Photobooth (January 15)
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Life Expectancy In A Man With Copd
lever for sustainable development? The whimsical figures of Syntec
The document "Telework in the service of sustainable development" has to be published in January 2010 by the union bosses Syntec, which includes among other engineering companies in informatics. This is a new call for a forcing for teleworking but reasoning "scientists" on which he seeks to build more than questionable.
Example (from the box on page 15 widely highlighted in the press kit)::
" TONS of CO2 saved!
In France, an employee travels on the commute, on average 26 km per day. If employees worked an average of 2 days per week at their home, this would imply a direct gain of over 800 kg of CO2 per person per year, almost 10% of the carbon footprint of a person.
At these first savings plus the reduction of CO2 emissions related to the reduction of office space, needs lighting, heating and air conditioning ... The buildings are indeed responsible for a quarter of greenhouse gas effects emissions. "
But as we have already written, the first results of the investigation our current among teleworkers and telecommuters at home employees show that over 30% of them have moved from an apartment to a house during the transition to telecommuting. The average travel time home-business has more than doubled. It went from 44 minutes to 89 minutes or over 181% increase!
Journeys fewer but much longer ...
Although the paths are fewer, since telecommuters only go two or three times a week in the company premises, but they are much longer and produce more CO2. All the reasoning on the economies of transportation is called into question, especially if the telecommuter is by car instead of coming by subway!
Most ecological towers or houses in the countryside?
As for the assertion concerning the reduction of CO2 emissions related to the reduction of office space, needs for lighting, heating and air conditioning must also be tempered. Indeed, energy consumption induced the permanent, heating, cooking and working in a house, certainly not less than that required in the same activities in the company. Who can say that energy consumption in a small house in the country is lower than in an office tower? Especially with the development of the towers 'green', producing their own energy.
Agree or disagree with our analysis, if you have not already done so much to join our online survey on telework (http://teletravail.enquete.free.fr).
Invite please, other teleworkers to participate as well. 
The document "Telework in the service of sustainable development" has to be published in January 2010 by the union bosses Syntec, which includes among other engineering companies in informatics. This is a new call for a forcing for teleworking but reasoning "scientists" on which he seeks to build more than questionable.
Example (from the box on page 15 widely highlighted in the press kit)::
" TONS of CO2 saved!
In France, an employee travels on the commute, on average 26 km per day. If employees worked an average of 2 days per week at their home, this would imply a direct gain of over 800 kg of CO2 per person per year, almost 10% of the carbon footprint of a person.
At these first savings plus the reduction of CO2 emissions related to the reduction of office space, needs lighting, heating and air conditioning ... The buildings are indeed responsible for a quarter of greenhouse gas effects emissions. "
But as we have already written, the first results of the investigation our current among teleworkers and telecommuters at home employees show that over 30% of them have moved from an apartment to a house during the transition to telecommuting. The average travel time home-business has more than doubled. It went from 44 minutes to 89 minutes or over 181% increase!
Journeys fewer but much longer ...
Although the paths are fewer, since telecommuters only go two or three times a week in the company premises, but they are much longer and produce more CO2. All the reasoning on the economies of transportation is called into question, especially if the telecommuter is by car instead of coming by subway!
Most ecological towers or houses in the countryside?
As for the assertion concerning the reduction of CO2 emissions related to the reduction of office space, needs for lighting, heating and air conditioning must also be tempered. Indeed, energy consumption induced the permanent, heating, cooking and working in a house, certainly not less than that required in the same activities in the company. Who can say that energy consumption in a small house in the country is lower than in an office tower? Especially with the development of the towers 'green', producing their own energy.
Agree or disagree with our analysis, if you have not already done so much to join our online survey on telework (http://teletravail.enquete.free.fr).
