https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51529207

I'm often out of the office so claim meals back on expenses. I really wouldn't be happy if my employer enforced this.

I would challenge that was against my human rights and take them to court.

Also on health grounds, I have allergies to fruit, nuts and seeds, celery plus other foods.

I suggest I would be hard pressed to find enough to eat to keep me alive.

Discriminatory and most likely against the law.

The sentiment is probably well meant, but is likely to land them in a lot of bother.

Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 10:04 am

I would challenge that was against my human rights and take them to court.

Also on health grounds, I have allergies to fruit, nuts and seeds, celery plus other foods.

I suggest I would be hard pressed to find enough to eat to keep me alive.

I hope you have lunch at home should we ever get drawn at Forest Green in the cup !

TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 9:50 am

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51529207

I'm often out of the office so claim meals back on expenses. I really wouldn't be happy if my employer enforced this.

I wouldn't travel. My employers need me to travel more than I need to do it for myself.

That employer boss needs a good hiding

With all the travelling outside the office I would think eating lettuce instead of meat, won’t be enough to offset their carbon footprint

I thought the next civil war would be about something else, but if people like her ever get control of this country, then vegan/veggies would get thrashed in the fighting They would not have the stamina.

First, this is another example of bullying people into something they don't want, and is, as some have said, probably challengable in law (although the payment of expenses is not a legal right I suppose). Secondly, if I am reading this right they are a property developer, so do they carefully look at where they are building. Thirdly, I have questioned for years this idea that vegetarians are somehow saving the planet's environment. My wife was a veggie for nearly 20 years before she got bored with it and we had some interesting conversations. My main point was how does it help the environment when you can actually 'grow' animals in places you can't grow crops, such as on the tops of hills or mountains, or even in water. I have even wondered if it would be logistically possible for the whole world to be veggie due to the need for vast areas of agricultural land, do we have enough of it, and what of countries where such land is at a premium?

The whole concept of vegetariansim somehow saving the planet doesn't seem to work for me. I could of course be totally wrong and maybe I could be convinced otherwise, I don't have a closed mind on this, but there are simply too many things that get in the way. What do we do with all the meat related industries employing millions of people worldwide? How do we feed all the people who are not in a position to grow crops in vast quantities? What of the people in the fishing industry and the communities that rely on that industry? Until someone asks those questions and actually comes up with some definite answers we should stop trying to bully ordinary people into some kind of procrustean bed of conformity.

summitclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:21 am

I thought the next civil war would be about something else, but if people like her ever get control of this country, then vegan/veggies would get thrashed in the fighting They would not have the stamina.

Is it me or does it seem that all these bonkers PC ideas mostly come from women? I'm not being anti-female here, it just always seems to be that the progenitor or leading 'spokesperson' for these things does usually seem to be female. Mmm.

The employees can eat want they want as long as they're paying for it.

houseboy wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:24 am

First, this is another example of bullying people into something they don't want, and is, as some have said, probably challengable in law (although the payment of expenses is not a legal right I suppose).

Try reading the article, the bit where it says:

"Development surveyor Kate Marfleet, 28, is head of the firm's values team and persuaded staff to go vegetarian last year, to reduce its environmental impact. The idea was put to an internal vote and passed, with a few dissenters."

It was a democratic vote and the majority were in favour.

Meat eaters lost, get over it.

Some predictable responses on here, which kind of shows how difficult it is to change people's behaviour.



Same with climate change, the human race is ultimately doomed because no-one wants to change the way they've always lived their life, no matter how insignificant the changes required.

Cryssys wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:39 am

Try reading the article, the bit where it says:

"Development surveyor Kate Marfleet, 28, is head of the firm's values team and persuaded staff to go vegetarian last year, to reduce its environmental impact. The idea was put to an internal vote and passed, with a few dissenters."

It was a democratic vote and the majority were in favour.

Meat eaters lost, get over it.

You are missing the point. People should be able to eat what they want. It's like every other trendy crap. Don't push your fad on others. Who do these people think they are?

summitclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:42 am

You are missing the point. People should be able to eat what they want. It's like every other trendy crap.

They can though, but not on company expenses.

Oh noes, my boss won't pay for my bacon butty or lardy chips. They will pay for food that doesn't have animal in it, but if I want my triple beef burger I'll have to pay for it myself. Fecking commie fascists!

summitclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:42 am

You are missing the point. People should be able to eat what they want. It's like every other trendy crap. Don't push your fad on others. Who do these people think they are?

Missing the point? Houseboy completely missed the point when he said they were bullied into something they didn't want.

They put it to the vote and the majority voted in favour.

Do you have a problem with democracy?

claret2018 wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:41 am

Some predictable responses on here, which kind of shows how difficult it is to change people's behaviour.



Same with climate change, the human race is ultimately doomed because no-one wants to change the way they've always lived their life, no matter how insignificant the changes required.

Because changing to a diet that humans aren't built for is an insignificant change.

It's disgusting how this commie fascist employer is staving her employees to death.

summitclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:42 am

You are missing the point. People should be able to eat what they want. It's like every other trendy crap. Don't push your fad on others. Who do these people think they are?

Exactly.

