For a frequent traveler on business, food often becomes an afterthought. This 30-year-old employee spends most of the day in transit or in meetings, sometimes skipping meals entirely, or surviving on a coffee or two.
The company has a $30 daily meal allowance, which worked fine most of the time, especially when flights or remote locations left few options. But after going just $1.50 over the limit one month, and having a new, inflexible approval team reject the expense, she decided to take the rule literally. Every meal. Every day.
What started as a minor annoyance turned into a quiet act of defiance. Now, her per diem is fully spent, sometimes twice or three times over what she used to claim, and she even carves out extra time to make sure she eats.
Here’s how she turned a petty policy into her own little rebellion.
The Frustration
The traveler often finds herself in cities where healthy food options are scarce and airport food courts remain shut or limited. She used to eat lightly or skip meals entirely to save money and calories.
But when the new expense team rejected her claim for exceeding $30 by $1.50, even after she explained that some days she hadn’t eaten at all, they refused to budge.
Previously, the older approval team would balance overages with underages, seeing the whole month’s spending, but the new team operated with rigid precision.
The rejection left her frustrated. It wasn’t about the money, it was about principle. “If I’m expected to stay under $30, fine,” she thought, “but I’ll stick to it religiously. Every. Single. Time.”
The Malicious Compliance
From that moment on, she deliberately spent as close to $30 as possible each day. On short trips, she bought slightly over-priced meals or coffees just to hit the maximum.
At airports, if the only option was fast food, she ensured her choices still maxed out the per diem. If she brought back extra food, it was for her husband – free, slightly squished leftovers but she made sure the full allowance was used.
She also started taking her meal breaks fully, no rushing. A 30-minute lunch meant 30 minutes away from work, reducing the amount of productive hours she could bill, another tiny act of rebellion.
What had once been $100 for the month in total meal expenses now easily doubled or tripled, all within policy.
Reflection and Strategy
The result is a mix of efficiency, principle, and minor chaos for the approval team. She isn’t wasting food maliciously – mostly – but she does spend a few bites before discarding the rest if it can’t be saved.
She’s found small ways to bend the system while remaining fully compliant. Reddit commenters suggested clever tactics like converting remaining allowance to gift cards, donating meals to strangers, or even spending just enough to trigger automatic company reimbursements.
For her, it’s a satisfying way to reclaim control in a system that once penalized her for minor overages.
See what others had to share with OP:
Most commenters cheered her quiet rebellion. SweetDove suggested using the extra funds to help someone in need, making it a “win-win.”
Others shared similar experiences, like night-otter, who recounted being praised for spending near daily allowance.
A few cautioned that leftover funds or overages could appear on record, but the consensus was clear: if a policy is arbitrary and inflexible, playing it to the letter is both satisfying and fair.
Sometimes, following the rules to the letter is the most effective way to assert yourself. This traveler turned a minor grievance into a daily ritual that maximized her benefits, carved out personal time, and even shared perks with her family.
It’s a lesson in malicious compliance done smartly: she’s fully within policy, yet she makes the inflexible system work for her. The bigger question remains – how far would you go to stick it to a rule that doesn’t make sense?
