Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 319 posts

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#221

Post by underbluewaters »

gamblor956 wrote: post #129
tedunangst wrote: post #67

> staff will not be able to expense any meals that include poultry, pork or red meat. What about dolphin?

Like most fake vegetarians, the policy apparently does not include any aquatic creatures like fish, squid, whales, or dolphins...even though the latter two are intelligent mammals with more capacity to feel pain than any type of poultry.

I really don't understand the moral argument for vegetarianism that excludes seafood. There are plenty of fish and marine invertebrates that are as smart/sentient/feeling as a chicken or cow. In many cases the environmental impact of their take is also much worse.

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#222

Post by mreome »

While I don't think this "forces" a vegetarian diet on the employees, it is placing the employees in a situation where their company is promoting a particular ideology/lifestyle/diet through financial motivation. Dining is generally reimbursed during business travel due to the (often significant) increased cost of having to exclusively dine out, so the option for the employee is to eat vegetarian or accept additional personal finance costs. (I would also question the feasibility of finding vegetarian options all the time, but that might be due to my work travel sometimes taking me to more rural areas).

The question then becomes, is it acceptable for a business to use monetary incentive/disincentive to encourage lifestyle or ideological changes in it's employees?

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#223

Post by [deleted] »

kyledrake wrote: post #42

I can't eat a lot of types of food due to allergies. Meat is one of the few things I still can eat without issue. Yes, there are actually people out there (hi, me!) that actually cannot eliminate certain foods from our diets without getting sick. This policy would prevent me from being able to work at that company, for recognized medical health reasons, because I would not be able to do legitimate expenses of food re…

[deleted]

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#224

Post by internet_user »

jlarocco wrote: post #63
kyledrake wrote: post #42

I can't eat a lot of types of food due to allergies. Meat is one of the few things I still can eat without issue. Yes, there are actually people out there (hi, me!) that actually cannot eliminate certain foods from our diets without getting sick. This policy would prevent me from being able to work at that company, for recognized medical health reasons, because I would not be able to do legitimate expenses of food re…

I guess I missed how anybody being "forced" to do anything. Their employees are still free to buy all the meat they want.

and you are free to buy your own health insurance!

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#225

Post by natrik »

throwawayou812 wrote: post #207
natrik wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of your comments on this thread have been illogical. Companies are not required to dole out free food. Them changing their policies to only reimburse certain kinds of food can be met with you leaving the company if it matters that much to you. You can bring your own food or pay for it out of your own pocket if you need to. They have stated people with medical/religious requirements that need meat will have their…

I think his point was that such a heavy handed policy that runs contrary to the views of most of the world's population is problematic. Since there will be situations where employees have little or no choice but to eat company sponsored meals, I for one don't see that to be "illogical".

At my current workplace I can only work from home once per week. I would vastly prefer working from home than the uncomfortable chair and noisy working environment of the office, but I have to make do.

Options available to me are changing jobs, asking for a policy shift because of medical issues, etc.

If you have to eat a more ethically sourced and less savory meal because of work I don't see that to be a large issue.

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#226

Post by qubax »

If this is what a founder of WeWork is focusing on, I can't wait til they IPO so I can short it. I doubt this company survives the next recession.

As for livestock vs vegetation being better or worse for the environment, it isn't a contest. Farming is many times worse for the environment than raising animals. Has any of these useless journalists, CEOs and crazy vegans ever stepped on a farm? Do they understand what is involved in farming? To farm, you do your darnedest to pretty much wiped out all animals from insects to rabbits to coyotes to large herd animals to protect your farm. And if the world were to go vegan, we'd have to cut down every rich forest ( amazon to the jungles of southeast asia and africa ) to provide farmland for vegetables. Whereas wheat, soy and corn that we feed livestock can grow in harsher temperatures, most vegetables we eat cannot. Also goats, pigs, etc can forage on weed and other "pest" vegetation in harsh climates.

Also, farming kills 1000 times more animal than raising livestock. These vegans are so insane that they think vegetables fall from the heavens like manna. Nope. An incredible amount of insects and small rodents/mammals are killed prior to planting and during harvest. That's right, every salad, every fruit and every meal that you eat contains some animal.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/but-not-simpler/i-hate-...

I am so sick of the vegan nonsense. It's not based on fact, reality or common sense. It's just agenda pushing virtue signaling where people pretend to be morally superior for nothing.

More animal lives perished for a vegans salad than a carnivore's steak. And a vegan eating a salad is actually eating more animals than a carnivore eating a steak.

So morally speaking, a meat eater has the upper hand if you think all animal lives matter.

But maybe we should listen to a dumb city dwelling vegan who has never set foot on a farm. Lets wipe out forests and cultivate the land for farming. We'll wipe tens of trillions of animals in the process. And that's before dousing the farmland and vegetation with pesticides, petrochemicals, etc. But vegan feels over reality right according to the lazy journalist and the agenda pushing CEOs and corporations.

Or do cow, pig, chicken lives matter more than insect and small mammals?

Are the thousands of lives lost for a single salad meal worth a single cow's life that could produce a thousand meals?

Edit: Downvoted? I guess vegans don't like science. Maybe you are more of a huffpost crowd.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/05/02/bugs-in-food_n_1467...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/11581770/Hair-aphid...

Downvote all you want. Vegans eat more animals than a carnivore. In case you were wondering, insects are animals.

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#227

Post by pera »

lylecubed wrote: post #172
pera wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That could easily backfire though (healthier chips are usually much more expensive), specially because kale chips are delicious :)

> specially because kale chips are delicious :) This is OT, but I'm curious: what do kale chips taste like to you? A little sweet? To me, they taste like lemon rind without the "lemony" taste. Just pure bitterness.

I guess there are many variants of kale chips, but never tried one that tasted particularly "lemony". They are indeed a bit bitter, but the ones I buy are mostly a fried something with lots of salt (yeah, like pretty much all chips). I do like its texture and more earthy/complex flavor, which I generally find more interesting than potato or tortilla chips alone.

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#228

Post by ravitation »

mreome wrote: post #222

While I don't think this "forces" a vegetarian diet on the employees, it is placing the employees in a situation where their company is promoting a particular ideology/lifestyle/diet through financial motivation. Dining is generally reimbursed during business travel due to the (often significant) increased cost of having to exclusively dine out, so the option for the employee is to eat vegetarian or accept additional…

In this case exacerbated by the fact that said lifestyle or ideological change involves one of the bare necessities (since all of the "equivalent" examples I've seen do not).

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#229

Post by null000 »

curioussavage wrote: post #193
whack wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty great analogy. Lots of businesses have a no-alcohol policy. No one even bats an eye when it's mentioned. I hardly see anyone complaining about such companies pushing a lifestyle agenda.

Alcohol is not a good example. Alcohol at work causes so many problems.

Some people can't handle alcohol. Others can usually handle alcohol, but it really only takes one time to be an issue. Get large enough, and serving alcohol at company events guarantees at least one, sometimes more, HR headaches, statistically speaking.

I'm not a huge fan of a company changing its behavior because it wants to avoid risks that are just inherent in dealing with people (the logical conclusion is to pretty much treat all your employees like children to avoid anyone causing trouble) but I can at least respect it if they're up front about their motivations.

Re: WeWork Will No Longer Let Employees Expense Any Kind of Meat

#230

Post by tedunangst »

jlarocco wrote: post #91
juancn wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're forced for example in the context of a business trip.

No they're not. Every company has limitations and provisions on what they'll expense on business trips, and I don't see how this is any different.

Companies used to have one hotel room per trip limitations, too, and if the woman didn't want to stay with a man she could always pay for her own room.
Post reply on HN