adminLabour Matters Davies Ndumiso Sibanda
ONE of the most problematic issues to manage when employees travel on business is their welfare as employers try to balance cost management and ensuring the employees’ tour of duty is as human as possible.
Many National Employment Councils (NECs) prescribe how an employee on business travel will be conveyed, accommodated and how meals will be provided.
In such cases where the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) is clear, detailed and periodically updated there is no problem for the NEC graded employees.
The challenge is that the majority of the NEC has left employee travel and subsistence management to individual employers and employees.
Among the most problematic issues is where the employer sends workers on a business trip and provides inadequate funds for accommodation.
Not long ago I met some workers who had been sent by their employer to Victoria Falls and had been given $15 each for accommodation.
They had failed to get accommodation for $15 and were negotiating with an international truck driver for permission to sleep in his truck for a fee. I met the workers the following day; they had succeeded in sleeping in the truck for $6 each.
They looked miserable as they searched for somewhere to take a bath. Such treatment of workers is not human; it’s morally wrong and brings the name of the organisation down.
I am of the view that the employers should have a travel and subsistence policy that details employees’ rights when on business trips.
The policy should have realistic standards for accommodation for various grades of employees. For example, senior managers can qualify for four star hotels while NEC graded employees could qualify for two star hotels or equivalent. Monetary value limits should also be spelt out as guided by accommodation rates in various towns.
Where an employee opts to stay outside the hotel, the organisation should decide whether that is acceptable or not and the allowance must afford the employee decent accommodation.
Use of private accommodation while on business trips has its many challenges. They include that the employee might decide to save money and stay with relatives. The risk with this option is that at times the visit might be an inconvenience to the relative who has to find bedding for the visitor, spend extra money on food, have the wife or children preparing food for the visitor early in the morning, have some people displaced from their rooms and bed times might be unfriendly.
At times the worker might have certain habits that upset the host. For example, some visitors could have unacceptable religious habits they want to impose on the host family, the employee could turn up drunk in an unacceptable manner to the host, and at times the employee might overstay and cause huge family relations problems.
I recall a case of an employee who visited another town on business and stayed with a relative resulting in him impregnating the relative’s maid.
The matter became complex and embarrassing to the employer, and all parties involved.
It’s easy to say it has nothing to do with the employer but if the worker dies in a relative’s house while on duty or his business car is stolen or damaged while at a relative’s house, or the worker is robbed of merchandise while at relative’s house or lose tools and equipment while at a relative’s house, the employer will realise why it is important to carry the cost of the workers travel and have a policy on do’s and don’ts while on business travel.
Very often workers who are poorly financed by their employers have ended up being accommodated in dingy places and getting exposed to prostitution and drugs. In the end the workers die of diseases contracted while on business travel.
At times employers restrict meals allowances to an extent that workers end up starving or skipping some meals. I have known of workers who have been hospitalised due to eating cheap contaminated food which will have been prepared under unhygienic conditions.
It is advisable that employers preserve their images by ensuring that the travel and subsistence policy is detailed and helps preserve the image of the organisation. Use of private accommodation should be allowed only if it will be backed by strict rules that preserve the image of the organisation and must be very low risk.
Davies Ndumiso Sibanda can be contacted on email: [email protected] or 0772 375 235
Online Reporter