140

I was at a work conference last week that was supposed to go M-F. It ended a day early and I drove home Friday during the day instead of Saturday. When I got back in the office today, my manager told me that I'd have to use one of my unpaid time-off days for this, since they didn't get any value out of my day. Is this a reasonable request or something I should push back on? For what it's worth I got the hotel I was staying at to refund one night, so it ended up saving them some money. I feel like this should at least count for something.

I'm in the US, and I'm paid a salary, not hourly. Unpaid time-off days are a limited benefit (we get ~5 per year). I could probably also use one of my PTO days, but those are very limited at 10 per year and I already have plans for them.

edit: It was a 6-hour drive, so it took most of a work day. I'm supposed to be reimbursed for gas+tolls+wear and tear on my personal car, but according to my coworkers it takes a lot of pulling teeth to get them to actually write the check. That's probably best left to another question though.

neubert
  • 10,316
  • 11
  • 50
  • 66
TurnpikeGuy
  • 671
  • 2
  • 5
  • 6

9 Answers9

317

Travel away from home is legally work time, unless it was done outside of regular working hours, and you were a passenger (that is, you were not driving yourself).

If you have spent another 6 hours driving to the conference (presumably on a Sunday before), you should point to your manager that both trips are legally considered work time, and you should in fact be granted an additional PTO for traveling on a Sunday.

Let them read the DOL fact sheet and suggest they should at least drop the idea of you taking a day off on Friday.

Dmitry Grigoryev
  • 9,225
  • 2
  • 26
  • 53
  • 94
    Thank you for the factually correct answer and the DOL reference. Unfortunately, there often seems to be a lot of speculation about labor law in America when it comes to subjects like this, leading people to assume that there are no controls or regulations, or that companies can do whatever they want. Neither is true. What this employer has done is, in a very black and white sense, illegal. – dwizum Mar 10 '20 at 12:43
  • 1
    @dwizum - What the manager is asking for is illegal. It might not actually be company policy. It's not clear if the author got paid during their travel to the conference. It's also not clear if the author spent the entire traveling or spent 30 minutes, and didn't show up for the rest of the work day. I have been to conferences that were in the same town. Details matter, but as you said, there are guidelines and laws that describe what can and cannot be asked of an employee. – Donald Mar 10 '20 at 16:47
  • 58
    It might be worth pointing out that this is a good time for resume-dusting-off. Pointing out that your boss is acting illegally can win you the battle but lose the war. And independent of whether this is legal or not, it's fundamentally unreasonable in the extreme, and that is a potential red flag against depending on this person in a long term work relationship. – msouth Mar 10 '20 at 18:50
  • 7
    You definitely want to get the hell out of that company! Sheesh ... Don't let the door hit you in the butt as you leave. – Mike Robinson Mar 10 '20 at 19:18
  • Is it possible that this is a misunderstanding then? Legally, the company should pay for travel both ways, and maybe they were planning to pay for Sunday and pay for Saturday. But with the change in plans, the return travel is on Friday, and they're paying the OP for one fewer day of work. As they're still paying for the drive back (originally scheduled for Saturday), the lost day of pay is for what was originally scheduled on Friday. Filter this through a couple of managers, and maybe it comes down to the OP as ‹We're not paying you for Friday.›, and somebody interpreted that as UPTO. – Toby Bartels Mar 10 '20 at 21:14
  • The OP indicates that they're paid a salary, not hourly. Doesn't this indicate they're an exempt employee? Does the linked fact sheet cover exempt employees? Some of the language there makes it unclear to me. – MikeH Mar 10 '20 at 23:18
  • 5
    @MikeH you can't refuse to pay a salaried employee for a day they worked, so it seems applicable either way. – Kat Mar 11 '20 at 00:22
  • 1
    @MikeH My understanding is that an employee on a salary can't get paid extra money for extra time they have worked. However, there's still work time accounting applied to them (at least on a daily basis), so they should get PTO days in exchange for extra days worked. At the very least, they should not be taken away a PTO for a day which they have worked from legal point of view. – Dmitry Grigoryev Mar 11 '20 at 09:16
  • @TobyBartels The OP were working on Friday from the legal point of view, so they should not be asked to use an UPTO on that day. Asking them to use an UPTO for Saturday also makes no sense, unless the OP regularly works on Saturdays (which would be very unusual) and they didn't show up on Saturday after traveling on Friday (which they should then have mentioned). – Dmitry Grigoryev Mar 11 '20 at 09:28
  • 1
    An employer can absolutely refuse to pay for expenses. Heck I've had a employer not pay a contract at all. It was wrong. Sure. The remedy? You have to go to court and sue. Employers do the wrong thing all the day. Our laws are what protect us (in the US) – Michael Durrant Mar 11 '20 at 09:58
  • 2
    As a non native speaker could you explain what DOL means? Is this some kind of labor law regulation or a goverment agency? – some_coder Mar 11 '20 at 10:59
  • 3
    @some_coder, DOL stands for "Department of Labor", the government agency dealing with labor laws. – Bart van Ingen Schenau Mar 11 '20 at 13:18
  • Question about this: > As an enforcement policy the Division will not consider as work time that time spent in travel away from home outside of regular working hours as a passenger on an airplane, train, boat, bus, or automobile.

