Jump to content
The Christmas Logo Competition is back. See thread in Sheffield Discussions for details ×

Igloo Won't Pay For Your Meat Expenses

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, makapaka said:

It also has negatives - physically and environmentally.

 

there is no discrimination - it’s an expense policy that’s all - no one is being prevented from eating meat.

 

 

By Igloo's own admission it's a pro vegetarian policy which has nothing to do with expenses.  Of course it's discrimination because meat eaters aren't allowed to choose what they want to eat at Igloo's expense while working when vegetarian only eaters are allowed to choose what they want to eat at Igloo's expense while working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, West 77 said:

eat at Igloo's expense

This is the bit why it’s not discriminatory mate.

 

its their own policy which they’re entitled to invoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, makapaka said:

This is the bit why it’s not discriminatory mate.

 

its their own policy which they’re entitled to invoke.

I agree it's Igloo's own policy. You obviously don't understand the definition of discrimination if you can't acknowledge meat eaters who work for Igloo are being discriminated against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, West 77 said:

I agree it's Igloo's own policy. You obviously don't understand the definition of discrimination if you can't acknowledge meat eaters who work for Igloo are being discriminated against.

I would say the opposite - and that if you think discrimination is an employer making people eat vegetarian foods when they are using the employers money to fund it - you don’t understand the definition.

 

theyre not refusing anybody the right to eat on their expense - only that it’s in line with their policy.

 

its like accusing a vegetarian restaurant of being discriminatory. It’s just not.

Edited by makapaka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst my employment law knowledge is pretty rusty and I will be happy to be corrected by my fellow legal colleagues - surely there has to be legalities at play here.

 

Client functions and food provided directly by the employer is one thing but if that employer is sending their staff out on regular trips away from their usual workplace and particularly overnight stays I am pretty sure that there are clear laws about such employee being able to claim back their expenses for meals.

 

It is certainly pretty arguable that alcohol may not be entitled within any expense policy but I really find it difficult to believe that they have any legal right to debar an employee who is forced to work away from home from freely choosing whatever category of food they wish to eat.

 

Just imagine a scenario if this company had an employee who was extremely fussy eater and chose to only ever eat Big Macs.  Is it really feasible that company will be so stuck to their vegan/veggie principles that the employee would be left with no choice but to fund their own food or starve.

 

I'm certainly very interested to see a test case on this and will love to see how the employer would hold their ground.

Edited by ECCOnoob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, West 77 said:

By Igloo's own admission it's a pro vegetarian policy which has nothing to do with expenses.  Of course it's discrimination because meat eaters aren't allowed to choose what they want to eat at Igloo's expense while working when vegetarian only eaters are allowed to choose what they want to eat at Igloo's expense while working.

There is no discrimination.


Meat eaters aren’t allowed to charge meat to expenses.

 

Likewise, non meat eaters aren’t allowed to charge meat to expenses.

 

That seems pretty non-discriminatory to me.

 

Anyway, if you fancy a laugh, wrap your (vegan) mince pies around this froth:

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/02/19/not-meat-eaters-need-morality-check-vegans/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can spot the people in this thread who've never worked away for weeks at a time and claimed expenses for food, accomodation and travel. If I'm being sent to somewhere like the USA or Japan for work, I'm paying for my own food up front (or it's going on a company credit card), and whilst I accept that my expenses will be paid for food within reason (i.e. a cost per meal per day) what I eat and where I eat is my business.

 

I assume that Igloo staff expenses are only claims for lunchtime sandwiches and drinks when showing a client a property rather than for any prolonged period of time.

Edited by the_bloke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/02/2020 at 22:23, Pettytom said:

There is no discrimination.


Meat eaters aren’t allowed to charge meat to expenses.

 

Likewise, non meat eaters aren’t allowed to charge meat to expenses.

 

That seems pretty non-discriminatory to me.

 

Anyway, if you fancy a laugh, wrap your (vegan) mince pies around this froth:

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/02/19/not-meat-eaters-need-morality-check-vegans/

We all know a business wouldn't get away with having an anti vegetarian policy which only reimbursed  employees who only eat meat.  If Igloo had a policy of not paying for Vegetarian or Vegan meal expenses then there would be uproar because the minority would be discriminated against 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/02/2020 at 10:51, L00b said:

 

It's just imbecilic virtue-signalling. But hey, it's their business right to do so, and the markets (employment, customers) will decide, as always.

Well it's not their right. In my case if they tried that they would walk straight into a Equality Act minefield as soon as they imposed it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, West 77 said:

We all know a business wouldn't get away with having an anti vegetarian policy which only reimbursed  employees who only eat meat.  If Igloo had a policy of not paying for Vegetarian or Vegan meal expenses then there would be uproar because the minority would be discriminated against 

Yes because that would prevent a vegetarian / vegan from getting anything wouldn’t it? But that’s not the case in the reverse.

19 hours ago, Obelix said:

Well it's not their right. In my case if they tried that they would walk straight into a Equality Act minefield as soon as they imposed it...

Of course it’s their right.

 

the same as they can say they won’t reimburse for fags,  or balloons, or coat hangers etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/02/2020 at 19:38, makapaka said:

I would say the opposite - and that if you think discrimination is an employer making people eat vegetarian foods when they are using the employers money to fund it - you don’t understand the definition.

 

theyre not refusing anybody the right to eat on their expense - only that it’s in line with their policy.

 

its like accusing a vegetarian restaurant of being discriminatory. It’s just not.

I think you will find it absolutely is discrimination towards carnivores .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, jonnyhonda said:

I think you will find it absolutely is discrimination towards carnivores .

Humans are omnivorous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.