Boss Doesn't Want Me to Cycle

Trg

Elisa Francesca Roselli wrote:
> Last Tuesday, I went to a meeting with some colleagues at
> the Headquarters of the firm where I usually work in the
> Training Center. The HQ is in a place about 10 kms from
> the Training Center, and very inaccessible by public
> transport. The way there involves the first 8 km
> practically all gently downhill, then a brutal ascent up a
> very steep, windey forest road, then a rather bumpy dirt
> path. On the way back, the topology is reversed - steeply
> downhill at the beginning and then an upward faux plat all
> the way home.
...
> EFR Carfree By Choice in Ile de France

Where is your work located and where is your meeting?
Maybe Those of us who bike in the area can suggest an
optimal route.

Mike Jacoubowsk

> I wish....the problem is that Elisa is doing this for
> work, and if there
is
> a preception (no matter where it came from) that cycling
> along a given
route
> is unsafe, then the employer must act in both the best
> interest of the employee and the company. One can
> easily argument that one can address a sedentary
> lifestyle outside of work hours. Of course, bossman
> can't stop her from riding durning lunch or to/fro
> work. But bossman might have something to say about
> riding during work hours.

Worse, bossman may have either a contrived or real concern
regarding the reliability of Elisa's chosen method of
transportation. There could also be a concern on the part of
bossman regarding whatever the French equivalent of worker's
compensation is, given that Elisa has spoken of "terrible
pressure on my wrists and I don't want them to go into spasm
again." And then there's the simple practicality of this
particular trip by bike, given that the bike, loaded down,
weighs over 60 pounds. That's a lot to handle, either riding
or pushing, and it's apparent that Elisa isn't yet up to
Lance's caliber of riding.

Finally, as far as safety is concerned, it's not always
going to be the case that a given cyclist can safely
navigate a given route. Could be that Elisa has no choice
but to use roads that are quite hostile to cyclists in
general, and require a degree of skill & strength that isn't
possessed.

I hate to sound like I'm negative towards an attempt to use
cycling in one's daily life, but there may be issues here
that go beyond the norm.

By the way, if Elisa would be interested in posting the
beginning & end points of the route, I'd possibly be able to
check it out late July, when I'll be spending some time in
Paris. Heck, my daughter will even have a video camera... we
could film a documentary! Just kidding... but I am curious.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Pete

"Elisa Francesca Roselli" <Elisa.Francesca.Roselli@quadratec-
software.com> wrote
>
> But my supervisor is insisting that I am "not safe on the
> bike" and that in future I must take a taxi for this trip,
> which might install itself as something I need to do every
> Tuesday. I REFUSE! Meetings with the Documenation team and
> closer liaisons with HQ have come about on my own
> initiative entirely and one of my big reasons for doing
> this was to get the opportunity to train up to bike
> commuting on the journey. If I have to use stinky petrol
> to go, there isn't even a point ot it.
>
> The cab trip would cost about 20 Euros one way and I would
> have to go through a big rigmarole to claim it on the
> company. I would also be stranded out there with no way to
> get back (except on foot) unless I could persuade the
> company to disburse a further 20 Euros to get me home or
> beg a ride from a colleague (and be entirely dependent on
> other people's routes and schedules). Not only this is
> majorly inconvenient but I can see eyebrows being raised
> about the expense and myself being targetted as an
> unnecessarily costly employee at a time of company cut-
> backs (I am the only Carfree person in the company but the
> French have even less understanding of Carfreedom than
> they do of Childfreedom). Alternatively, the bosses will
> try to force my colleagues to give me lifts but the
> colleagues will resent it and I will have to deal with
> their bad temper. My impression is that my supervisor
> dislikes my rapprochement with HQ and is trying to punish
> me by playing up transport difficulties and creating
> issues where there aren't any. I also particularly resent
> the way these motorist assholes go on about my "safety".
> Yes, I am terrified of road traffic which is why I spend
> so much time on sidewalks. But whereas early death by road
> is a possibility, early death by heart disease and
> diabetes is a near certainty for me if I retain the
> sedentary lifestyle of the IT geek.
>
> So it looks like I have some civil disobedience on the
> way. I WILL NOT TAKE THAT CAB!.
>
> EFR Carfree By Choice in Ile de France

Your boss has a few concerns, some justified, some not.

