Jump to content

Igloo Won't Pay For Your Meat Expenses

Recommended Posts

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, makapaka said:

Riddle me this. 

(...)

Are you asking me to give you a dumbed-down version of my post? :confused:

Edited by L00b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 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.

As both myself and Loob have mentioned, how does this work over a prolonged period of time?

 

Have you ever had to claim expenses for more than a sandwich on a day out yourself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, the_bloke said:

As both myself and Loob have mentioned, how does this work over a prolonged period of time?

Well, for the pro-vegetarians, it works great: workers on expense get weaned off meat products, and hopefully adopt vegetarian dietary ways over time ; and ever more of them if the policy gains traction, resulting in ever less meat consumed by workers on expenses. Virtuous circle, so far as (proselyte) vegetarians are concerned.

 

The eventual knock-on effect on the meat supply market and pricing, helps turn meat products into ever more of a luxury, a state of affairs readily accepted by most everyone by then, conditioned as they have become to only ever eat meat as a special personal treat.

 

Know your place, peasants worker bees: meat is for your lord bosses and shareholders only :D

Edited by L00b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, the_bloke said:

As both myself and Loob have mentioned, how does this work over a prolonged period of time?

 

Have you ever had to claim expenses for more than a sandwich on a day out yourself?

Yes I incur expenses every day.

 

ive worked away permanently and semi permanently and only worked in my home town for small periods in my entire working life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alcohol is not required to live, food is - hence one is expensible and the other isn't.

 

If I worked there, I'd eat whatever I wanted and just claim an extra hour of overtime to expense it if they weren't going to pay it (unless of course they're salaried, but there are ways and means round most systems)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, whiteowl said:

Alcohol is not required to live, food is - hence one is expensible and the other isn't.

 

If I worked there, I'd eat whatever I wanted and just claim an extra hour of overtime to expense it if they weren't going to pay it (unless of course they're salaried, but there are ways and means round most systems)

Meat isn’t required to live either. They are still letting people claim for food. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robin-H said:

Meat isn’t required to live either. They are still letting people claim for food. 

.......but only with the extreme exclusions of food products which are widely accepted and readilly available, instead choosing to limit such food choice to just items that THEY personally deem morally acceptable.     

 

You really think that's right for an employer to place such restrictions on their staff - even more so when they are working outside of normal hours and away from their home? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

.......but only with the extreme exclusions of food products which are widely accepted and readilly available, instead choosing to limit such food choice to just items that THEY personally deem morally acceptable.     

 

You really think that's right for an employer to place such restrictions on their staff - even more so when they are working outside of normal hours and away from their home? 

I think it's absolutely within their right yes. 

 

I don't think saying they won't pay for meat is an 'extreme exclusion' of food products. The company is trying to be more eco conscious, and have determined that incentivising the reduction in meat consumption is a relatively easy way of achieving this, considering the well established and understood negative impacts that meat production has on the environment.

 

They are not saying you can't eat meat. You can work there and gorge 24 hours a day on ribeye steak and nobody could stop you. All they are saying is that they won't pay for the privilege, and let's not forget that the western diet is a privilege. The earth could not sustain us if everyone ate a western diet. It can barely sustain us now. I think people complaining and crying discrimination about this one attempt to reduce their environmental impact need to look at the the bigger picture. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Robin-H said:

I think it's absolutely within their right yes. 

 

I don't think saying they won't pay for meat is an 'extreme exclusion' of food products. The company is trying to be more eco conscious, and have determined that incentivising the reduction in meat consumption is a relatively easy way of achieving this, considering the well established and understood negative impacts that meat production has on the environment.

 

They are not saying you can't eat meat. You can work there and gorge 24 hours a day on ribeye steak and nobody could stop you. All they are saying is that they won't pay for the privilege, and let's not forget that the western diet is a privilege. The earth could not sustain us if everyone ate a western diet. It can barely sustain us now. I think people complaining and crying discrimination about this one attempt to reduce their environmental impact need to look at the the bigger picture. 

 

 

Amen brother/sister.

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.