Corporate BS

brettw22

Several months ago I had some damage to my car and my boss shrugged it off and said something like that's what "wear and tear" is blah blah blah. I recently decided to check on the actual policy on what is and is not covered or included in them paying the $.445cpm. The Director of Corporate travel told me my type of damage (described below) was included and there was no valid claim. I spoke with my boss about it and he said that's the rules etc. and I told him I totally disagreed and asked him what I should do if I don't accept the answer. He told me whatever I did, just CC him on it, so I did.

Below I've pasted an email that I sent out to a few people within our company. They are the Director of Corporate Travel, VP of HR, my boss, his boss, and our local HR Director.

The overview is basically that there has been damage done to my car (not inexpensive damage) and they wanted to claim that it all fell under the normal "Wear and Tear" that mileage is to cover.....I called them on it....

Based on the conversations I've had with some of you, I just wanted to go on record as saying that the verbal policy (it's not written anywhere) regarding 'wear and tear' is an unfair policy for those of us that do the type of job I do.

My car was damaged by company equipment, causing rusting and requiring body work to repair it. The bolting pins on the Photo Kiosk that I was loading into my car unsnapped and the machine opened causing it to drop on my car and pull/rip the vinyl on the armrest of my rear passenger door. The body work alone was just over $**** and the door panel is about $350 plus tax. This damage happened about 5 months ago. The other armrest has also incurred other damage over the years from all the equipment that I have had to install.

Those of us in this position are being penalized in essence for having projects that required us to travel, because if the same damage had occurred to my car on a store 10 miles away, something tells me that the company wouldn't be so bold as to say that the $8 in mileage money should cover the $1000+ damage to my vehicle.

Every person that I have spoken with, some of which are people in the same position (who have also had damage to their vehicles), have agreed that the policy on this type of damage is unfair. I understand claiming things under 'wear and tear' like brakes, tires, windshields, rock chips to paint, oil changes, and gas and I have no problem with paying for these items from the mileage money.

If the company was paying for a rental car and the damage occurred, the company would pay for it and it would be a non-issue. If the standpoint is that the reason it's paid for in this scenario is because we're paying for a service, then ultimately the company should look at my transporting equipment as a service. I don't believe that it states anywhere in my job description that I be an equipment carrier. The amount of money that the company has saved in my moving equipment from store to store or office to stores should not be overlooked. It is not unusual (and oftentimes the norm) for our group to be told to run to this store or to that store and grab some equipment from the office or warehouse and get out there immediately etc. etc. where even the thought of having it shipped was not an option.

If the solution that the employees have to take is to say that we will not ever transport equipment to stores and will not be putting our cars in the position to be damaged, the expense in having to ship every single item that we are supposed to install will be a MUCH bigger expense than covering the types of equipment damage that we have all incurred in our personal vehicles. While the extent of damage to my vehicle is not typical of all abuse to our vehicles, it does happen . To blanket cover equipment caused damage with an unwritten and unspecified policy as has been explained to me is unfair.

What do you guys think? Would you take what they told you and leave it alone?

dorokusai

I don't think it's anything that a firearm won't solve.

PolkThug

If you're going to use your personal vehicle to transport things, then you should prep your vehicle (ie lay a blanket down first) for it or buy a more suitable vehicle.

brettw22

I do have/use blankets.....that's not entirely the point of the post though.....

Dennis Gardner

Company BS??..........no doubt, but with that type of complaint you don't have to be worried about becoming "company man" of the year. The kinda guy that takes one for the company.

You'll now be on the "high maintenance/high risk" list. I'd bring my resume current.;)

brettw22

Putting the past 2 years aside of them being complete fucktards with the way they've handled several situations directly affecting me, I couldn't give a rats **** if their feathers are ruffled a bit.

I don't give a **** who the company is, I'm not going to incur nearly $2k worth of damage (not wear) to my car and smile. Any company on the up and up shouldn't expect their employees to either.

We're mid-merger as we speak, and will be a whole different company in a month and a half.

Polkersince85

Write it off your taxes as a non-reimbursed employee expense. Sounds like you will have a better chance with the IRS than the company. Good luck

janmike

Unless you are independently wealthy, we all have to work. That is about 1/3 of the better part of your life.. You may as well enjoy it. Sounds like it may be time to move on. Good luck.

TroyD

You are 100% correct. Mileage is only to cover normal wear and tear. Damage like that doesn't just happen. That's just stupid.

I'd refuse to use my own vehicle, if I were you.

BDT

kingtut

If they said no to your email, go to your state dept. of labor to file a claim agaisnt them.

mrbigbluelight

Dennis Gardner wrote:

Company BS??..........no doubt, but with that type of complaint you don't have to be worried about becoming "company man" of the year. The kinda guy that takes one for the company.

You'll now be on the "high maintenance/high risk" list. I'd bring my resume current.;)

Your email response was excellent, but if I may suggest for future reference, never approach the problem with management from a "fair/unfair" standpoint.
Management doesn't, and this is over-simplified, give a **** what's fair/unfair.
#1, they are concerned with bottom line profits .
#2, they are concerned with "The Law of Self Preservation", ie, don't rock the
boat if what's in place rule-wise doesn't endanger their jobs.