    I.e. driving back on Saturday would've never been paid out in hours?

     – Anemoia Mar 11 '20 at 17:37
  • @Snake No, this answer has some questionable aspects to it. For one, it's most directly applicable to hourly employees. For another, time spent traveling for work related duties (not as a passenger, and not as part of a normal commute) outside of "normal work hours" can end up covered, depending. See also: "The time is not only hours worked on regular working days during normal working hours but also during corresponding hours on nonworking days." Note that state laws can further enhance the DOL regulations. The simple answer is the employer is wrong. The deeper answer is: see a lawyer. – taswyn Mar 11 '20 at 18:34
  • 1
    @DmitryGrigoryev : Sure, what's being asked of the OP is wrong. I'm just wondering if this is a wrong policy implemented from the highest level or a bungled communication somewhere between HR and the OP. – Toby Bartels Mar 12 '20 at 02:00
  • 2
    Just to give an update, I followed this example and met with my manager to go over the DOL fact sheet. They changed their mind immediately and I'm not using PTO or unpaid time off, I'm being paid as if it was a normal day. – TurnpikeGuy Mar 13 '20 at 23:40
128

Is this a reasonable request or something I should push back on?

It's completely unreasonable to me. I would push back. And if that doesn't work, I might have a chat with HR to understand relevant company policy.

If it hadn't ended early, you still wouldn't have been in the office. So there is no difference in days worked in either case.

I think your manager is making no sense at all.

