"Recliner" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
I've heard that this is already happening, unfortunately.

No, the opposite is true.


The majority of flights I make are in classless aircraft, those that are not
have either no FC section or only 12 - 16 FC seats

The traditional FC passenger is now the private jet hirer.

I don't suggest that BC and FC will disappear just that most airlines will
have to depend on the price sensitive market.
The companies I have worked for have all had policies for travelling that
mandate coach for 4Hrs and then case by case above that..
e.g. Business class if working within 8 hours of arrival.

In message , at 21:48:10 on Fri, 23
Oct 2009, Buddenbrooks remarked:
The companies I have worked for have all had policies for travelling
that mandate coach for 4Hrs and then case by case above that..
e.g. Business class if working within 8 hours of arrival.

A more useful rule for the latter might be: Coach, unless you have to
work within total flight length hours of arrival.

But that has the difficulty that getting home exhausted at 6pm [local]
on a Saturday after flying overnight for 14 hours, might not trigger the
rule. Do employers consider having a "Sunday off" as something the
employee is entitled to, without it being entirely consumed by
recovering from the flight?
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 21:48:10 on Fri, 23
Do employers consider having a "Sunday off" as something the
employee is entitled to, without it being entirely consumed by recovering
from the flight?


An employee returned late one day from the States, expected in next day
early for a debrief meeting.
Is killed on way to work, believed to have fallen asleep at the wheel.
Company now allows taxis from home to work after long haul.
This was not altruism, the company was being sued by the widow that the
company failed in their duty of care in requiring an employee to work
excessive hours
and drive while unfit to do so.

In message , at 09:10:58 on Sat, 24
Oct 2009, Buddenbrooks remarked:
An employee returned late one day from the States, expected in next
day early for a debrief meeting.
Is killed on way to work, believed to have fallen asleep at the wheel.
Company now allows taxis from home to work after long haul.
This was not altruism, the company was being sued by the widow that
the company failed in their duty of care in requiring an employee to
work excessive hours
and drive while unfit to do so.

In which country(s) was the company, the widow and the lawsuit?
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:10:58 on Sat, 24
Oct 2009, Buddenbrooks remarked:
An employee returned late one day from the States, expected in next day
early for a debrief meeting.
Is killed on way to work, believed to have fallen asleep at the wheel.
Company now allows taxis from home to work after long haul.
This was not altruism, the company was being sued by the widow that the
company failed in their duty of care in requiring an employee to work
excessive hours
and drive while unfit to do so.

In which country(s) was the company, the widow and the lawsuit?

UK, it was settled out of court with the usual non-disclosure agreement.

In addition the company, which has several sites used to expect managers
to drive 4 hours to a site do a days work and then drive back as required.
They no longer allow this and pay for overnight accommodation. It had been
pointed out that they were expecting staff to drive longer hours than would
be permitted if they were driving as a job.

I do not think there has been any court cases, so no precedent, but rumor
had it that the company decided that they were of risk of
liability should an accident occur. But it was also part of the 'cut travel
costs' campaign and any travel has to be far more justified than in the
past.
8 hours driving followed by a 4 hour meeting is a very expensive meeting.

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 08:46:41 -0000, "Buddenbrooks"
wrote:

In addition the company, which has several sites used to expect managers
to drive 4 hours to a site do a days work and then drive back as required.
They no longer allow this and pay for overnight accommodation. It had been
pointed out that they were expecting staff to drive longer hours than would
be permitted if they were driving as a job.


I used to work for a company that expected employees to do the same.
After the death of an employee who fell asleep at the wheel on his way
home has now changed policy to insist on (1) an overnight stay, (2) no
longer than a 13 hour shift including driving, and (3) a minimum 11
hour break before starting the next shift.

I think one or both of the latter requirements was imposed by law.

In message , at 08:46:41 on Sun, 25
Oct 2009, Buddenbrooks remarked:

8 hours driving followed by a 4 hour meeting is a very expensive meeting.

ObRail: I'm currently suffering a lot from 1.5hr meetings (the minimum
practical, really) sandwiched between 3hrs each way getting to London
and back

Last Friday, for example: left home at 11am and got back at 6.30pm.
Hence my frustration when the train company can't even be bothered to
staff the buffet for my journey home.

And before you chip in saying this is a lifestyle choice - those choices
are made for us sometimes.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...

And before you chip in saying this is a lifestyle choice - those choices
are made for us sometimes.
--

The lack of service is not acceptable. Having a job involving a lot of
international travel and living a long distance from Heathrow is a lifestyle
choice.
Probably a perfectly valid one.