Safety aspect - typical in the non-riding populace. Time
aspect - If this is during the workday, he may have a semi-
valid concern about the time thing. If it takes you 2+ hours
round trip by bike, thats 2+ hours out of your workday, just
to get back and forth to a meeting. How long does it take by
car (cab)? "If the other people can get there in 20 minutes,
why can't you?"

Is there more than one than one person going from your HQ to
the Training center and back at the same time? If so, then
carpool, every time! Not just you, everyone! This week,
Marie drives, next week Pierre drives, the week after that,
Marta drives... Organize the rotation, push it as cheaper
and more comfortable for the individual employee, get the
bosses support if you can (...in the interest of time and
efficiency, blah, blah, blah...).

Being car-free does not have to mean never, ever using motor
transport. Just be judicious in how it is used. And "civil
disobedience" is not always good when it's your boss. Choose
your battles. Using work time for bike training is usually
not a good battle.

Pete

Tanya Quinn

> slow and drinking water frequently. The trip back took
> less time than the trip out (yes, I do walk faster than I
> cycle), giving me a round trip of 4 hours 30 minutes for a
> total 19.01 km, with 3 km per hour my most frequent going
> rate. My heart monitor, which I took with me,

While I fully agree that you should be able to use your
transportation method of choice so long as you aren't
billing the company for the time it takes to do so - why not
walk if you can walk faster than you cycle? (assuming
there's space to do so the whole way) And if you do walk
faster than you cycle, maybe you could find some cyclist
training somewhere near where you are, because it actually
seems to me to be quite quite difficult to ride at 3km/h.
Its almost certainly to cause a lot of knee pain to go at
that speed. Even to go at a still quite leisurely pace of 15
km/h (with the exception of the steep uphill) you'll save
yourself tons of time!!

I'm also sure your co-workers should have no problem taking
you along if they are going over at the same time, and
although it may feel against your principles, they are going
to take their car there anyway so might as well fill the
space in it.

But yeah, someone telling me I can't cycle because its not
safe would be enough to make me really angry at them.

Jacques Moser

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:46:27 +0200, Elisa Francesca Roselli wrote:

> (...)(I am the only Carfree person in the company but the
> French have even less understanding of Carfreedom than
> they do of Childfreedom).

What do you mean by the French not having understanding of
Childfreedom ?

Pat

> But yeah, someone telling me I can't cycle because its not
> safe would be enough to make me really angry at them.

paternalistic.

Pat

> > (...)(I am the only Carfree person in the company but
> > the French have even less understanding of Carfreedom
> > than they do of Childfreedom).
>
> What do you mean by the French not having understanding of
> Childfreedom ?

People not getting married and having children? or getting
married but not having children? Living their adult lives
without children and having somebody thinking ill of them
because they don't want to procreate?

Pat in TX

Garmonboezia

Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in news:cacefj$t4n$1
@dux.dundee.ac.uk:

> http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/dilbert-
> 20040531.html

Or better yet:

http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Hopper.Danis.html

(Excerpted from the website,)

Admiral Hopper was also famous for a remark she made on
television in 1983. She said " It is much easier to
apologize that to get permission". She explains this in her
interview with Voices of America "... I want them to go
ahead and do it. I've seen that happen in the Navy. There
was one young lieutenant junior grade, and he was ordered to
a very small ship; the Navy thought it was too small to have
a computer. He was in the administrative department so he
took his own computer aboard with him. In a very short time
he had the ship's records in his computer; he was getting
all the reports out on time; everything was going
beautifully. When he was transferred, the captain had to buy
his computer as the ship could not run with out it any more.
He didn't have to apologize. He did it.".

Loki

I guess it depends on one's circumstance but if my boss told
me to stop bicycle commuting - after I stopped laughing -
I'd suggest he insert the tail pipe of his truck into his
mouth and blow.

