Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

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:
rookiemere · 10/10/2015 17:02

I find it extremely hard to be on a teleconference if the other participants are face to face - particularly if they are longer meetings, I'm sure colleague 1 would find it equally hard.

Therefore you could suggest that you're worried that as Colleague 1 will be dialling in, it will be hard for her to hear and contribute if the other two of you are face to face and it makes more sense for all of you to dial in.

I also think that it is fair that most meetings are in London. London appears to be the recognised centre for your organisation, so it makes sense that it's used that way.

If none of the above helps then I say stick to your guns and attend for the hours that just about make your day workable i.e. 11-3. I think you're in the legal field and I'm sure matters are complex, but really a 4 hr focused meeting should be more than enough to cover off most matters.

I'm sure you haven't made any out loud references about Colleague 1s inability to travel and quite rightly so as it's her personal business.

I've started getting mentoring from a senior p/t professional lady at our office and she has made me a lot tighter around my boundaries, but she says the key thing is not to be apologetic about it, provided what you are offering to do is not taking the mickey, which in your case it clearly isn't then people shouldn't react negatively. Amazingly since I have been doing a bit more of this, people seem to respect me more, not less.

Fairenuff · 10/10/2015 17:10

Presumably we'd also need dongles or some sort of wireless internet connection, again we don't have that in our office.

No, no dongle required, nor wireless connection.

It's clear that you haven't even tried to skype which is a surprise as it's the obvious 'go to' when a face to face meeting is not possible.

VelvetSpoon · 10/10/2015 17:54

What seems likely to happen is that we're going to carry on meeting in London, so colleague 1 can attend, and continue with phone meetings at all other times.

If colleague 2 declines to travel to London and suggests I go there, I'll be happy to outside term time. During term I'll point out that a face to face with only 2 of us seems pointless. Colleague 1 is unlikely to change their position, I suspect.

As to Skype, video calls or whatever, I've only ever known people Skype from mobile phones or laptops/home computers, both connected to the internet whether wirelessly or cabled. So forgive me for not understanding that it could work indpendent of this, although I don't quite see how.

However, with respect, the issue is that we don't have laptops or other video conferencing facilities.

I can't sit at my desk and use my computer, because as mentioned we work in open plan offices, and are discussing sensitive issues which need to be in meeting rooms away from other staff. There are no computers, nor anything other than basic phones (suitable for a telecon, but not video calling) in the meeting rooms.

So no, I haven't tried to Skype. Given the above, I don't think it would be possible in a meeting room, nor would it be appropriate to do so from my desk. In our organisation, meetings are face to face, if you work in the same office. If in different offices then often they are by phone BUT the expectation is that many will be face to face. Those much higher up the management chain regularly travel not just to London, but to other major cities, not just in England, but Scotland/NI as well, to attend face to face meetings. I'm lucky I don't have to travel that far.

OP posts:
Fairenuff · 10/10/2015 19:05

As to Skype, video calls or whatever, I've only ever known people Skype from mobile phones or laptops/home computers, both connected to the internet whether wirelessly or cabled.

How are you posting now OP? Wireless? Connected to internet? Phone, ipad, computer?

Skype works the same way. So whatever you are using now, you could use for skype. But I'm getting the message that you don't want to and are not actually looking for solutions.

VelvetSpoon · 10/10/2015 19:22

I'm using a laptop at home. It's not a work laptop, and I wouldn't be permitted to use it at work. As said, we don't have work laptops provided to us. And I am not generally allowed to work from home.

I don't work for a company where stuff like video calls are the done thing, and the culture is such that suggesting it would do me no favours when to all concerned the established practice of face to face meetings works perfectly well.

OP posts:
strongandlong · 10/10/2015 19:27

I think the outcome seems as reasonable as possible, given colleague 1 not being able/willing to travel. No point you travelling if they're not going to be there too.

I'm intrigued about your company. What industry are you in? What kind of size is it? I'm just being nosy, but find it hard to imagine an org with no laptops/wifi and in which people feel so disempowered that it's not even worth suggesting ways to make things more efficient and effective.

VelvetSpoon · 10/10/2015 19:41

It's a company with several thousand employees. Our side of the business is legal/regulatory. It is possible people in other sectors (IT for example) have laptops, certainly no-one in our area does.

OP posts:
Fairenuff · 10/10/2015 19:52

You could ask for a work laptop. Much cheaper than all the petrol costs over the years.

VelvetSpoon · 10/10/2015 19:58

We travel by public transport - yes, I could ask for a laptop, but I doubt such a request would be authorised based on the company's general attitude to technology, and the fact none of the managers above me are provisioned with laptops. There's no general rule that anyone in my role, nor much more senior to me should have one. And of course my colleagues would also need laptops as well.