Invite please, other teleworkers to participate as well.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Saturday, January 2, 2010
33 Weeks Pregant Sore Tummy
What happens if the employee refuses the dictatorship of quantitative indicators of management by objectives related to telecommuting?
risks exclusion induced by forcing the development of telework (continued)
Telecommuting employee at home = a new vision of the wage contract
The French employment contract is a contract "to time "and not" to the task. " The employee is not a slave, whose working time is unlimited, nor a paid hack for the task (see the book I wrote with Peter Mathevon, occupational physician "Quality of life and health" - presentation on http://qualite.vie.travail.free.fr/ ).
is the fruit of the labor struggles of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries: the employee "sells" a portion of his time against his salary. This working time should be measured because it is limited and the employee is not "exploitable" at leisure, since the Act of March 22, 1841 is the first law regulating the working hours of an employee. While the employee has an obligation of means (for the time contract work) and subordination (follow the instructions of the employer) but no performance requirements, unlike the self-employed or professional that has an obligation of results, but is not "subordinate" to his client.
It is obvious that the time control of telecommuting is almost impossible, except for very special cases (telemarketing, call center ...). Control would be too picky indeed rejected by many telecommuters. Therefore we find that most telecommuters are "day pass" the contract stipulates a number of days (eg 215 days of work per year) and not a number of hours (eg 35 hours per week).
We also note that the control of working time is almost always replaced by controlling the activity with the tools of "management by objectives."
Telecommuting employee = accept home management by objectives
Be aware that telecommuters are teleworkers are those who accept the management by objective and this ambiguity in their employment contract: indeed the teleworker is close self-employed because it is always subordinate to the employer, it becomes is liable to a result that is to say, to achieve goals. Moreover, many salaried non-teleworkers are already subject, good or ill will, management by objective. It is far from pleasing to all, because the management by objectives is often based on numerical indicators very questionable!
What happens if the employee refuses the dictatorship measurable indicators?
But all employees in jobs "teleworkers" will they be forced to accept not to work "in time" (calculated by year and not per day or per week) by "objective." Will they have to have a core of self-employed? Do they not likely to be excluded while managing "time" is the basis of French labor law?
course, there are other risks of exclusion if it accelerates the development of carelessly telework (self-sufficiency, trusting relationship with the company ...) which will be discussed.
Agree or disagree with our analysis, if you have not already done so much to join our online survey on telecommuting ( http://teletravail.enquete.free.fr ).
Invite please, other teleworkers to participate as well. 
risks exclusion induced by forcing the development of telework (continued)
Telecommuting employee at home = a new vision of the wage contract
The French employment contract is a contract "to time "and not" to the task. " The employee is not a slave, whose working time is unlimited, nor a paid hack for the task (see the book I wrote with Peter Mathevon, occupational physician "Quality of life and health" - presentation on http://qualite.vie.travail.free.fr/ ).
is the fruit of the labor struggles of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries: the employee "sells" a portion of his time against his salary. This working time should be measured because it is limited and the employee is not "exploitable" at leisure, since the Act of March 22, 1841 is the first law regulating the working hours of an employee. While the employee has an obligation of means (for the time contract work) and subordination (follow the instructions of the employer) but no performance requirements, unlike the self-employed or professional that has an obligation of results, but is not "subordinate" to his client.
It is obvious that the time control of telecommuting is almost impossible, except for very special cases (telemarketing, call center ...). Control would be too picky indeed rejected by many telecommuters. Therefore we find that most telecommuters are "day pass" the contract stipulates a number of days (eg 215 days of work per year) and not a number of hours (eg 35 hours per week).
We also note that the control of working time is almost always replaced by controlling the activity with the tools of "management by objectives."
Telecommuting employee = accept home management by objectives
Be aware that telecommuters are teleworkers are those who accept the management by objective and this ambiguity in their employment contract: indeed the teleworker is close self-employed because it is always subordinate to the employer, it becomes is liable to a result that is to say, to achieve goals. Moreover, many salaried non-teleworkers are already subject, good or ill will, management by objective. It is far from pleasing to all, because the management by objectives is often based on numerical indicators very questionable!
What happens if the employee refuses the dictatorship measurable indicators?
But all employees in jobs "teleworkers" will they be forced to accept not to work "in time" (calculated by year and not per day or per week) by "objective." Will they have to have a core of self-employed? Do they not likely to be excluded while managing "time" is the basis of French labor law?
course, there are other risks of exclusion if it accelerates the development of carelessly telework (self-sufficiency, trusting relationship with the company ...) which will be discussed.
Agree or disagree with our analysis, if you have not already done so much to join our online survey on telecommuting ( http://teletravail.enquete.free.fr ).
Invite please, other teleworkers to participate as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)