New Job 80-100% int and dom often at last minute travel advice please :)

[shellthom]

I'm quite fortunate in that sense, my o/s trips are generally between 3-5 days away from home, and domestics are arely more than 2days/2nights away. If i had ot be away for weeks and weeks or even months away at a time, I'd either ask for my family to join me and be looked after, or tell them its not possible.

To the OP, the other thing to bear in mind, if your partner is likely to be away for long periods, is it long periods away from home and in one spot, or long periods away from home in multiple spots? Its a subtle but important difference. If he's going to be away from home but sitll jetting about, there's probably not much point in you being away also.

From what we understand it would be in one spot, he has been told his training would be for 3-6 months in either MNL or Mid west usa (oh so very different but I guess thats where the trainers lie) and he was also told about having to be away for longer blocks but reading between the lines and the description saying 80-100% to me that means there will be a lot of shorter trips around those longer ones.
The sales guy said he travels a lot. I am not sure why my partner should need to given that he just fixes formatting in the code (in both senses) which to me can be done anywhere. But I am happy to visit for a week if he is away for a month or two. If he is away for 12 months then yes that will be harder unless I don't work.
And if I don't work then I can't retire in 10 years like I have been promised..

 

[drewbles]

Yes we have discussed that. It was a referral by a person who left his company to work at the new and he likes that guy too and while the thought of leaving these people makes him say that he likes them, I usually only hear about how incompetent and annoying they all are and he doesn't even know how they have a job (anywhere not just at his work).
His biggest plan is to take the letter of offer with the wage and bonus on it to his current employer and ask for it to be matched. The issue with that is he may be escorted out of the building instantly so he is also not sure how to do that and keep his job if he wants to stay.

In my experience (ie, what i've observed in the industry I work in, not what i've done), trying to get an employer to match an offer can be a short term patch but a long term disaster. Whilst it may increase his salary immediately, the boss/management are then aware that he's "looking around " (even though in this case his offer appears to be unsolicited and not searched for, management will assume this). They may match the offer, but should the tides turn and the company needs to lay staff off, such people who've 'done a deal' are often first to be in the firing line.

I'm in the situation that I am underpaid for my line of work, but the people and benefits I receive make up more than enough for me to be happy where I am. It's a cost vs benefit situation and only he (and you) can decide what's best, but for my money i'd rather less cash and a happy/flexible work life than be paid plenty and not like it. It's all about balance

 

[shellthom]

Yes, a good accountant! There are determinations that allow for travel allowances to be paid with no deduction of tax and for substantiation to be minimal for actual costs re accommodation and meals, I suspect its an area many pay more tax than they need to when there are legal options!

We have already decided that we are going to be extremely organised with receipts this coming financial year so I might need to get some travel size expandable/filing folders (I don't know what they are called or if they exist) so that he can put them in the appropriate spot while on the road.
He is still waiting for the offer to come in the mail. I am hoping that it isn't because they are doing up their contract as I wanted him to negotiate an extra week of leave or some QFF points or something else into his contract but I think the negotiation phase is over and he just doesn't know it yet.

 

[drewbles]

He is unlikely to be escorted out for asking for a pay rise (not that I know the industry he is in, though). I would expect the worst that could occur is that they say no. Especially if he says he was offered this job and that he was not actively looking. Then it is up to your partner to decide to stay or go.

I've seen a situation where someone tried to match an offer and was told 'no' and that was that. He was pretty much escorted out (due to the nature of his job being privy to highly sensitive information). The employer did not want the risk of them taking IP and other information with them (although he did make the mistake of showing the offer to his boss, so at least he had another job to walk into).

 

[markis10]

We have already decided that we are going to be extremely organised with receipts this coming financial year so I might need to get some travel size expandable/filing folders (I don't know what they are called or if they exist) so that he can put them in the appropriate spot while on the road.
He is still waiting for the offer to come in the mail. I am hoping that it isn't because they are doing up their contract as I wanted him to negotiate an extra week of leave or some QFF points or something else into his contract but I think the negotiation phase is over and he just doesn't know it yet.

