[Foundation-l] Travel policy
by The Uninvited Co., Inc
<<<Florence Devouard wrote:
The Uninvited Co., Inc wrote:
> 1. It should be made clear that travel must be approved in advance
> before arrangements are made, in addition to the post-travel approval of
> expense reports.
Lots of bureaucracy for a quite uncertain benefit.
If a person travelling for WMF provides expenses not fitting with the
policy, he can reimburse afterwards. If the case is borderline, this can
be discussed afterwards and case clarified.
>>>
It is extremely unlikely that anyone will ever actually be denied
reimbursement for a trip on the grounds that the trip was not warranted,
because doing so would leave the traveler in the situation where they
had to pay for the trip entirely themselves. On the other hand,
approval of trips in advance provides a well-defined opportunity to
discuss the merits of a trip before the expenses are incurred. This is
not an unusual provision.
<<<
> 2. Dependent care expenses are not reimbursed by most other
> organizations and should no longer be reimbursed by the WMF now that it
> has matured.
Why ?
And, what does maturity have to do with that ?
>>>
No other organization I have worked for or volunteered for reimburses
such expenses.
The fact that we do so dates from an earlier era in our history when it
seemed to make sense. I do not believe it makes sense now, because it
is a red flag to donors and auditors. In essence, repayment of child
care expenses is repayment of an opportunity cost. The equivalent for
me, since I have a day job, would be to repay the lost wages I would
forfeit if I did not work. I don't believe that is an appropriate thing
for us to do, and I see repayment of child care expenses as equivalent.
<<<
> 4. The airfare policy should state that the lowest fare within a (e.g.)
> 2 hour departure and arrival window should be used.
Overkill imho.
>>>
The point of codifying this is to make it clear when a traveler does or
does not have to choose a lower-cost flight. Doing so is important to
maintain fairness and parity, so that it is clear that travelers need
not take late-night flights to save a few hundred dollars. The
provision is as much to protect travelers as the foundation.
<<<
> 5. The airfare policy should state whether or not and under what
> circumstances a traveler is expected to take connecting rather than
> direct flights to save money. It is usual to require a traveler to
> utilize a connecting flight if the cost savings exceeds several hundred
> dollars.
Overkill as well imho. The policy already states "The lowest available
airfares shall be sought when making bookings."
>>>
Again the point in codifying this is to make the rules clear to protect
travelers. No one should be open to criticism because they took a
nonstop flight for $100 extra to avoid additional risk of missing an
event.
<<<
> 6. Ticketing fees should be included among the reimbursable expenses.
Sorry, what is "ticketing fees" ?
>>>
Many travel agents now charge a fee to issue tickets because airline
commissions to them are no longer sufficient to allow them to make as
much money as they would like. :( While it is sometimes possible to
avoid such fees by booking directly with the airline, they are sometimes
unavoidable, such as in situations where a complicated itinerary
involving multiple carriers is being flown.
<<<
> 9. The policy should state the class of rental car which should be
> used. E.g. midsize car unless there are more than two travelers sharing
> a car.
You missed that point, already mentionned
4. VEHICLE RENTAL
Rental vehicles may be used where economical and practical. All vehicle
rentals must be for economy-class vehicles, unless three or more people
are traveling together and/or when travelers have to carry excess
baggage and/or equipment for WMF purposes. Rental vehicles must be
returned on time and with a full tank of gas to avoid additional hourly
costs and excessive refueling charges.
>>>
Car classes in the U.S. are: subcompact, compact, midsize (or
intermediate), full size, and luxury. I haven't encountered an
"economy" class. I agree with the sentiment but suggest that a
particular class should be specified. There may be an "economy" class
in other countries but plausible non-U.S. destinations have public
transit making the point moot.