But then I've been told I have a 'problem with authority'

--
'I'm a man. But I can change. If I have to. -Red Green's I
guess.' The Man's Prayer

Tim Hall

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 13:46:27 +0200, Elisa Francesca Roselli
<Elisa.Francesca.Roselli@quadratec-software.com> wrote:

<snip>
>
>So it looks like I have some civil disobedience on the way.
>I WILL NOT TAKE THAT CAB!.
>

Soyez réaliste, demadez une bicyclette

Tim
--
For those who have trouble distinguishing, cynicsm, sarcasm,
humour etc, try mentally inserting smilies thoughout my post
until it either matches what you'd like to read, or what
you'd expect me to write.

(Jon Senior urc)

H. R. Bob Hofma

As a person with supervisory experience, I believe the
reason for not approving bicycling to the meeting is a
liability issue. ASsuming that a 4-wheel vehicle is safer
than a 2-wheel vehicle is probably correct, and the boss
wants to not be liable for your demise or injury, so he
recommends the safest possible way to get to the meeting,
Since the meeting is on company time, and you are going from
one company location to another, you are definitely on
company business and they are responsible for your safety to
some degree or another.

IF the boss recommends you take a cab or other 4-wheel
vehicle, and you do, and there is an accident, the conmpany
is probably liable for your injuries.

IF you do not follow the recommendation, and your are
injured on your bicycle, you may have a hard time collecting
from your company since you violated their recommendation on
transportation. You could still sue, but your chances of
collecting are not too good since you violated your
company's advice.

Now, if they don't pay for you to get from one location to
another, and it has to come out of your own pocket if you
take a cab or other payable transportation, and you take
your bicycle, you might have a much batter chance of
collecting in case of an accident. Please let us know what
you decide to do.

H. R. Hofmann

Pete

"H. R. Bob Hofmann" <hrhofmann@att.net> wrote

> ASsuming that a 4-wheel vehicle is safer than a 2-wheel
> vehicle is
probably correct,

That may be an incorrect assumption.

It might easily be the way the boss thinks, but it is not
necessarily correct. Would the boss have pitched a bitch if
her normal mode of transport was a motorcycle (provably less
'safe' than a car)? Doubtful.

A bicycle is, in many eyes, an abnormal mode of transport.
"Be normal. Drive a car." To be sure, the bike may well take
longer than something motorized. Which is where the boss's
real concern comes in. And pretty justifiable.

Pete

Bernie

Pete wrote:

>"H. R. Bob Hofmann" <hrhofmann@att.net> wrote
>
>>ASsuming that a 4-wheel vehicle is safer than a 2-wheel
>>vehicle is
>>
>probably correct,
>
>That may be an incorrect assumption.
>
>It might easily be the way the boss thinks, but it is not
>necessarily correct. Would the boss have pitched a bitch if
>her normal mode of transport was a motorcycle (provably
>less 'safe' than a car)? Doubtful.
>
>A bicycle is, in many eyes, an abnormal mode of transport.
>"Be normal. Drive a car." To be sure, the bike may well
>take longer than something motorized. Which is where the
>boss's real concern comes in. And pretty justifiable.
>
>Pete
>
>
How about "don't be an eccentric, be like everyone else". I
work in a sales agency, and oddballs are not wanted.
Management wants us all to appear successful and "normal".
Big surprise! We are all human instead, all hiding our real
humanity in order to appear "normal" - except me,
unfortunately, because I appear every morning on a bicycle.
(I do dress for business when I am there tho). I think
management's desire for us all to be "normal" is a big
kicker though. The safety issue is bogus imho. Bernie

S O R N I

Elisa Francesca Roselli wrote:

{big ol' snip -- story had to do with riding bike to
mandatory weekly meetings}

My question would be, if it takes 2+ hours each way, that's
at least half the day spent riding your bike. Could it be
your employer prefers that you /work/ during that time?

An exaggerated example would be if an east coast company
had, say, monthly meetings on the west coast. If an employee
hated flying and wanted to drive or even take a train, no
employer would allow that due to lost time (presumably on
the company's dime).

Bill "or am I missing something?" S.