1. At the outset, Travis has made only one trip & his actual out-of-pocket expenditure is only one $ 296.
2. Knowingly getting reimbursed for the same amount from 2 firms ,is blatant violation of ethics ,all the more when an un-suspecting other party is made to believe a lie.
3. Travis cannot justify himself ,on any count , as he is well aware of the facts– having combined with malafide intentions ,strongly believing that neither firm has any scope to suspect.
4. This belief of Travis is the psychological assertion to support his appropriate-approach justification.
Travis is ethically & morally wrong , even though he may be correct in claiming as per the firms’ independent offer to reimburse the out-of-pocket expenses of the candidates ,attending the scheduled interviews— without even enquiring whether the candidates have come on any other mission ,to their geographical location.