How would vegetarians/vegans like it if their employers introduced a 'meat only' expenses policy?

Their next company policy: "We won’t hire you if you are not Vegetarian".

Billy Balfour wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:53 am

It's disgusting how this commie fascist employer is staving her employees to death.

Billy Balfour wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:49 am

They can though, but not on company expenses.

Oh noes, my boss won't pay for my bacon butty or lardy chips. They will pay for food that doesn't have animal in it, but if I want my triple beef burger I'll have to pay for it myself. Fecking commie fascists!

Vintage Claret wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:54 am

Exactly.

How would vegetarians/vegans like it if their employers introduced a 'meat only' expenses policy? What bit of that do you not understand?

Stop with the mockrage. It was put to a vote vote and the majority were in favour. What bit of that do you not understand?

You don't do irony, do you Cryssys. My first post of "The employees can eat want they want as long as they're paying for it" should have given you a clue, ffs.

Some people have special dietary requirements, a sweeping policy of this nature would I believe be deemed illegal if challenged.

I agree people could pay for meals out of their own pocket.

If any company wants me to travel and They think it’s ok that I will spend more than when I am at home. Then at home I will stay.

deanothedino wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:51 am

Because changing to a diet that humans aren't built for is an insignificant change.

The human body requires vitamins, minerals, fats, proteins, carbs etc. Meat is not a fundamental dietary requirement.

For me it comes under positive discrimination.

So if they put a vote “ Only black people can be employed by the company” if that was voted in, is that acceptable??

But nobody is stopping anyone from eating meat. The meatless policy is an expenses policy. This is all a bit “nothing to see here, please move along”.

Probably aimed at people who take the **** tbf. Better off just giving an allotted meal limited. Some business won’t pay for employees to stay in 5 star luxury so what’s the difference?

Billy Balfour wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:18 pm

But nobody is stopping anyone from eating meat. The meatless policy is an expenses policy. This is all a bit “nothing to see here, please move along”.

Reads news:

- A million people now without access to public transport
- transgender sausage rolls

UTC 'Have you heard about these sausage rolls'

I'm a meat eater, but I still say it's up to the company with regards to what it wants to pay for and what it doesn't. The best thing about this storm in a teacup is that it has got the right people frothing.

When's International Men's day?

19th November.

When's the Music of White Origin awards?

Billy Balfour wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:05 pm

You don't do irony, do you Cryssys. My first post of "The employees can eat want they want as long as they're paying for it" should have given you a clue, ffs.

Sorry Billy. I've stopped frothing at the mouth now.

Lowbankclaret wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:15 pm

For me it comes under positive discrimination.

So if they put a vote “ Only black people can be employed by the company” if that was voted in, is that acceptable??

No, because that would be racial discrimination and illegal. What this company has done is entirely legal and has the support of the employees.

Maybe the company should expect a lot of expense claims with Burger King receipts

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-01-06/pla ... staurants/

It's good that this is such an IMPORTANT ISSUE.

I mean, it not like we've anything else to worry or froth about, is it.

Excellent work by their Marketing people to get their company noticed. Straight out of the 'do something controversial enough to get noticed by the media' Ryanair playbook.

Next you'll believe they enforce a rule meaning their male employees need to sit down when using the toilet.

I was thinking the same. Be controversial and get in the papers.

Cryssys wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:39 am

Try reading the article, the bit where it says:

"Development surveyor Kate Marfleet, 28, is head of the firm's values team and persuaded staff to go vegetarian last year, to reduce its environmental impact. The idea was put to an internal vote and passed, with a few dissenters."

It was a democratic vote and the majority were in favour.

Meat eaters lost, get over it.

My point is that they needn't have put it to a vote at all, putting people under the pressure of having to vote is the first wrong step. Your post itself says 'a few dissenters', how many? Don't you know? 2 or 3, 40%? How many? People in a job should not have lifestyle choices forced on them by an employer, it is wholly and completely wrong. And while you are on about reading posts properly you should try it. My post states that my wife was a veggie for nearly 20 years and I never had a problem with it, it was her informed and independent choice. People at that place are being discriminated against if they eat meat and maybe it should be challenged legally because the ones who didn't want it are suffering through no fault of their own. There is no such thing as a democratic vote on a subject such as this in a work place as it has an effect on only a minority. It is not necesarry and the company should hang their heads in shame for their discriminatroy behaviour.

This is not an argument for or against vegetariansim, people can do as they wish, it is the principle of an employer forcing people, or attempting to force people, into a lifestyle they do not want or face financial consequences, if you think that is right then please don't quote democracy to me.

Virtue signalling by idiots. A look at us, aren't we wonderful policy.

Darthlaw wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:44 pm

Excellent work by their Marketing people to get their company noticed. Straight out of the 'do something controversial enough to get noticed by the media' Ryanair playbook.

Next you'll believe they enforce a rule meaning their male employees need to sit down when using the toilet.

Ryanair ad recently on the telly box:

We try to get all our planes full to help the environment. No - you try to fill them to maximise profit (nothing wrong with that just don't say it is for some onther reason).

Darthlaw wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:44 pm

Next you'll believe they enforce a rule meaning their male employees need to sit down when using the toilet.