Joe Strazzere
  • 382,456
  • 185
  • 1,077
  • 1,492
  • 31
    There are probably laws regarding this, never mind company policy. You might have to make HR/accounting do the understanding ;) – Mars Mar 10 '20 at 07:06
  • 1
    Have to disagree with that. Of course there is a difference in days worked. The employer send OP to the conference because it seemed useful to them. So for the employer there is one day at conference learning things versus not doing anything, that is a big difference. Additionally it seems the general travel policy is 'travel time is free time', OP wouldn't have gotten an extra work day for driving home Saturday either. That is not a nice policy but it is certainly legit and not that uncommon. – quarague Mar 10 '20 at 07:38
  • 57
    @quarague Commute time is your own time, travel time is not. There is a difference. If it takes you 1 hour to commute each day to work, for example, that 1 hour is up to you to plan and your employer does not need to compensate you for it. But for a conference that takes 6 hours to travel to, that is not your responsibility. Your employer needs to compensate you for the 6 hours time that it takes and for the mileage if you drive your own car. – Brandin Mar 10 '20 at 09:57
  • 1
    @Brandin Do you have a law you can quote for compensating the travel time? From personal experience travel time to conferences or to customers may or may not be compensated, both are compatible with German labor law and are used in practise. I don't know the US labor law but I would be surprised if it is more employee friendly than German law. – quarague Mar 10 '20 at 10:33
  • 31
    While it's unreasonable, I don't see what value this answer offers above the others. No actionable points, no relevant laws, nothing. Just a "common sense" point that's easy to upvote. – Matsemann Mar 10 '20 at 10:50
  • 7
    @quarague I don't know the US labor law but I would be surprised if it is more employee friendly than German law get ready to be surprised! The law is very clear about what counts as travel time in situations like this. That said, many employers don't understand the law, or ignore it, and many employees will unfortunately tolerate that abuse, but that doesn't mean it's okay or not illegal. – dwizum Mar 10 '20 at 12:45
  • 10
    @Matsemann The question asked was "Is this reasonable?" Joe's answer answers that question. – dkwarr87 Mar 10 '20 at 15:35
  • 2
    @quarague. Isn't Germany covered by the EU Working Time Directive? Last time I looked, business travel counted as work. – Tony Dallimore Mar 10 '20 at 15:53
  • 2
    @quarague, https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/workhours/traveltime/. It's complicated enough and with enough exceptions that I don't know all the rules, but just the first sentence of the introductory paragraph is enough to tell me that it's worth it for OP to push back and ask questions. – Karen Mar 10 '20 at 17:09
  • 1
    Or "not go to the conference" if it has this other cost associated... – rogerdpack Mar 11 '20 at 20:16
  • @Matsemann "I don't see what value this answer offers above the others. No actionable points, no relevant laws, nothing." Well, regarding an action point, he did recommend to "push back", so that's action? – kiradotee Mar 12 '20 at 15:05
42

No. Time spent traveling for work should be paid time. Your manager's suggestion should be concerning not only to you but also for your organization.

You should, at minimum, alert another trusted leader in the organization to your manager's request. Additionally, you might consider discussing the situation with your manager to make sure he/she understands the situation, what you believe is the right, and agree on a path to resolving the issue.

Wesley Long
  • 63,364
  • 22
  • 144
  • 213
Jay
  • 12,286
  • 2
  • 41
  • 63
  • Thanks for your input. I'll prepare some talking points and discuss it with her tomorrow. – TurnpikeGuy Mar 10 '20 at 01:16
  • @TurnpikeGuy I personally would be also preparing to pull teeth. – DrMrstheMonarch Mar 10 '20 at 01:18
  • What do you mean by that? – TurnpikeGuy Mar 10 '20 at 01:19
  • @TurnpikeGuy Use the @ symbol to tag the person you want to reply to so they get a notification. But i'm pretty sure it means that management isn't going to want to reimburse you. – Shadowzee Mar 10 '20 at 03:39
  • Situations like this are why it's very important to ask a lot of questions in an interview. You might not get truthful answers but the more you ask the better chance you have of seeing any red flags. – Rich Mar 10 '20 at 04:02
36

Tell them that you didn't get any value out of the day either.

Besides, they did get value out of it because you were at the conference. If you hadn't done the travel, you wouldn't have been at the conference.

EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine
  • 6,362
  • 1
  • 21
  • 51
21

You are paid in exchange for your free time.

The value that you bring to the company is not relevant to whether you should be paid (it is only relevant to whether the company want to keep working with you).

Whenever you use your time for the company rather than for yourself, it is time that the company should be paying you (including the time traveling to/from the conference that is not commuting)

Their argument is backward: instead of them not getting any value from your time, it is you who is spending your time on behalf of the company.

njzk2
  • 2,990
  • 1
  • 15
  • 21
  • For example, you get paid if you go to work, and your office is evacuated from 10am to 4pm because of a bomb threat. Tough luck for the employer. – gnasher729 Aug 01 '22 at 07:49
6

Entirely unreasonable. The company sent you to the conference. Because of the company, you were many hours away from work on Friday morning. The company didn’t get any benefit from you on Friday, but that is due to the company’s decisions. It’s up to the company, not down to you, to make sure that your work is beneficial to the company or not.

