[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Update to reimbursement procedure (now: max 3 months after expense)

On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 11:26:25PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>On 06/10/14 at 20:38 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 12:38:31PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>> >On 06/10/14 at 12:07 +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> Both 2008 and 2011 are more than a year ago, so I don't see any
>> >> justification for making this change and would like to see it reverted.
>> >
>> >There were other occurences of reimbursement requests coming very late
>> >recently. It seems that some people wait until the deadline to do
>> >such tasks.
>> >
>> >Also, I don't think that 3 months is unreasonable. My employer applies a
>> >two-week soft deadline, and a one month hard deadline for travel
>> >reimbursements.
>> So that's a stupidly tight setup on their part, so what...? What
>> actual *problem* are you trying to solve in Debian by arbitrarily
>> reducing the limit for us?
>Given that we have no clear process to track reimbursement requests over
>time, late reimbursement requests often involve digging through email
>archives to understand their status.

OK... How many such requests do we have to deal with? In those
situations, it may take a little time. Complain to the people doing it
when they're *too* late. But an arbitrary short cut-off is not

>I agree that improving the processes (using e.g. RT) would be better,
>but this hasn't happened yet. If you want to join the auditor@ team to
>make that happen, you're welcome. But I am already spending far more
>time than I would like on financial stuff.

It's your call on how much time and effort you want to spend, of
course. I don't remember having to spend much time at all on
reimbursements as DPL, but you may have many more requests; I'll admit
I don't know the numbers.

>Also, I really don't see why you feel that it's necessary to have the
>possibility to wait for a year before submitting a reimbursement

See Phil's response, for one. Personally, for small-ish things I often
end up leaving them for a while until they bunch up enough to care
about the money. Why is 3 months suddenly too long for that? You're
changing something that doesn't need changing, AFAICS - that's why I'm
asking you to justify why the change is necessary.

Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"When C++ is your hammer, everything looks like a thumb." -- Steven M. Haflich

Reply to: