New controversial work travel policy

[jakeseven7]

I hate this approach, particularly as certain levels seemed to be exempt and furthermore it always seemed to be at places like Shangri-La and JW Marriott, why not less expensive properties? TBH some of it I suspected was related to capacity and having everyone in the same hotel/resort rather than being separated. One, just one, was in 2BR apartments. That was much better.

The hotel is very similar to what you describe, and it’s because of the deals we get there corporate preferred partners etc.

I agree, if they are going down this route for cost, then there are other ways to save money and also agree an apart-hotel type of accommodation would be more appropriate and sellable to the local team I think - but our ability to influence that is ZERO so now we have to try and manage the situation…

 

[Denali]

Ask to share with the CEO or a Board member.

My last conference, I got a suite and my GM got a standard room . My CFO knows what it takes for me to go to a conference

 

[jakeseven7]

Only time I have ever come across this was working for an international consultancy in the 90s, when sending grads to interstate training they would make them share a room with another grad of same gender (but never applied to higher ups).

As I understand it’s a bit of a relic of the past this sort of policy, certainly in huge western companies like ours. I suspect it’s the Asian based regional office influence that has led to this decision…

One thing we are trying to work out is how to manage exceptions (eg people with sleeping problems), objections in general and how to manage the gender based approach which is really problematic and puts some people in uncomfortable positions - so we have to equip our people managers how to handle it…

Just to clarify I’m in a local leadership position and having to manage the blowback we are getting on this (because it leaked already and the business was not prepared, surprise!)

 

[Pushka]

As I understand it’s a bit of a relic of the past this sort of policy, certainly in huge western companies like ours. I suspect it’s the Asian based regional office influence that has led to this decision…

One thing we are trying to work out is how to manage exceptions (eg people with sleeping problems), objections in general and how to manage the gender based approach which is really problematic and puts some people in uncomfortable positions - so we have to equip our people managers how to handle it…

Just to clarify I’m in a local leadership position and having to manage the blowback we are getting on this (because it leaked already and the business was not prepared, surprise!)

Yes, I think these days it raises far more issues than they may be expecting.

 

[dajop]

A few times I was allocated with colleagues I worked with closely and it really wasn't as big a drama as I thought it would be. If you are compatable and considerate of each other it's manageable.

The worst of it was being in a room with a temperature incompatable , sleep-time incompatible room mate. This was at the Park Hyatt in Canberra (WTF was wrong with any one of a range of cheaper hotels we could have had our own rooms in, is beyond me), and my roommate would be in bed by 9:30pm and have the room temperature set to 27 (he was from central-northern Queensland). I am a hot sleeper and go to bed at or after midnight. It just didn't work. At one point I stayed in the lobby to catch up on some work at 10pm after socialising and the first night I schlepped down to reception at midnight to get a flat sheet to sleep under as under the provided doona I was really overheating.

 

[Lynda2475]

I suspect it’s the Asian based regional office influence that has led to this decision

Quite likely.

One company I worked at was acquired by a Singaporean company; and when they went to merge the HR systems we hit lots of cultural issues.

For example in Singapore you are only eligible for maternity leave if you are married to the father and they can ask to see the marriage certificate and birth certificate naming the father (you have to upload these). This is obviously a massive overstep in Australia where you are not required to be married, only have completed minimum service of 12 months before bein eligible for company funded maternity leave.

It was a fun few meetings explaining they needed to modify their system such that in Australia you cant make divulging marital status, sexual orientation or religion mandatory; that despite what happens in Singapore and other places they had holding, our privacy laws are very different.

 

[tdimdad]

Just to clarify I’m in a local leadership position and having to manage the blowback we are getting on this (because it leaked already and the business was not prepared, surprise!)

In this case, one healthy move from the corporate would be to have one of the US leaders responsible for the arrangements or HR policies organise a town hall with the AU-based (or regional) staff to talk through the logic and boundaries of the decision (e.g. how to deal with the diversity in practice). It might help also the HQ to see this through a wider lense if staff can freely ask questions.

 

[jakeseven7]

In this case, one healthy move from the corporate would be to have one of the US leaders responsible for the arrangements or HR policies organise a town hall with the AU-based (or regional) staff to talk through the logic and boundaries of the decision (e.g. how to deal with the diversity in practice). It might help also the HQ to see this through a wider lense if staff can freely ask questions.

Thanks… 100% agree in theory.

In reality our regional office would not welcome this or endorse it, they’d see it as us going over their heads and dobbing them in. I also am not quite sure we’d get support from HQ given it’s not technically banned.

But equally you are right we should put at least some of the onus of answering all the questions we are now getting pounded with on the decision makers.