With that in mind, one approach to a situation like yours would be to speak to management in a positive way, to let them know of the "advantages" to them of paying for the sort of damages you incurred.

"Say, Captain Sparky (your boss), the guys in sales have noticed that rival-company XYZ is going to impliment a vehicular damage program, and listening to them, I think they have a couple of good points about us doing the same thing".

: repeating "what you heard" helps put you on the same side of the desk as
the boss. YOU aren't coming with YOUR demands, you're just repeating
what you heard. Helping the boss head off "trouble" so to speak.

"I think it was Jerry in Sales who knows a couple of the sales team over at XYZ. He saids their sales guys are really amped up on this thing, and are ready to go out and kick some **** on the road. Although I always thought it would be NICE if we had a vehicular damage program, I never really realized how psyched up the sales guys get over stuff like this !"

: First off, Captain Sparky isn't going to call rival XYZ to find out if what you
are "repeating" is true. If he does, and they tell him "No, we're not doing
that", the doubt still exists that they are telling him "No" because they are
trying to hide a "good thing".
You telling Captain Sparky that YOU never realized how psyched up the
sales team get over stuff like this helps him save face. "Gosh, somebody
else was in the dark over this issue. I'm not the only smuck with his head
up his ****".

"You know, Captain Sparky, I'm wondering: maybe we ought to try out a program like this on a trial basis. See if our sales team gets amped up like XYZ's sales team has. The vibes I'm getting from our guys makes me think that our sales are going to go through the roof if we institute something like
this. I think it's kind of crazy, but you know those sales guys ! Who knows how they think. And what's neat, is that this shouldn't hardly cost the company anything. Sure, we might get a few more vehicle claims in, but that will be easily offset by the climb in sales. Man, I wish we could try out something like this, on a trial basis. How could we go about doing something like this before our Admirals in management get wind of this and decide to try it out ?"

: "Trial basis". Get your foot in the door, don't go hogwild on claims for a bit, and the thing will be impossible to kill.
Dangle the "increased sales" in front of Captain Sparky, with only the slight
risk of increased damage claims and get his interest. "It might be something that makes ME look good to the upper bosses ? Hmmm".
Throw out the seemingly inevitable that when the Admirals in management
hear about such a program, they're bound to institute it. Gee, Captain Sparky, I just wish there was a way to make YOU look good. Why, gosh, if you institute this program first, why .... think how smart YOU will look !

Well, that's just off the top of my head. Hope it doesn't sound like something I pulled out of my other end.
But, as I say, my suggestion would be to avoid the "Fair/Unfair" issue entirely.

brettw22

Our company absolutely is one that couldn't typically care less regarding fair/unfair......however, I felt that was a better angle than saying outright "you're wrong you dumb ****".......(even though that is the sentiment).....lol.

I'd had 2 seperate emails from the Director of Corporate Travel.......one indicating the damage wouldn't be covered, and second telling me to talk to my boss.

As soon as I sent out the above email, I got this response from her less than 2 hours later:

Brett please call Risk Management Call Center and give them your claim. Their number is 800-****-XXXX, I have talked to XXXXX XXXXXXXX regarding this matter and she is aware of the situation, she will review the claim and get back to you. Please let me know if you have any further questions.

The ONLY reason that I even went to the extent of sending the email in the first place is that it's not a policy that actually exists on paper. It was just a discussion people had and decided on. These days, when companies quote from the bible (employee handbook) for every single situation, don't tell me that it's all of a sudden acceptable to just have a floating policy based on whatever some people chose one day vs. the next.

MacLeod

Im with you on this one. I consider "normal wear and tear" covered by mileage pay to be brake pads, oil changes, fan belt, tire wear and so on. Having a company prop break and drop on your car is certainly not "normal".

Say you have your kiosk set up and your car parked next to it. Something on the kiosk gives way the the kiosk falls over onto your car and crushes the roof in. I suppose by their logic that would be normal wear and tear also?

Sounds like to me theyre just trying to keep from paying anything and theyre hoping youll just give up and go away. Fight for it bro!

Strong Bad

Brett,

Per our conversation, it's time for you to head back to school so you can get that company out of your life. I trapped myself in a job for over 14 years that made me sick every single day for the last 5, but I woke up and I'm damn happy I did. It's scary making a big career change, but it certainly can be done.

The car damage is just the tip of the iceburg! Get rid of the problem!


John

brettw22

I completely agree with you John. We're doing our "one on one meetings" (they're not calling them interviews) with the new company over the next couple of weeks......should be interesting.

brettw22

When I had talked to my boss the morning before I sent out that email, he had all sorts of numbers put together on why they were justified on not covering this type of damage. It's the justifications that they continually come up with why it's ok to screw over the people busting their asses that makes me fight this type of issue. When my initial attempts at working with them get instantly shut down by a snap reaction of never wanting to do what's right, my interest in their arguement goes down the drain. There's more of a history here than I'll get into, but it's perfectly warranted.

