No, that was in response to someone who claimed I could eat for 2.50 a day and not be out of pocket.

So what you are saying is, you make breakfast and dinner every day for less than £2.50 each.

But it’s not possible to get lunch for £2.50 ?

Do I spend £5/day on dinner and breakfast?

I’ve no idea. That’s only £35 a week, so possibly.

Anyway this is a side issue. What’s weird is the discrepancy.

Back in ’03-’06 I worked in a place for a while (shop) that was so busy on weekends they’d give us £5 for lunch on each day of the weekend and 15 min break to go buy it, rather than a full hour off.

I would have my whole weeks basic grocery shopping if I was in both days of the weekend!
veg, fruit (2 a day!), beans, rice, tin of corned beef (mm mm), chicken thighs, couple tins rice pudding.

easy
🙂

I’ve found the previous 4 pages quite interesting though. My wife’s just been away on a 2 week residential course and they’d pay for lunches, drinks all day long during course hours but not breakfast and dinner, so pretty much the inverse of Molegrips.
And … she had to stay there over the weekend for ‘concentrated homework and group preparation’ They didn’t cover any of the meals on the weekend. My wife’s defense/excuse for her employer was .. “but it’s an amazing opportunity”. I did query her employers decisions on that one but didn’t think any more of it till now.

FYI my lunches are £1-2 fresh soups (i.e. depends what’s on offer pricing, but covent garden or supermarket own brand) that I buy and microwave daily. usually between 2-4 of your 5 a day if you go for vegetable based ones.

I assume thats on the presumption that works canteens are free.

Which in the real world, they rarely are. Presumably this is a piece of outdated policy from about 1972.

I’m with molgrips on this one, as someone who has to work away a lot. If the company wants you to be staying away, with limited access to fridge/food cupboard and often nearby shops, they should pay for three reasonably priced meals a day.

molgrips is either a massive troll or a nuclear grade teabagger,I know which way I’m leaning

Anyway this is a side issue ….

Funny how things turn into “side issues” when they fall apart at the seams eh ? 😉

I’ve just finished doing 4 days a week at another office, dinner bed and breakfast paid for. No paid lunch (pretty much the only thing they didn’t pay for tbh) as it’s a company location, it doesn’t have a canteen, but neither does my base office. Suits me fine, saved a ton not paying for brekkie and tea!

Molgrips, please answer the one question on everyone’s lips (well mine anyhow), before you left for the big smoke that it London what did you agree as your terms and conditions in relation to meals?
Is it any different now?
What seems to be the problem?

molgrips is either a massive troll

I’M a troll??!

So answer the bloody questions instead of acting the fool.

molgrips is either a massive troll

or hes going to become a much slimmer one

The questions are not relevant.

I didn’t check expense policy before I took the job. As far as I know it’s always been the same. It’s been the same every time I checked.

So what?

I’m with molgrips on this one, as someone who has to work away a lot. If the company wants you to be staying away, with limited access to fridge/food cupboard and often nearby shops, they should pay for three reasonably priced meals a day.

+1

I have never heard of this before tbh. Seems very strange.

I’m with molgrips on this one, as someone who has to work away a lot. If the company wants you to be staying away, with limited access to fridge/food cupboard and often nearby shops, they should pay for three reasonably priced meals a day.

I suppose its better than the companies real thought process or policy of “think yourself lucky you have/can get a **** job”

I didn’t check the expense policy before I took the job

Hihiihihihihihi

Congratulations,
You are the stupidest person I have ever communicated with.
You have a responsible job?
Really?
You’re actually 12 aren’t you.

I’m so stupid, you’ll have to explain yourself.

Which part would you care me to clarify?
The part where you failed to check how much money you were getting?
Then the part when you came on heretofore cry about it?

That’s a bit nasty and uncalled for. Bad iolo.

So have we established what ‘on-site catering’ means yet?

LOL at not answering the “wrong” questions!

Anyway, this expenses policy, does it have pictures? Presumably yes, otherwise how would you know what you’re getting? So my advice is to look at the pictures.

