The report "The development of telework in the digital society of tomorrow," written for the CAS (Center for Strategic Analysis) is a document very comprehensive and very interesting that addresses all aspects of telework.
A new anthem for the development of telework
He has one fault, but it is important: it is a new anthem for the development of telework. All text, also more than the final proposals, heavy emphasis on the virtues of telecommuting and the need for France to catch up "late" ...
From the first page sets the tone: "In many areas, telework has significant advantages: it improves the conditions working employees and reconciling personal and professional life and contributes to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases, he hustles the organizational and managerial models obsolete, it promotes access to employment for people excluded from labor market, thereby contributing to social inclusion, it can reduce the health impacts of pollution in urban centers .... "
But the demonstration of all these statements, which reflect the traditional discourse pro-telework (ICT providers or companies teleworkers activists), is not made In the following pages, and because it is said in conclusion that it would be necessary to have "a better understanding of the possible gains through teleworking ...."
Telework is a type of work organization among others and the report is unable to justify why the government should promote, including through financial assistance, this organization more than others. It pushes the reader to conclude implicitly that entrepreneurs, managers and employees are the only French do not yet have understood all the benefits!
= Ideal society widespread telecommuting
Gold insisting that "Telework could affect up to 50% of jobs in 2015, against 30% today," the report implies that the ideal society would be society in which all jobs "teleworkers" should be held by telecommuters. Therefore a number of press articles titled "Telework could affect up to 50% of the workforce in 2015."
The dangers of forcing for telework
Two examples among others show the boundaries, and sometimes the danger of forcing for the development of telework at all costs.
First example. It is repeatedly said that telecommuting helps reduce emissions of greenhouse gas emissions. This is far from always true: the first results of the investigation we are conducting with teleworkers and telecommuters employees (http://teletravail.enquete.free.fr) show that over 30% them have moved from an apartment to a house at the transition to telecommuting. The average travel time home-business has more than doubled journeys are fewer but much longer. As for energy consumption induced by work in a house, it is unclear whether lower than that required for heating a corporate office.
Second example. It is repeatedly said that telecommuting improves quality of life. It also confirms that the vast majority of initial responses to our survey. But "all teleworkers are satisfied with telework "Does not mean that all employee (s) would like to telecommute. "All those and all those who love to ski the mountain" does not mean that everyone would like to spend their holidays in the mountains and need to force them.
Therefore, forcing in favor of telecommuting results in risk of exclusion. Even, especially, if we like telecommuting, we must be lucid: all employee (s) and do not WANT MAY not telecommute. It is on these risks of exclusion, and the notion of "delay", we return to in our future columns.
Okay 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)
0 comments:
Post a Comment