Maybe you dont need to be THAT organised

TD 2012/17 - Income tax: what are the reasonable travel and overtime meal allowance expense amounts for the 2012-13 income year? (As at 19 September 2012)

 

[shellthom]

In my experience (ie, what i've observed in the industry I work in, not what i've done), trying to get an employer to match an offer can be a short term patch but a long term disaster. Whilst it may increase his salary immediately, the boss/management are then aware that he's "looking around " (even though in this case his offer appears to be unsolicited and not searched for, management will assume this). They may match the offer, but should the tides turn and the company needs to lay staff off, such people who've 'done a deal' are often first to be in the firing line.

I'm in the situation that I am underpaid for my line of work, but the people and benefits I receive make up more than enough for me to be happy where I am. It's a cost vs benefit situation and only he (and you) can decide what's best, but for my money i'd rather less cash and a happy/flexible work life than be paid plenty and not like it. It's all about balance

Yes this is something that he is concerned about and also that it would stop him getting any promotions in future and while they may match it now that he wouldn't get another raise for x amount of years meaning in the long term he was worse off with the "deal" which is why I think he is leaning towards outright resignation.
He has done a lot of research in the last few days and most of what he has read/been told has basically said what you have and what he was afraid of. It's best just to leave. Not to say to where. Just to put in required notice and go. If they want to make an offer to stay they can its their choice but not to force that onto them.
He is the only person in Australia who has trained on a certain product and he did so recently so I think he is hoping that they will just offer more based on the expense of sending someone else to do the training along with him being the best employee etc etc.

 

[shellthom]

Maybe you dont need to be THAT organised

TD 2012/17 - Income tax: what are the reasonable travel and overtime meal allowance expense amounts for the 2012-13 income year? (As at 19 September 2012)

Too many words not enough meaning...
Hmm seems a decent amount per day based on what his wage will be but he said he thinks he would just be given a corporate credit card and everything paid for with that (he has that now)

 

[markis10]

Too many words not enough meaning...
Hmm seems a decent amount per day based on what his wage will be but he said he thinks he would just be given a corporate credit card and everything paid for with that (he has that now)

You dont need receipts for expenses under the limits mentioned in that doc, things like meals whilst away etc etc

 

[shellthom]

You dont need receipts for expenses under the limits mentioned in that doc, things like meals whilst away etc etc

thanks for the summation.
I really hate how wording government documents sometimes.
I saw the tables and something else that said daily limit and another that said no receipt but I couldn't get all the words into my head so I was hoping thats what it meant lol

Thanks for the link.

The one thing I didn't pick up on anywhere was so you can use their table for minimum proof needed acceptable claiming amounts but how do they assess the days that it is based on as to me 80-100% of the time might be cause for concern for the ATO come audit time... considering the value is quite high per day and he is potentially going to be overseas or more expensively in perth for every calendar day in a year... with no proof of costs that may look a bit suss??

 

[markis10]

. with no proof of costs that may look a bit suss??

Thats the point of the document, if the costs are less than the limits you dont need proof, after its unlikely you will get a tax invoice form the Hawker Stall at Shi Lin night market for instance. What would look sus if you claim breakfast costs when you catch 10AM flight OS on the same day, or you claim costs for a non overnight trip.

 

[harvyk]

I'd be careful with the no-complete clause. Whilst some do indeed get struck down by courts as an unreasonable restraint of trade, most these days are well drafted and would take a lot of time and money in litigation (whether real or threatened) to resolve.

If it's a clearly identified and worded clause in an employment contract that your partner has signed there'll be a presumption that he intended to be bound by the clause.

I am not a lawyer, so the following is from my own personal experience. I have many times move from one job to another in the same industry and now competing with my old company. Provided that within the 6 month period I did not actively pursue clients of my old company, the previous company did not enforce any non-compete clause. Otherwise how would any one move between jobs?