Lol@unknown

Iolo. If you were out of work, and someone offered you a job, would you ask to see the expense policy first and possibly reject the job if it didn’t suit?

So have we established what ‘on-site catering’ means yet?

No, iolo is busy flexing his muscles.

I cant be arsed to make sarnies and always buy food out from the bacon butty van ! or Tesco express etc

Not having read all the way through this modern tale of woe, I’d like to point out that I get 2 20 minute breaks for each 12 hour shift, and I have to buy my own dinner and tea.

As you were.

I’m not flexing any muscles. I am merely explaining that you must always ensure that you are happy with whatever is offered before you sign for a job. If you wanted lunch you should have stipulated this was in your contract. If its not there and you’ve signed then its too late. That is all.

I am merely explaining that you must always ensure that you are happy with whatever is offered before you sign for a job.

I’m willing to bet no-one else goes into that level of detail. Except perhaps your awesomeness.

The original post was about a possible misleading wording of the policy. Not a complaint about my contract of employment.

It’s not “misleading” at all from what you have said.

If there is no “on site catering” you can claim for lunch.
If there is, you can’t.

That’s pretty straightforward I would say.

A definition of “on site catering” would be if there was “catering facilities”, and they were “on site”

I presume that there are, otherwise you wouldn’t be moaning about it ?

There’s no legal obligation for them to make sure I’m not out of pocket, is there?

Correct.

There isn’t.

Sorry but that is exactly what everyone does. I’m really not trying to be awesome.
You only work to get paid. You don’t do it for fun.
You need to know exactly (to the penny) what you get.
This way you can pay your bills and know what you have left.
Then, and only then can you decide what to save and what to spend on bikes.

That’s pretty straightforward I would say.

But at that reading, it makes no sense at all. Why would it be reimbursable if the money was spent outside, but not if it was spent inside?

The effect on my pocket is the same. That’s what I don’t understand. Why would the policy be like that? There’s a possibility it’s been mis-worded.

Sorry but that is exactly what everyone does.

I don’t believe that, and I don’t believe you know what everyone does.

People look at the salary and benefits. The expense policy isn’t even an external document so you can’t see it if you’re not an employee.

I’m not flexing any muscles. I am merely explaining that you must always ensure that you are happy with whatever is offered before you sign for a job. If you wanted lunch you should have stipulated this was in your contract. If its not there and you’ve signed then its too late. That is all.

Your being a tool. That is all.

Do really people examine the lunchtime expenses policy before they take a role? It’s totally reasonable to not be out of pocket when working away from base.

But at that reading, it makes no sense at all. Why would it be reimbursable if the money was spent outside, but not if it was spent inside?

You said it was misleading, it isn’t.

It’s actually really easy to understand.

You can argue that you don’t think it’s logical or that you don’t think its a good policy, but that’s a different point entirely.

It’s totally reasonable to not be out of pocket when working away from base.

Be that as it may, molgrips isn’t out of pocket. If he’d answered any of the “wrong” questions about the impact of his free breakfasts and dinners vs paid for lunches on his bottom line that would be (even more) clear.

I don’t know how much money I spend on food at home, if that answers your question? So it is possible that overall I am not out of pocket, but I don’t expect I am.

SO HOW DO YOU KNOW YOU’RE OUT OF POCKET?!

Edit: Nice ninja edit

But the benefits will show what’s included ? Or not?

The presence of a canteen puts me out of pocket, according to this rule. That’s the point.

But the benefits will show what’s included ? Or not?

No, they relate to pensions, health etc. Expenses are not a benefit.

Aagggrrrrhhhhh! Or it puts you less in pocket, or it doesn’t make a blind bit of difference. The policy is what it is and you don’t even know if you’re up or down because of it. I’m out.

I feel your pain.
When I work at home, I tend to just lounge around in my pants, but if I go to the office they expect me to wear trousers, but they don’t give me a trouser allowance!
Bastards.
The irony being I’m out of pocket to get pockets.