Dear Lord, how many times do you need telling! I'll say it again for the hard of thinking; It wasn't enforced.

The policy was proposed by an employee, put to a vote and the vote was carried.

Democracy, it means that sometimes you lose. Get over it.

CombatClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:13 pm

The human body requires vitamins, minerals, fats, proteins, carbs etc. Meat is not a fundamental dietary requirement.

Here's a fact you clearly didn't know, the body doesn't need carbs. It is the only one out of fat, protein and carbs that the body doesn't need.

Meat isn't a fundamental requirement, however a diet devoid of meat will need supplementing to replace nutrients that are predominately found in animal products. The human body isn't made to purely eat plant based.

The most environmentally friendly diet, in my opinion, would include locally produced meat alongside locally produced fruit and veg.

Darthlaw wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:44 pm

Excellent work by their Marketing people to get their company noticed. Straight out of the 'do something controversial enough to get noticed by the media' Ryanair playbook.

Next you'll believe they enforce a rule meaning their male employees need to sit down when using the toilet.

Ryanair ad recently on the telly box:

We try to get all our planes full to help the environment. No - you try to fill them to maximise profit (nothing wrong with that just don't say it is for some other reason).

A few years ago we got stuck at an airport in Spain because our Ryanair plane was delayed. The reason? The plane coming out wasn't full so they waited until the next one and put the two together.

houseboy wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:47 pm

My point is that they needn't have put it to a vote at all, putting people under the pressure of having to vote is the first wrong step. Your post itself says 'a few dissenters', how many? Don't you know? 2 or 3, 40%? How many? People in a job should not have lifestyle choices forced on them by an employer, it is wholly and completely wrong. And while you are on about reading posts properly you should try it. My post states that my wife was a veggie for nearly 20 years and I never had a problem with it, it was her informed and independent choice. People at that place are being discriminated against if they eat meat and maybe it should be challenged legally because the ones who didn't want it are suffering through no fault of their own. There is no such thing as a democratic vote on a subject such as this in a work place as it has an effect on only a minority. It is not necesarry and the company should hang their heads in shame for their discriminatroy behaviour.

This is not an argument for or against vegetariansim, people can do as they wish, it is the principle of an employer forcing people, or attempting to force people, into a lifestyle they do not want or face financial consequences, if you think that is right then please don't quote democracy to me.

Does it matter how many dissenters there were?

Nothing was enforced, It was put to a democratic vote and the majority voted in favour. It was there informed and independent choice. You may not agree with it but the employees did and voted accordingly.

Cryssys wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:54 pm

Dear Lord, how many times do you need telling! I'll say it again for the hard of thinking; It wasn't enforced.

The policy was proposed by an employee, put to a vote and the vote was carried.

Democracy, it means that sometimes you lose. Get over it.

Democracy about whether we should be in or out of the EU has to have a winner or a loser. There's no compromise, it's either/or.

This sort of thing shouldn't be covered. Vegetarians should be free to avoid meat, meat-eaters should be free to eat it, both parties can easily be accommodated. All sorts of things could be decided by employee majority vote - wearing socks, say - but why should they be?

If the boss wants to say that it's a meat-free firm, that's slightly different. But for the employee majority to tell the employee minority what they can and can't do, that's wrong.

This wouldn't affect me as I barely eat meat but it's a very bad policy in my view. This shouldn't be forced on people at individual employer level.

It's no surprise though, given the ideological zealotry of many vegetarians.

dsr wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:16 pm

Democracy about whether we should be in or out of the EU has to have a winner or a loser. There's no compromise, it's either/or.

This sort of thing shouldn't be covered. Vegetarians should be free to avoid meat, meat-eaters should be free to eat it, both parties can easily be accommodated. All sorts of things could be decided by employee majority vote - wearing socks, say - but why should they be?

If the boss wants to say that it's a meat-free firm, that's slightly different. But for the employee majority to tell the employee minority what they can and can't do, that's wrong.

Who are you to say that this should not be covered? What right have you to say that? The employees made an informed choice. Surely you should respect that? Or do your democratic principles only extend to policies you agree with?

As for your comment "If the boss wants to say that it's a meat-free firm, that's slightly different." Does that mean that if the boss had unilaterally imposed it that you would be supportive?

Cryssys wrote: ↑

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:54 pm

Dear Lord, how many times do you need telling! I'll say it again for the hard of thinking; It wasn't enforced.

The policy was proposed by an employee, put to a vote and the vote was carried.

Democracy, it means that sometimes you lose. Get over it.

Whoosh....!!!!

It doesn't matter whether it was enforced or voted for. It's a PR stunt, for those wet behind the ears.

I can buy into the meat free theories and I've cut back a lot recently. This does seem excessive though.

Imagine they only expensed travel if you went by bike and refused to expense travel by other means if it wasn't carbon neutral?

I understand that producing meat leaves a bigger carbon footprint, but in the grand scheme of things if this company ensures its employees don't eat meat (or reduces it significantly), what is the impact on the carbon footprint?

So many better ways to achieve carbon neutrality than this, definitely an attempt to get people talking and it's worked...