this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
107 points (91.5% liked)
Asklemmy
44152 readers
748 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is idiotic. No one compensates employees for their commute.
So many ridiculous variables that would need to be factored in and so much room for abuse. Are they going to be compensated based on distance or time?
You just asked exactly the same question as the OP
I asked that question rhetorically. I was actually going to list a bunch of other questions as well to show how difficult this could turn out being, showing how stupid the idea is. What if one person is 15 miles away but no car, versus someone 40 miles away with a car? Or 2 people are the same distance away but one drives and the other doesn't? Do they get the same amount? What if someone moves further away... does that mean they get a raise?
That's what I'm asking you, my fellow Lemmy :)
The answer is they don't compensate them, because that would be silly.
Why? Bob has higher costs and longer preparation time for work.
In economic theory, the job is worth less to Bob, and he should be compensated more for taking it.
Is it fair that Bob should subsidise the company's labor costs?
Bob's labor also incurs greater costs on the communal infrastructure (roads, pollution, gas, etc), why should the company not also have a higher burden (higher tax) to compensate the commons for that?
Because the simplest option for the company is not to hire Bob.
Bob chose to live and work where he does, he can live with the consequences of his choices.
I don't feel sorry for bob.
Bob lives where they do because that's what they can afford that will fulfill their needs. If you want them to work for you, make an attractive offer. Compensating for a commute is one way to do that.
But the question is not what is simplest for the company. Arguably it would be even simpler for the company not to pay Bob, or anyone for that matter, they could also simplify a lot with not bothering with doing anything beside extracting money from people, slavery and robbery are very simple.
If we change the viewpoint from people living to serve companies, we might arrive at different conclusions, and maybe even a society better suited for humans, rather than companies.
I already answered. This is idiotic. No one does this.
Where I live (NL) β¬0,21 per kilometer (untaxed) is typical. Some get a cross country public transit pass which can be used for unlimited private trips or even car which can also be used for private trips, though for cars this is seen as income and taxed. But with tax incentives for EVs it isn't too bad.
There are also companies that pay something like β¬600-1500 per month mobility budget (taxed as income if not used, partly tax free is used for transportation options named above or KMs.) This is more typical in higher paying jobs of course.
It's less typical to see time paid.
And if you move? Do you essentially get a raise?
This system seems fraught with errors and corruption, quite frankly, amd seems like it would be infinitely easier to just pay the person a better salary to compensate and let them figure it out.
Nobody's transportation and time is going to cost less than β¬0.21 per kilometer, unless you're riding a bicycle and view that activity as adding value.
For anyone else, it's a lump sum kind of thing. You're compensated for transportation, but you still probably want to live relatively close to your workplace because there is nothing to gain from living far away.
I'm sure you can defraud the Dutch tax office but they'll fuck you over big time, and I'm not aware of any such thing going on.
Virtually no one is going to give up extra time of their live to abuse this unless they have been convinced you are worthy of the abuse.
Then itβs personal.
So my question is if thats your default stance, how much do you abuse your staff? And call it fair because its what everyone is used to?
Yea, thats not true. Where I live any employer legally has to do it. They either pay a certain amount per kilometer (defined by law) or pay your public transportation fee. I rack in about 300β¬ of travel compensation every month which covers fuel costs. Having to pay to get to work seems to bizzare to me.
Also wait till you learn our lunch breaks are paid and on top of that the company has to either provide a meal or compensate you for that too...
I replied to someone from NL and they said they got .21 Euro per km. I asked if they essentially got a raise if they moved further away. This sounds all ridiculous. If it costs $X to commute, then just negotiate a salary that is $X much more per year. I'll figure out how I get to world.
I am not from NL, so dunno how it is there, but over here that money is completely untaxed, so it is not quite the same as getting a raise. And yes, if you move the amount you get changes. But noone is dumb enough to move just to get more travel money, it barely covers gas costs, you would just be wasting your time lol.
I don't get how workers having rights and benefits is ridiculous. Honestly I think claiming that it shouldn't be a thing is the ridiculous part.
EDIT: just saw its untaxed in NL too, I guess the difference between us and NL is that for them its typical to get that paid, for us is straight up illegal for your employer not to pay that.