Open kelle opened 4 years ago
I'm in agreement with these - in particular no meal receipts should hopefully make things easier for NumFOCUS (and us).
I alike most of this, but a few riffs on that:
One clarifying question for @kelle's point I didn't understand: where is "no booze" relevant here? Meaning we should have people not count that in their per diem, or no "extra" booze at hotels, flights, etc?
Should we say how much more for direct flights? E.g. 25% more is ok but 100% more is not.
This kind of rule might start to get frustrating and extra work for people to come up with documentation etc. What if it costs 50% more but is say 12 hours instead of 36 hours with a 12 hour layover? I'd vote for not including such a clause. If we really want we could say that above a certain amount this has to be checked by someone else prior to purchasing to make sure it's not ridiculous?
Great ideas -- keep 'em comin! We can synthesize better into an actual policy when the time comes.
And I don't know the answer about the "no booze" rule. This is something which I think we should discuss at some point. Are we ok with someone justifying the full per diem with drinks?
(btw, just to let you know that we're not off the rails here: we spend a non-trivial amount of time discussing this policy in AAS Board meetings as well.)
And I don't know the answer about the "no booze" rule. This is something which I think we should discuss at some point. Are we ok with someone justifying the full per diem with drinks?
I think there's a difficulty here that if we don't check receipts for meals then it's difficult to police this anyway. What about super expensive food? I can see why some places just grant the full per diem and no questions asked...
I think that just up to the per diem, no receipts is fine (and yes, encourage people to ask for what they spent if it is less). My earlier comment about no booze was related to providing free alcohol at official functions (e.g. the fall coordination meeting), where there is direct visibility of how we are spending money. But however they choose to spend their per diem is fine.
I will say that in my experience the gov't per diem is usually 25-50% more than I actually spend, but I guess I'm not a big eater or partier.
And :+1: on using common sense with flights for the reasons stated. I often fight with travel about the money saved on a layover vs. what they end up paying for me to be sitting around in an airport. For us it is more of an issue because there is a preferred Gov't airline for each city which is uncorrelated with airlines that have good connections there.
Lynn (NumFocus) will send us their policy just to take a look at, but we can really make our own.
What about AirBnB, Uber, Lyft?
(for some context to the above: this was a discussion the CoCo was having but then realized there was no need for it to be in a private repo).
What about AirBnB, Uber, Lyft?
I'd say those are permissible. We've certainly relied on them in the past when funded through other channels! (but opinions may vary?)
airbnb is almost always cheaper than the hotels. So is that the encouraged way, or just permitted?
airbnb is almost always cheaper than the hotels. So is that the encouraged way, or just permitted?
Well, there's multiple factors there - yes it's often cheaper, but sometimes the quality is much worse, and there's insurance questions, etc. I think it should be left to the discretion of the individual to some extent how they weight those factors.
Not sure how much of that got across above, but the CoCo's thinking was that we don't want to be overly prescriptive. That is, these are generally to be guidelines rather than hard-and-fast rules like some institutions have.
And car rental? Are we required to buy certain insurance and so on?
We have discussed this in the finance committee again today since this is a long open issue. I summarize the results of that discussion here.
We don't rule out ever having a travel policy along the line discussed above, but at this point there does not seem to a problem that would have to be solved with a policy.
*: Yes, I know, some foreign governments have OpenSkys aggeements with the US and NASA money might be spend on their carriers, too, but the point is that it's out of Astropy's hands to make that call and thus there is little use in having an Astropy policy in that particular example.