I can agree with this point, Shillard, but let's just say that in the early days, the personal funds were lower than a snake's last waistcoat button for me !
That's the whole point. In those days, a couple of hundred was a lot for me. It may sound like chicken feed or a throwaway amount, but there is something deeply wrong when the company was expecting not so senior staff to fork out their own money (and get reimbursed later), when they knew full well they weren't earning a great deal.
After all, I don't go up to my boss and say "Hey Boss, give me an advance for my dive trip to Vanuatu", do I ?
He'd tell me to get stuffed. Asking people to pay expenses (and then get them reimbursed) is fine and works very well - my whole point being - as long as they know full well that they have the cash to do so. Otherwise, how well does the boss really know their people ? Not very, in my old case.
The main gripe I had was not really that I had to pay for it - but that even knowing my situation, and that I'd talked to them re: this (as in, for the CEO, $500 is chicken feed, to me, it was 2 weeks rent back then), they seemed to believe that it was all O.K. that I pocket the expenses myself. A careful juggling act ensues to make sure that I'm not overdrawn while I was away. No one seemed to give a stuff that I wasn't earning a lot, through no fault of my own.
I've had mates who have had to do the same, and even had to entertain clients on a limited budget. How the hell the company expects execs to perform if they tie their hands with a 'no more than X dollars per meal' clause ? I agree with drawing the line somewhere, but to tie their hands needlessly is stupidity in business.
I can see the value, and the sense behind earning points via company expenses ; I agree, and I would use this too, but first of all, the managers need to talk to and understand that their guys can actually afford it first -and not merely assume that they can.
