Is this illegal?

[CSO286]

so you're saying if I had small children it would be my responsibility to pay for someone to take care of them? This makes no sense. If I wasn't away from home for job related things I would be home taking care of them. So if someone takes me away from them wouldn't that be their responsibility? To me that seems wrong, but if those are the laws, those are the laws.

Exactly how it works. If you had to to travel for work related training, you would be on the hook to make necessary child care arrangements for your kids. Just like you have to arrange child care to go to work each day.

That's the way the world works.

I've had to travel for my former job 3-4 times a year for 3-4 days at a time. My emloyer covered my transportation, lodging, meals and training costs, but I needed to arrange care for my child.

 

[Ohiogal]

so you're saying if I had small children it would be my responsibility to pay for someone to take care of them? This makes no sense. If I wasn't away from home for job related things I would be home taking care of them. So if someone takes me away from them wouldn't that be their responsibility? To me that seems wrong, but if those are the laws, those are the laws.

So you think your employer would be required to pay for you to have daycare while you work as work was "job related things" away from home?
Try that argument. You will lose.

 

[Zigner]

Your employer is a shoddy cheapskate operation for requing you to share a room with a co-worker.

That's like a bad joke from a sitcom and not something a professional organization would do.

That's a bit out of left field. There's no reason for employees NOT to share rooms.

 

[Proserpina]

Your employer is a shoddy cheapskate operation for requing you to share a room with a co-worker.

That's like a bad joke from a sitcom and not something a professional organization would do.

BUT

Honestly the best solution is to offer to pay your own room.

I would pay for my room before I have to share a room with a coworker.

It might surprise you to learn that several of the top twenty Fortune 500 companies have similar tendencies.

I'm sure they care lots about your opinion.

 

[eerelations]

Your employer is a shoddy cheapskate operation for requing you to share a room with a co-worker.

That's like a bad joke from a sitcom and not something a professional organization would do.

BUT

Honestly the best solution is to offer to pay your own room.

I would pay for my room before I have to share a room with a coworker.

I have personally worked for two employers that did this. One of them was a professional consulting firm with 250 employees in Canada and 60 employees in the US. The other was Canada's largest telecommunications provider with 18,000 employees. Both organizations were highly professional and neither organization was a cheapskate (let alone shoddy or a bad joke) - they were just careful with their money.

My husband's last employer - an insurance company with more than 6,000 employees - also did this. Finally, Canadian federal and provincial government employees have to share rooms when travelling on business. I don't know about municipal employees though.

 

[CdwJava]

Your employer is a shoddy cheapskate operation for requing you to share a room with a co-worker.

That's like a bad joke from a sitcom and not something a professional organization would do.

BUT

Honestly the best solution is to offer to pay your own room.

I would pay for my room before I have to share a room with a coworker.

Welcome to the world of government employment! I doubt that the OP is a government employee, but, it has long been common practice for most non-reimbursed travel (i.e. not paid for by a grant or other fund to repay the agency or organization for the cost of a solo room) that you double bunk. My wife teaches, and I'm a cop, and when we travel to conferences or training that require hotel stays, we almost always have to bunk with same-sex roomies.

So, yes, professional organizations can and do require employees to double bunk ... at least those agencies with a mind towards expenses.

 

[davew128]

I would pay for my room before I have to share a room with a coworker.

Oh I don't know, I can think of several former co-workers I would have jumped at the chance to share a hotel room with.

 

[commentator]

I was once stuck into a training at the last minute because my co-worker (male) who was scheduled to attend had a family emergency. When we arrived on site, we discovered that the other attendee (male) and I were scheduled to share a room. We didn't of course, but split the cost of the one extra room we got to avoid having to share with each other. Every time I hear about all the "waste and fraud in government" that's going on, I think of our boss who made us bring our empty bottles of White Out, and non working ink pens to prove they were no longer functional before we were issued another. Now that is CHEAP.

But what I think is truly amusing and amazing is that the OP actually believes that his girlfriend's foot surgery and his necessity to be home and care for her during her recovery is a valid reason to be allowed to stay home, or to take her with him to business related training (which is strictly frowned upon in many companies.) People really believe that employers are supposed to care about their personal situations. It's like Santa Claus and the tooth fairy.

 

[Just Blue]

I was once stuck into a training at the last minute because my co-worker (male) who was scheduled to attend had a family emergency. When we arrived on site, we discovered that the other attendee (male) and I were scheduled to share a room. We didn't of course, but split the cost of the one extra room we got to avoid having to share with each other. Every time I hear about all the "waste and fraud in government" that's going on, I think of our boss who made us bring our empty bottles of White Out, and non working ink pens to prove they were no longer functional before we were issued another. Now that is CHEAP.

But what I think is truly amusing and amazing is that the OP actually believes that his girlfriend's foot surgery and his necessity to be home and care for her during her recovery is a valid reason to be allowed to stay home, or to take her with him to business related training (which is strictly frowned upon in many companies.) People really believe that employers are supposed to care about their personal situations. It's like Santa Claus and the tooth fairy.

What about Santa and Ms. Fairy? What are you saying???????? Say it ain't so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!