Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to not have agreed to travel for this meeting?

101 replies

VelvetSpoon · 09/10/2015 19:13

I have a meeting in a couple of weeks time with 2 colleagues. We all work in different offices, me and colleague 1 are within an hour of London, colleague 2 is 2 hours away.

Generally we arrange meetings in London.

Both colleagues have pre school age children. However they also have spouses, and parents/grandparents around. My DC are older (secondary school age) but I'm a lone parent with an unreliable Ex, and no living family.

It was suggested moving the meeting outside London today, to which I said no as it would mean me leaving home at 6am and not getting back til possibly 9pm. I have to leave before 8 every day for work as it is and am not normally home til between 6-7.

AIBU to have said no? I very rarely play the lone parent card and have done long days or indeed overnights before but am trying to limit this now as I really don't feel it benefits my DC...

OP posts:
Bogeyface · 09/10/2015 20:06

So, what would someone do who had no childcare in this situation?

They would do what I did, and not take the job!

Not being flippant but when I was offered a promotion at a previous job I had no choice but to turn it down. I was gutted and to be fair, they bent over backwards to find a way to make it work, but the simple fact was that the job required some travel, some overnights and a lot of meetings that could go out of hours. I didnt have the childcare for that so it wasnt possible.

I will never have such a great opportunity again, but thats life. If I couldnt guarantee childcare to cover travel etc then I wouldnt have even applied, or would have withdrawn as soon I knew. The OP can cover it, she has before and has said that she used to do more travel than she is now, so childcare isnt the issue so much as it being inconvenient, which sometimes you do just have to suck up.

I would agree that taking it in turns to choose the meeting location is probably fairest.

jelliebelly · 09/10/2015 20:07

All this travelling and meeting time is massively inefficient - you should suggest phone/conference/weber/FaceTime/Skype as alternatives. Why do they have to be face to face?

PaulAnkaTheDog · 09/10/2015 20:07

Op I would usually say yabu. However, I do remember your previous posts about your kids and I think if you can't trust them to get to school then I fully understand why you are reluctant to go to the meeting. Unfair on colleague two, but I understand your reluctance.

Bogeyface · 09/10/2015 20:10

" If I couldnt guarantee childcare to cover travel etc then I wouldnt have even applied, or would have withdrawn as soon I knew." That is, in the fictitious job I wouldnt be taking! The job I was offered was a new role so I hadnt known until it was on the table.

RB68 · 09/10/2015 20:16

Given what we know you are not unreasonable, but you could always pay a before and afterschool babysitter or childminder to come to the house

Original poster
VelvetSpoon · 09/10/2015 20:18

The job I do now is different from the job I was originally employed to do, in addition my circumstances have changed and I am no longer as willing to leave my DC, as I cannot reliably do so. There is no way they would get up before 6am if I tried to wake them or be trusted not to go back to bed if I did manage to do so.

Re the meetings, it is London or colleague 2s office. My office and colleague 1s office are further from colleague 2 than London.

And, as mentioned colleague 1 will not travel.

So it's either we all travel to London (2 hours for colleague 2, an hour for me and colleague 1), or I travel to colleague 2s office, a 3+ hour journey for me, and colleague 1 doesn't attend.

OP posts:
ilovesooty · 09/10/2015 20:19

Why is colleague 1 being allowed to opt out?

PaulAnkaTheDog · 09/10/2015 20:20

I don't really know what to say that will be useful for this situation but just want to say I'm really happy that you seem to be getting things sorted with your ds.

Original poster
VelvetSpoon · 09/10/2015 20:22

My DC are too old for any formal childcare. And I really can't afford the extra expense. Because again I am a LP, so it's just my salary supporting my family.

I will travel but so far as possible am trying to arrange my unavoidable meetings/ overnights for school holidays and inset days.

OP posts:
LyndaNotLinda · 09/10/2015 20:23

Of course you have video conference facilities - you have a computer don't you?

Honestly, I'm self-employed and my clients are all over the world. I've worked with some of them for 2 years + and we've never met. Also a 6 hour meeting is stupidly inefficient. Your organisation really needs to get with the 21st century. It's crazy anyone being out of the house for 15 hours for an internal meeting.

Original poster
VelvetSpoon · 09/10/2015 20:25

I don't entirely know why colleague 1 can opt out. Their DC are quite young, and I know their spouse has been unwell. Possibly that is a factor. I believe (can't say for certain as we're forbidden to discuss salaries, and accept this may not be relevant anyway) that both are considerably better paid than me - colleague 2 is senior to me, colleague 1 at best is at same level as me.

