To control costs, we are considering a policy that would require employees of the same sex to share hotel rooms when travelling on company business. What, if anything, should we be mindful of when considering such a policy and would such policy be outweighed by legal considerations to the contrary?
Question: To control costs, we are considering a policy that would require employees of the same sex to share hotel rooms when travelling on company business. What, if anything, should we be mindful of when considering such a policy and would such policy be outweighed by legal considerations to the contrary?
Answer: I am unaware of any legal impediments to development of a policy requiring employees to share hotel rooms while traveling on company business, in the absence of an express or implied contractual right to private accommodation.
It is unlikely that a past practice of the company bearing the cost of private accommodations would be sufficient to create an implied contractual right without more.
Clearly, any new policy should be brought to the attention of employees when it is created. Notice of a new policy related to business travel should be given in advance of upcoming travel. As well, reasonable consideration should be given to any objections that might be raised in individual cases.
It should be kept in mind that the mere fact that employees are of the same sex will not necessarily make shared accommodation an appropriate course of action in every case. However, if notice of the policy is given in advance and it is reasonably administered, it should not create any predictable concerns of a nature different than those involved in employee business travel generally.
Tim Mitchell is an employment lawyer with Laird Armstrong in Calgary. He can be reached at [email protected] or (403) 233-0050.
Answer: I am unaware of any legal impediments to development of a policy requiring employees to share hotel rooms while traveling on company business, in the absence of an express or implied contractual right to private accommodation.
It is unlikely that a past practice of the company bearing the cost of private accommodations would be sufficient to create an implied contractual right without more.
Clearly, any new policy should be brought to the attention of employees when it is created. Notice of a new policy related to business travel should be given in advance of upcoming travel. As well, reasonable consideration should be given to any objections that might be raised in individual cases.
It should be kept in mind that the mere fact that employees are of the same sex will not necessarily make shared accommodation an appropriate course of action in every case. However, if notice of the policy is given in advance and it is reasonably administered, it should not create any predictable concerns of a nature different than those involved in employee business travel generally.
Tim Mitchell is an employment lawyer with Laird Armstrong in Calgary. He can be reached at [email protected] or (403) 233-0050.