I wouldn't have a problem (or claim) if they had an actual documented policy specifying exactly what is and is not covered in the travel policy.

warren

Submit the paper work through the companys insurance co., or sue the guy with the opinion, thats you right! Warren

Strong Bad

Those corporate **** will spend more time and money fighting to not pay you then to just do whats right.

I guess thats in the "All Mighty Holy Corporate Management Manual."

Brett, watch Office Space before you sit down to one of these "one-on-one" meetings with the new corporate pigs. If the guys name is Bob, you know what to do...;)

Seriously, good luck. My 14 years were spent with a large international CPA firm. They always made us Admin people feel low. Our time wasn't billable directly to a client, so we were always seen as an expense.

madmax

Turn in the bill on an expense report.
madmax

dkg999

I would also suggest approaching this from the angle of your personal auto insurance. Most personal auto insurance does not cover you or your vehicle if you are using your vehicle in a work related manner. Has your company considered the liability they put themselves at risk of if you are in an accident and they then get taken to court by the other parties in the accident and your personal insurance company? Most companies very much limit when and how you can utilize your personal vehicle for work, as part of their risk mitigation strategies.

reeltrouble1

Your going to have beat them with what they consider "legit" expenses.
As noted companies dont deal with "soft" issues like fairness very well anymore, its a low priority. Sad but true. They like to point hard things like policies, past practices, etc. Much more concerned with the effeciency of an operation in terms of time/money rather than its effectiveness, a large difference between these two words.

You can go for a one time exception and move up the food chain so to speak.

Good Luck Brett. As mentioned you are now officially designated as disgruntled wave maker who does not want to play nice, Some fat cat is telling some slightly skinnier fat cat to tell you to shut the FU. They want all the CC's to cover there ****.

If your driving to PF in your now junky beat up car how about bringing those 7C's for me we can work a deal.

RT1

SCompRacer

brettw22 wrote:

......if they had an actual documented policy....

It's best for corporations when things are written vaugely so they are subject to interpretation. Many years ago I worked for a corporation that had a simple policy "We will treat all our people fairly." I was amazed at how leadership there could interpret that in so many different ways.

Like some have hinted here, and like an old boss used to tell me, you may win the battle but might well lose the war. But having been there and done that at one time or another, sometimes you gotta do what you think is right. Good luck with your case.

masanz1

I can see big corp coming at you from the angle or negligence on your part for not making sure the pins were in good working order or you not snapping them together properly. I have seen similar things before unfortunately

wallstreet

What skin is it off your bosses **** for the repair?? Sounds like he's got bonus money tied into the deal somehow. Either that or he really doesn't like you and inciting you to quit would make his day.

Polkersince85

The next time you have to load your car, be sure to park beside his. Damn pins broke again:eek: Sorry bout that chief.

audiobliss

lol!

brettw22

Our company is self insured (in other words, insurance type claims are a departmental expense) and he does bonus. I have no doubt in my mind as to that being the reason that he doesn't want the company to pay it, but the ultimate word isn't his........it was the director of corporate travel that made the decision to deny first, but then later give me the OK to file the claim.

Strong Bad

Polkersince85 wrote:

The next time you have to load your car, be sure to park beside his. Damn pins broke again:eek: Sorry bout that chief.

Yeah chief, too bad it's only considered wear-and-tear or the company might have paid for the damage.

mrbigbluelight

with this situation.

I'm curious as to what it looks like at your office with your co-workers. Are they giving visible vocal support to your attempts at correcting this situation ?
Or is it a "Yeah, Bretw22, you're right ! YOU go get 'em ! We're behind you 100 % !" to your face, but when a supervisor/manager shows up, it turns into a case of "Well, Capn' Sparky, I don't know what Bretw22's problem is. I don't think I'D ever even think about what he's doing !"

Our organization went through a big restructuring a dozen years ago. Inefficiency, ineffectiveness ... the person who dreamed up the plan had his head up his derriere.
Was the plan working ? No. Could it have possibly worked ? No.

So the blame was laid at the doorstep of the workers: "They're fighting restructuring ! They aren't being flexible ! They won't accept change !".

Things got so bad, that the Vice-Chancellor of Finance came down from The Mount to speak to the troops. Not really to speak, more to threaten.
"If things don't improve, I have to tell you this: there is talk of contracting work out unless "you people" start being more flexible and willing to accept change !".

He then asked if there were any questions or comments. Looking around, all you could see were a sea of whooped dogs, and these were people that REALLY cared about the organization.

Well, someone raised their hand, and said:

"You know, I think we're really wanting to make this thing succeed, but it is not a good plan. You mention being flexible, and being willing to accept change. We are and we have been. But 2 Points:
We're willing to bend, but not bend over.
We're flexible, but not fuckable".

And the person sat back down.
You could have heard a pin drop.

The next day, the Vice-Chancellor for Finance was gone.

Things changed.

The moral: Do the right thing. Period. Always. It's the easiest way in the long run.

Attempt to "steer" them in the right direction, without compromising your morals. If that doesn't work, than stake out your position, have a "Today would be a good day to die" atttitude, and just do the right thing.

Again, good job on dealing with the smucks.