OP posts:
catsrus · 09/10/2015 20:28

All of you travelling into London seems the best option for me.
All of you there, all have to travel, it's a mid point between your offices.

Shutthatdoor · 09/10/2015 20:29

Sorry but YABU. Domestic set up shouldn't really come into it.

You don't know in depth their situations.

Original poster
VelvetSpoon · 09/10/2015 20:32

Thanks Paul. Both DSs still have various issues but things seem to be better the more I'm 'around', so trying to keep that up. Obviously these situations at work don't help.

My desk is in the middle of an open plan office. A lot of the detail discussed at meetings is business/ employee sensitive, so could not be discussed with me sat at my desk. We do have phone meetings, but periodic face to face meetings are considered essential.

The head of our particular area of the business spends 3-4 days most weeks at meetings up and down the country, as expected by the directors he reports into, who do similarly. So I don't think me insisting on video meetings is likely to change anything as this directive very much comes from the top.

OP posts:
bloodyteenagers · 09/10/2015 20:34

A company with locations in several places and don't have computers and web cams. Really?
No Skype. No FaceTime. Webenairs..
The company then really needs to think outside the box and look at ways of reducing travel expenses.

Alibabsandthe40Musketeers · 09/10/2015 20:39

Can't you work from home and do the meeting as a dial in and then everyone can 'attend'?

Sounds like your company works in a very old fashioned way, all this travelling about.

I would refuse to do it on the basis that face to face isn't necessary and it means you are away from your children for too long.

Original poster
VelvetSpoon · 09/10/2015 20:41

We have computers, albeit a number of our systems are quite outdated (still running old versions of Office etc). I am pretty certain there are no webcams/ video conference facilities. I have had these at previous employers going back 10+ years but we simply don't have them here.

OP posts:
strongandlong · 09/10/2015 20:44

What kind of organisation is it? Sounds Dickensian!

Could you meet at a non-office location? I sometimes meet with my colleagues in hotels or hired rooms? Or just a service station cafe?

strongandlong · 09/10/2015 20:45

I think regular face to face is valuable even if you do have video conferencing etc, but there's a balance to be struck...

Osolea · 09/10/2015 20:48

If colleague 1 doesn't have to attend, then you shouldn't have to attend either.

YANBU.

Work is important but your children come first, and it certainly doesn't sound like you're just being work shy.

Fairenuff · 09/10/2015 20:50

I think YABU. There are 3 of you. The one colleague should not have to make the 2 hour trip everytime, whilst you and other colleague always have a 1 hour trip. That doesn't seem very fair.

SwedishEdith · 09/10/2015 20:54

They would do what I did, and not take the job!

So, what happens if your circumstances change whilst you have the job?

OP- agree about doing this over the phone or not going if one other colleague won't go.

PacificMouse · 09/10/2015 20:55

I'm a bit at loss as to why this meeting is going ahead if one of you can't attend anyway.
And why colleague 1 can't go anywhere bar London.
It looks like that usually because of colleage 1, all the travel is in London.
But actually this is also because of you too.
The issue here is that, before that wasn't something visible, whereas now you are also saying that you can't go to colleague2.

On a more general basis, I can see why you want to reduce the travel but from what you are saying it looks like travelling IS part of the job. (Which probably explains why colleague 2 expects you to travel to hers).
Do you think you can keep it up long term AND do what is best for your family?
What are the reasons for colleague1 not to meet anywhere else other than London?
Is colleague2 happy to do the 2hours journey?

I think that the fact you are not as senoir as colleague2 does play a part. It sounds logical not to ask as much from you if you are more 'junior'/not as high as colleague2.

PennyHasNoSurname · 09/10/2015 20:55

Cant you just say "I can make it to you, but I cant leave til my usual time, and I need to depart by four so it will have to be a little shorter of a meeting than usual"?

CountTessa · 09/10/2015 21:03

Can you not find somewhere inbetween colleague 1´s office and London? I don't really understand how it takes you 1 hour to get to London, colleague 2 takes 2 hours to get to London, but it takes you 4 hours to get to colleague 2. Or why colleague 1 won't go outside London and why they can dictate this. So many hotels, community centres have meeting places you can meet in that must be half way between the three of you.