I’m particularly worried about the gender segmentation. It’s 2023 after all.

 

[Ade]

I’m particularly worried about the gender segmentation. It’s 2023 after all.

You mean - you are worried because ;

1. gender segmentation - you don't want gender segmentation because it's 2023 after all?
2. OR you are worried because it's 2023 after all and people are identifying themselves beyond the older construct of male & female?
3. OR you are worried because, the HQ or management might choose to put 2 people of varying/different genders in the same room?
4. OR you are worried because, people of varying/different genders might choose to stay in the same room?

Reason I ask, IME it is better to leave people to choose what they like to do. I mean at the end, if those that choose to stay in the same room are happy, comfortable and understanding of what they are choosing to do.

For me personally, I'd choose to stay by myself and would not like to share a room. For instance, I'm now away on work travel and we all got our individual rooms. I checked in last night and I was allocated a 2 bed room apartment for myself, when all my colleagues, including my directors were given studio style accommodation.

From a general perspective - I'd suggest running a poll within the office for folks to vote anonymously, of course, on what they think about sharing rooms with a roommate of their choosing. If the response leans on the "happy to do it", then let the folks choose their roommate. If the response is more "sorry, what!?! nah, can't do sharing, absolutely nah mate!" then let the higher ups know that *collectively* the team prefers to have their own individual quarters and are not interested in sharing. Taking a collective response to the higher ups will carry more weight than individual opinions etc

 

[Virgin Bart]

how to manage the gender based approach which is really problematic and puts some people in uncomfortable positions

This is one of the hardest things. Good luck with that, I'm glad I'm not in your role.

 

[RB]

This discussion makes me very happy that we are retired and no longer owning/running our own business

 

[jakeseven7]

This is one of the hardest things. Good luck with that, I'm glad I'm not in your role.

Thanks for the empathy, this sort of HR nightmare is exactly what we don’t need right now…

We have a diverse workforce and how people identify is personal and private. I’ve already had someone come to me saying they are not comfortable sharing room with same gender and I understand why. I’ve bought time to get back to them… it’s a real mess.

 

[jakeseven7]

Can I ask if anyone DOES have this rooming policy at their workplace - how do you handle exemptions and exceptions?? What criteria are in place to handle them?

(And also a huge thanks to the lovely AFF community for the constructive support, 99% of posts so far have been thoughtful and helpful)

 

[jakeseven7]

. Taking a collective response to the higher ups will carry more weight than individual opinions etc

Thank you Ade, something to consider… I agree, numbers give you more power.

 

[tdimdad]

Would one potential avenue be that the company provides a shared room but if an individual want a private room, they are welcomed to cover the difference by paying the difference from their personal funds? This could perhaps be a neat way out of this and still remain within the policies, event arrangements and staff members' personal preferences.

 

[Katie]

Colleagues in the US years ago reported they had to share rooms on work travel, gender segregated. This would have been at JD Edwards.

My MNC experience has always been Y for flights, unless you have a high rank or it's a customer project and the customer's travel policy allows Y+ or J.

 

[Seat0B]

To those saying that it's being a bit precious, I think that's a little unfair. It's not clear whether the OPs 'roommate' would be someone they know or completely random. If completely random then not really that different to getting someone off the street to share with.

And even if you know them, it's not easy to share with a colleague - snoring is a real issue, bathroom habits another, sleep and wake times can cause issues too (I'm an absolute night owl and they always put me with a lark). So many problems.

 

[jakeseven7]

Would one potential avenue be that the company provides a shared room but if an individual want a private room, they are welcomed to cover the difference by paying the difference from their personal funds? This could perhaps be a neat way out of this and still remain within the policies, event arrangements and staff members' personal preferences.

Thank you, I think this is a possibility and a good suggestion. We’ve been pondering this.

It will still disrupt the team as I’m sure people will object to having to pay to attend a work event, but it could be lesser of the evils and at least provide an option…

 

[JohnK]

Glad I don't do work travel. I would politely refuse to attend unless they can find alternate accommodation for me.

 

[dajop]

The things is with MNC's, at the least ones I'm familiar with, unless you are genuinely sociopathic enough to reach the very top echelons (such as CEO), people who are team players tend to get rewarded with better opportunities, better bonuses and the like. If you start playing the "I am better than everyone else" game and demand special treatment for things like this, it does come across as a red flag, and you might be out the door very quickly (unless you have a genuine special need, or alternatively play company politics exceptionally well, which takes me back to the first point ).

The challenge of an organiser or leader is to manage expectations, manage disappointment and resistance in a way that does not undermine the whole team dynamic. Positioning it correctly and not singling out individuals for special treatment can be difficult.