The one time where I have seen non-compete clauses be carefully regarded is when a person has set up their own company which is now in competition with their old company. In that case I (and others I know) have waited out the typically 6 months before actively pursuing former clients.

 

[shellthom]

Thats the point of the document, if the costs are less than the limits you dont need proof, after its unlikely you will get a tax invoice form the Hawker Stall at Shi Lin night market for instance. What would look sus if you claim breakfast costs when you catch 10AM flight OS on the same day, or you claim costs for a non overnight trip.

I guess thats what I was asking - how do you relate these expenses to the travel - do you need to send itineraries through to the ATO? or is it more a case of these are what you can claim if we audit you we wont ask for proof of the expenses just proof of the travel it related too??

 

[markis10]

I guess thats what I was asking - how do you relate these expenses to the travel - do you need to send itineraries through to the ATO? or is it more a case of these are what you can claim if we audit you we wont ask for proof of the expenses just proof of the travel it related too??

You need to keep a diary in some circumstances, otherwise a copy of the flight bookings might come in handy if the ATO does not already have those, or a copy of your immigration movements which is available on request for OS trips.

 

[shellthom]

I am not a lawyer, so the following is from my own personal experience. I have many times move from one job to another in the same industry and now competing with my old company. Provided that within the 6 month period I did not actively pursue clients of my old company, the previous company did not enforce any non-compete clause. Otherwise how would any one move between jobs?

The one time where I have seen non-compete clauses be carefully regarded is when a person has set up their own company which is now in competition with their old company. In that case I (and others I know) have waited out the typically 6 months before actively pursuing former clients.

My partner said that his contract is standard (as in everyone in the company regardless of position has to sign the same non-compete agreement so while some of the terms don't relate to his role they still have him a little scared).
It does say about clients and also trying to move other staff over the wording in the contract he brought home was incomplete about working for another employer but he thinks somewhere he has an updated policy where they amended the times from 6-9months and from 9-12 months based on which dot point they related too.
I can see they were trying to say you couldn't work for a competitor for 6 months (which will now be 9 months under the new contract which he can't find) but the left out the "could not" part in their long winded sentence of trying to cover all possibilities - he said the wording has probable been corrected in the new one as well but I cant check.
We will see what happens.
It's his choice, his office now is close to home, the new one would be on our same block but I am not sure if that is their permanent office as they just moved from 2 blocks away.
If they moved into the city or out west he would be upset as walking to work is one of the things he really enjoys - although if he is never there I guess that doesn't matter... hmmm.

 

[harvyk]

My partner said that his contract is standard (as in everyone in the company regardless of position has to sign the same non-compete agreement so while some of the terms don't relate to his role they still have him a little scared).
It does say about clients and also trying to move other staff over the wording in the contract he brought home was incomplete about working for another employer but he thinks somewhere he has an updated policy where they amended the times from 6-9months and from 9-12 months based on which dot point they related too.
I can see they were trying to say you couldn't work for a competitor for 6 months (which will now be 9 months under the new contract which he can't find) but the left out the "could not" part in their long winded sentence of trying to cover all possibilities - he said the wording has probable been corrected in the new one as well but I cant check.
We will see what happens.
It's his choice, his office now is close to home, the new one would be on our same block but I am not sure if that is their permanent office as they just moved from 2 blocks away.
If they moved into the city or out west he would be upset as walking to work is one of the things he really enjoys - although if he is never there I guess that doesn't matter... hmmm.

My understanding of the issue is the enforceability of non-competes clauses varies from state to state. A company may attempt to enforce such a clause if you actively canvas their clients whilst a non-complete is in force, and they may use it against people who where in a strategic position within the old company, but unless your other half really does something nasty against his old company, they are highly highly unlikely to attempt to enforce any such clause.

Such clauses tend to be generic and more something they could attempt to use against you if you actively worked to disadvantage your old company. But in the general job hopping which is now pretty common, such clauses are of little concern to the average employee when choosing a new company to work for.