if you want to claim the money back for it  from your employer cos they’re not advocating it.

 

just like you can’t get money for other things back off them if you choose to do it but they don’t agree with it.

Do you work for Igloo ? I 'm intrigued why you take it on yourself to defend them and hold them in such high esteem. 

[Guest makapaka]

6 minutes ago, rachelmum said:

Do you work for Igloo ? I 'm intrigued why you take it on yourself to defend them and hold them in such high esteem. 

No.

 

i just think it’s a great idea. 

[rachelmum]

Just now, makapaka said:

No.

 

i just think it’s a great idea. 

We'll agree to disagree then. I think it's good to be corporate in the way you work not in lifestyle choices. That's my personal choice and I respect yours 

11 minutes ago, makapaka said:

You can do all that. You just can’t do it if you want to claim the money back for it  from your employer cos they’re not advocating it.

 

just like you can’t get money for other things back off them if you choose to do it but they don’t agree with it.

Do you work for Igloo ? I 'm intrigued why you take it on yourself to defend them and hold them in such high esteem. 

[ECCOnoob]

2 hours ago, makapaka said:

Maybe so.

 

but it’s a lot easier to reimburse for a cheese sandwich than change  business culture as a whole.

 

whats the problem - people don’t only eat meat and they can eat meat any other time.

The problem is that the company through its operations is forcing an employee to incur expense to purchase food, denying thier employee freedom of choice in their own eating habits whilst deliberately and unfairly giving preferential treatment to those who choose not to eat meat over those who do eat meat.  

 

Quite frankly it stinks of a power trip by the clearly preacy, self righteous owner.    Small firm mentality which is just an employment tribunal away from huge embarrassment.

 

As a side note, the fact that a company with just 30 employees has a position titled "Head of Values" really says it all.