OP posts:
theycallmemellojello · 10/10/2015 20:00

If you have the power within the company to refuse to travel, then I don't think it's a problem. But it might cause resentment. Your colleague might not see your childcare problems as justifying their having to be the one who always has to travel.

Fairenuff · 10/10/2015 23:05

Those much higher up the management chain regularly travel not just to London, but to other major cities, not just in England, but Scotland/NI as well, to attend face to face meetings.

This must be costing a fortune. Why not suggest that the company get a company laptop to use in one of the meeting rooms? That way they don't have to get one for everyone and they will save money on transport costs.

MaidOfStars · 10/10/2015 23:15

You're working in legal for a national and you don't have WiFi?

QuintShhhhhh · 10/10/2015 23:23

Do you really need to plan and change your strategy every month/two months to the point of a 6 hour face to face meeting?

Is your landscape so unpredictable that this is necesssary?

landrover · 10/10/2015 23:28

Finding it a struggle to think of any business with several thousand employees where computers and wi fi aren't required, sorry!

juliej75 · 10/10/2015 23:30

If you're paying 40% tax and these meetings are normally in London, how on earth can it not be worth it - as a one off or rare occurrence - to get a babysitter round in the morning to make sure your DC get up and go to school? And in the evening too if necessary.

Occasionally, I have to work on my day off. I do have a DH but his work is totally inflexible so he can't step in at all. I pay a babysitter day rates and no, I'm not chuffed about paying £100 to work on my day off, but it's worth it in the long run to know that I can step up when needed at work, with all the goodwill/brownie points / avoiding the boss's shit list that goes with it.

MaidOfStars · 10/10/2015 23:41

Pretty sure it's a point of principle, rather than a reality. Who the duck doesn't have WiFi?

VelvetSpoon · 11/10/2015 00:02

There's no WiFi in the office I work in, internet yes not WiFi, all our computers are connected via network cabling. It's the same in many offices ime. And yes we have computers, but no laptops in our sector. Some people in depts alongside ours sometimes use their own, but that wouldn't be appropriate for the sensitive info I deal with.

I don't have the money for a babysitter. I'm a single parent, I live in an expensive area, and it is my money alone that supports us as I receive nothing from my Ex. Plus I don't consider I should be compelled to spend extra simply to attend a meeting someone else has already opted out of. If they can refuse, so can I. And I feel my position is far stronger because mine isn't a blanket refusal, just not in term time. I've done my share of travelling before now, but I simply don't have the support others do, and feel I need to put myself and my family first.

The current meetings with colleagues 1 and 2 are related to an ongoing strategic project which has been running for several months and is likely to continue for up to a year. I am involved in several other long term initiatives which also involve me travelling to other offices as mentioned previously.

OP posts:
orlakielyimnot · 11/10/2015 00:09

Context matters a lot and mine is different, but if i was your colleague I would feel as if you assumed I should just do 2 hours more than you to make up for your situation, and if that was a constant assumption I'd feel taken advantage of and look to redress it.

trinity0097 · 11/10/2015 07:18

Would it be quicker to drive to the other office rathe pr than take public transport?

VelvetSpoon · 11/10/2015 10:10

It night be slightly quicker by car, however I don't drive so that's not an option for me. I know also as a business our co doesn't like us to drive to meetings because of H & S implications, and doing so id generally discouraged. However irrespective of that, it's not possible for me anyway.

OP posts:
PuppyMonkey · 11/10/2015 10:22

I'm doing some work at the moment which involves having a monthly conference call with several other people at different places all over the country. We just use www.powwownow.co.uk - it's a free conference call service - I dialled in from home on mobile. You don't need any other "facilities" - six hour meeting, what a waste of a day.

Squeegle · 11/10/2015 10:23

velvet, it seems to me that if colleague 1 won't travel, it's slightly irrelevant whether you're being unreasonable. Why are they permitted to say they won't travel? If they definitely can't, then surely you too can say the same? you have to have the meeting in London, and then all the complex issues can be worked on together.

I think what you say is that from you to colleague 2 is 3 hours, but for colleague 2 to get to London it's 2 hrs. Therefore it seems more reasonable for him/her to come to London.

whois · 11/10/2015 12:57

I don't think you're being U OP.

Quite a few large companies still have physical computers wired to a network with no WFH abilities, it seems stupid to me but it's not actually that unusual.

Bubblesinthesummer · 11/10/2015 20:22

I think what you say is that from you to colleague 2 is 3 hours, but for colleague 2 to get to London it's 2 hrs. Therefore it seems more reasonable for him/her to come to London.

However it would seem that colleague 2 always travels an hour longer there and an hour longer back to get to the meetings all the time.

LittleRedSparke · 11/10/2015 21:22

If colleague 2 travels more to get to London, is there a halfway point where you can meet?