Asklemmy

Government has power to put it on trial.

1. Revitalize public transportation, adjust timetables to usual starts\ends of shifts;
2. Make dumb paycards to pay-per-ride, consequential rides counting as one (if one needs to jump them);
3. Public sector employees, essential ones first, get 2 rides per working day monthly, to go there and back;
4. After getting some stats, make it equal to N litres of gasoline in $, tax-free, promote paying with it on gas stations and for government's services. No easy conversion to cash tho, not at the start at least, so it won't be seen as free money, worthy a fraud.

As a public test, it'd show if it works. Then, it can be pushed onto students, then on other spheres.

Then, as a large amount of workers has this benefit, it's not a wet dream but a real thing to consider and demand. One that private businesses would see.

I do find that not paying for commute has a good competitive value. It means I start to earn money right from the time I clock in, not spending my first minutes to compensate getting there – and that's a bitch for low-paid workers. Compared to those working from home, I still wake up earlier and am trapped on company's ground, but it's a first step to bridge and accept this difference.

In some cities I visited (ex-socblock) some big factories provide their own transport to take workers from their district and then bring them back. Since they are based way out of cities' limits due to health concerns, it's an obvious solution to that. By managing the commute of workers, factory may also be sure everyone in production line gets there at the same time, reaching full efficiency.

Fuel card, or static rate for travel costs that actually covers the cost

Let's make generalizations to answer the bigger problem here.

Most jobs that people are talking about are in cities.

Some people choose to not live right in the middle of a city for various reasons, but still want that job. They may live in a nearby community, the edge of the city, a county or two over, etc.

Predatory companies like Amazon resolve this by telling someone like Ryan homes to build a few 300 house communities right next to their new warehouse, resolving the issue and making their own non-city town. Normal companies do not have this ability.

There has to be a balance.

Businesses need to not be involved in commute repayment. They should instead invest into their local communities to make them more desirable to live in.

If I were to do it, I'd take the mileage of the drive as the most important factor, as companies in the US know the addresses of employees. Then I'd assume a gas price of $4.5/gallon at all times (Midwest prices aren't like the coasts) and assume a gas mileage of 25mpg. The person is paid this every day of the year without exception

If I am travelling to a location purely to do my job at that location, then travelling to that location is part of my job. I must be reasonably compensated for it either as part of my salary or as an extra (tax adjusted) payment.

Switch the pronouns and such to apply for Bob and Alice both.

What is RT?

No, the one with the longer commute should be taxed extra to account for all the damage caused to the environment, increased traffic, road wear and tear, etc.

Commuting should never be encouraged. Live where you work.

I'll offer Bob a place near the workplace if he's a good employee. If he asks me to pay for his transportation expenses, it won't happen. I think I'd formally invite him to find another job at the end of the contract.

I would negotiate that with them because maybe Bob doesn't care but Alice does or vice versa. Now if I was either bob or Alice. Yes I'm calculating fuel, maintenance and meal cost into pay.

The compensation could be capped at 15 miles or 30 minutes or something, which would encourage people to live closer to work.