And the company does benefit: If you hadn’t driven home on Friday, you would have driven home on Monday, and you wouldn’t have worked Friday or Monday.

(This doesn’t address the legality - just the fact that your manager tries to bamboozle you with seemingly good reason that fall apart when you look closer).

gnasher729
  • 169,032
  • 78
  • 316
  • 508
  • 2
    Why drive home on Monday? Not Saturday? – thursdaysgeek Mar 10 '20 at 16:33
  • 2
    The drive back is work. He doesn't work on Saturday or Sunday. – gnasher729 Mar 11 '20 at 09:29
  • 1
    @thursdaysgeek Other people have pointed out that OP should get paid even for driving back on the weekend; however, this answer is pointing out that even by following the company's messed up logic the company still wouldn't benefit because then people would just drive back on Monday so they still get paid for the travel time. Enjoy the distant location for the weekend, then travel back Monday when the company acknowledges it as work time. This is probably not necessary, but it's a good alternative point of view. – Aaron Mar 11 '20 at 18:56
5

I'm not suggesting this is what you should have done, but do I wonder if they would have had the same reaction if you had not said anything, and just showed up at work on Monday morning? You would have goofed off on Friday, gotten paid, and if you pocketed the hotel refund, actually made extra money.

Really though, as the other answers already said, you should be getting paid for your travel time to and from the conference. You have in fact saved your employer a load of money already - 1 night in the hotel, plus Friday's dinner, plus Saturday's breakfast, plus 6 hours driving time on Saturday, and you are more rested having had 2 days for your weekend. Demand that you get paid for 6 hours driving to the conference on Sunday, and don't let them steal your days off.

Nick
  • 51
  • 1
3

When I got back in the office today, my manager told me that I'd have to use one of my unpaid time-off days for this, since they didn't get any value out of my day. Is this a reasonable request or something I should push back on?

Yes push back. This doesn't sound right to me since it was beyond your control but otherwise you would have gotten paid. Generally speaking commute times aren't considered paid time but traveling to and from work related events are. By spending time traveling from the work event back to your home is considered paid hours.

I'm guessing your boss doesn't understand HR policy or misunderstood something. I would get further clarification and even go up to HR to ask.

Dan
  • 21,133
  • 4
  • 33
  • 71
2

In my 30 years I have seen:

  1. No pay for travel time but if you work while traveling you get paid for the work.

  2. No pay for travel time but while traveling at the client site we got crazy hours in so we made up for the lost hours. We also got $50/night "travel pay".

  3. Paid for travel time, but not to exceed 8 hours/day total work time. So if you travelled 4 and worked 6 you could bill 2 hours of travel time.

  4. Paid 1/2 rate for travel time from the time you leave your house until you get to the worksite or hotel. And in the reverse as well.

  5. Paid full rate for travel to the client, but not paid for travel home. The logic behind this is: If you are traveling to the client you are working for them. When you leave the client site you could be going anywhere (including a different client; in which case that client would pay your time).

Look at the job as a whole before making waves with their policies. Some of the policies above seem pretty unfair, but the companies had other policies that where pretty good. If you are in a small company then your salary is very dependent on how well you cooperate with everyone; making a fuss about policies is a fast way to get small raises. If you are in a big company then their policies were set by lawyers and you won't be changing them anytime soon.

Be Kind To New Users
  • 978
  • 5
  • 14
  • (3) is strange. If the client needs me from Monday 1pm to 2pm, or from Monday 1pm to Friday 2pm, my travel time and cost is exactly the same, and I should get paid the same (plus 4 hotel nights added, obviously). Of course the client and company might think hard before they send me out for an hour. – gnasher729 Jul 31 '22 at 14:26
  • @gnasher729 The policies get set by someone that does not realize that humans will adapt to the new policy. All we did was fly out the day before rather than getting up early and flying in in the morning. Then we could book the entire travel time. – Be Kind To New Users Jul 31 '22 at 19:28