Suppose there are two employees: Alice and Bob, who do the same job at the same factory. Alice has a 10 minute (20RT) commute, Bob commutes 35 minutes(70RT).

If you're the owner of the factory, would you compensate them for their commutes? How would you do it?

  • eksb@programming.dev
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would make sure they are both payed well enough that they can afford to live close to the factory. If they chose to live far away anyway, that is not my problem.

    • lntl@lemmy.ml
      hexagon
      ·
      1 year ago

      i used to work for Amazon. in the morning, I'd drive to a parking lot a few miles from the warehouse. then I'd get on a shuttle bus which would drop me off at the warehouse. (not enough parking at the warehouse)

      Jeffy B paid me for the shuttle ride to and from the warehouse AND paid the shuttle driver.

        • lntl@lemmy.ml
          hexagon
          ·
          1 year ago

          yes, I'd clock in and out on the bus. Know where a municipal bus collects fare near the driver? they had a shift clock there to punch in and out.

  • Mothra@mander.xyz
    ·
    1 year ago

    Some countries actually pay your commute fees or part of them. In Argentina it's called viático. It can be advertised as part of the job payment or discussed upon closing the agreement, regardless of whether the job is legal (by the books, officially taxable) or otherwise.

    • lntl@lemmy.ml
      hexagon
      ·
      1 year ago

      lol Argentina is a strange place to use as an example. I see what you mean though

      • Mothra@mander.xyz
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I know... lol I'm not trying to say it's any better. Wealthier countries don't see the point in compensating this way, because the expense in the grand scheme of things is just petty change for the workers.

        But if it was necessary, then it's not too bad a system, which is what OP was after.

  • JohanSkullcrusher@lemm.ee
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anything short of my commuting time being considered part of my working hours is a non-starter for me. I value the time I gain by not commuting a lot more than most employers do. If my day starts the moment I close my front door, then we can start talking about additional concessions.

  • bl4kers@lemmy.ml
    ·
    1 year ago

    A high static number, like $100/week. The people who live closer will get a little extra and that's fine (a mild incentive)

  • hellweaver666@discuss.tchncs.de
    ·
    1 year ago

    My employer gives us a commuting payment based on the distance from home to work (paid per km) on days we go to the office. We get an additional €60 a month to cover our working from home costs.

  • VulturE@lemmy.ml
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let's make generalizations to answer the bigger problem here.

    Most jobs that people are talking about are in cities.

    Some people choose to not live right in the middle of a city for various reasons, but still want that job. They may live in a nearby community, the edge of the city, a county or two over, etc.

    Predatory companies like Amazon resolve this by telling someone like Ryan homes to build a few 300 house communities right next to their new warehouse, resolving the issue and making their own non-city town. Normal companies do not have this ability.

    There has to be a balance.

    Businesses need to not be involved in commute repayment. They should instead invest into their local communities to make them more desirable to live in.

    • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
      ·
      1 year ago

      "choose" is doing a lot of work there. Have you priced housing lately? The real "choice" I see is that companies "choose" their location such that their employees can't afford to live nearby on the wages they're earning, or the companies "choose" to pay employees to little in wages to afford to live nearby.

      • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        although it is also true that near areas with lots of jobs rents will be higher and this is a case where the bourgeoise is actually relatively innocent and landlords are to blame instead. This is to a far lesser extent than it is for the proletariat an issue for the bourgeoise as it makes hiring more difficult to hire and takes money out of the economy that would likely otherwise be spent on commodities

  • D61 [any]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Half assed ideas.

    Option 1) % of hourly pay rate, capped at an two hours for a total round trip (but flexible) + a stipend depending on mode of transportation. Could try to get receipts from workers and have a purser issue cash/credit on their next paycheck or issue re loadable debit cards that get filled at regular intervals. (So a card for paid public transit and fuel for combustion vehicles) If we're working in a place that taxes employee wages, the more taxes the employer can carry the better on the workers.

    Option 2) Everybody gets a debit card and a list of approved places/items to be purchased for the purposes of "commuting to work compensation". Workers could be expected to keep as many receipts as possible to turn in weekly just to verify stuff.

    Option 3) Some subcommittee tracks worker commute times and how they commute and every quarter or something a stipend is paid in a lump sum like a bonus or it is used to give a paycheck by paycheck payout.

    Easiest idea would be like JohanSkullcrusher said, full hourly pay rate the second I get into my car to start driving. Though workers would wind up paying more in income taxes and there'd probably be some issues with workers getting different compensation, like somebody walking 10 minutes to work and somebody driving 1 hour to get to work are going to have significantly different income levels at the end of the year.

    • lntl@lemmy.ml
      hexagon
      ·
      1 year ago

      What if Bob rides a bicycle? Should he be compensated at a lower rate because his actual costs are less?

      • ryannathans@aussie.zone
        ·
        1 year ago

        Generally everyone just gets an allowance of X paid, pocketing the difference they don't use. I work from home, travel costs for me would likely be both on the clock and expenses paid if travel is necessary

        • lntl@lemmy.ml
          hexagon
          ·
          1 year ago

          I work in an office and am not compensated for getting to work. Would be compensated if after getting to the office they needed me to travel somewhere else.

          • Black_Gulaman@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            ·
            1 year ago

            That's what we also have here.

            "Took you 2 hours and 1/4 th your daily rate? Sorry you will have to cover that cost out of your pocket. After all, we didn't force you to work here, you applied knowing full well where the office is and how much your salary would be."

  • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
    ·
    1 year ago

    First: a company should pay at a minimum a wage that can afford housing nearby (probably within 15 minutes' drive). The company should pay everyone for work hours + that round trip nearby commute time

    If the company is paying that wage, then employees who live farther away are making a free choice to do so. They still get that round trip nearby commute time paid, but time beyond that is not paid. Or paid at some diminishing rate.

    Companies should recognize a worker's time list for the company's benefit. But there has to be a balance because of the temptation to game the system.

  • ThatHermanoGuy@midwest.social
    ·
    1 year ago

    No, the one with the longer commute should be taxed extra to account for all the damage caused to the environment, increased traffic, road wear and tear, etc.

    Commuting should never be encouraged. Live where you work.

  • banana_meccanica@feddit.it
    ·
    1 year ago

    I'll offer Bob a place near the workplace if he's a good employee. If he asks me to pay for his transportation expenses, it won't happen. I think I'd formally invite him to find another job at the end of the contract.