Juli And Tiffany Night Calls

Act of June 9, 2009: a necessary law ... but less reassuring to employees than the national agreement of 2005

The National Assembly adopted June 9, 2009, on first reading a text on teleworking should be debated in the Senate in October 2009. For
first time the Labour Code will comprise, when the legislation is finally adopted, elements on telework, subject hitherto totally ignored in this code.

This bill features: •

over form: it is very short and is only part of a more general law "to facilitate the maintenance and creation of jobs" (3 articles 13). MPs to visibly telework is not a revolution ...

• on the merits: it contains the outline of the national agreement on telework (ANI telecommuting) signed by the social partners July 19, 2005. It is also considering a diffusion of telework in government, but without defining the terms.

This law will finally give an indisputable legal status of teleworking to reassure businesses and employees wishing to introduce this type of work organization.

But it is much less precise than the text of the 2005 national agreement on a number of protections for the teleworker:

* It does not explicitly account workers "nomads" It does not
* problems period of adjustment, or health issues or training issues or problems with workload, ...
* She does not speak of collective rights: in particular, is not mentioned the need to inform and consult the works council as envisaged in the national agreement.

It is regrettable that this particular law does not regain a very important provision of the Agreement: "Telecommuters are identified as such on the single register of staff". Yet this identification only allows full transparency on the importance of teleworking in the business and telecommuting to reduce "wild" or "gray" (that is to say not explicitly recognized by a contract or an addendum) to the benefit of telework negotiated.
However, this law does not abolish the National Agreement on Telework and employees and their representatives in enterprises covered by the agreement (which has already been the subject of an extension order May 30, 2006 ) can always rely on this agreement. For a
déytaillée anlysis of this law, article by article on my site http://www.ergostressie.com

Chesterfield Sofa Spare Feet

limits

Argument No. 2 advocates of telecommuting employee fewer trips, thus saving time and less stress

Reducing the number of employee trips offer many benefits both socially and for economies of energy. But this reduction is not always as important as was hoped.

Reduced transport time for the employee.

"Since I started teleworking, I won three of transport by day ..." or "... I avoid two hours of traffic jams on the road ... "Or" Now I go to the customer without going through my office .... "

In reality, these gains are not always as obvious.

one hand, most employees are teleworkers in the company premises at least two days a week to meet colleagues and attend meetings. Compliance with this provision, provided in a large number of contracts telecommuting, ensures that the teleworker is disconnected from the corporate life. But that means the economics of travel time between home and work is only 40% over a 5-day week.

other hand, a number of telecommuters will continue to do what they did before, that is to say going to the customer or supplier directly from their home. This means that the time of transport are the same

Reduced stress related to transportation and schedule adherence

is an advantage which can be important whenever there is a need for means of transport and meet schedules (given that those are rare and those who come on foot or by bike in the company). Breakdowns and strikes in public transport, congestion or car breakdowns are very important sources of tress that reduces, in part, telecommuting.

Obviously this reduction is limited to days during which the employee is not getting into the business.

other hand, stress the schedule adherence of the company persists in large part if the teleworker must meet a "window of availability" (as we saw in the discussion of the argument # 1) .

Finally, the stress is sometimes replaced by those linked to local constraints, especially in the management of entries and exits of school to accompany or go pick up children.

Welcome Note In Wedding

saving time limits in the choice of hours

Argument 1 advocates of telecommuting employee telecommuting allows more freedom for the employee in the choice of hours

is obviously one of the strongest arguments of all teleworkers and telecommuting satisfaction cite it as a priority.

But when we look a little more detail on the freedom we find that she suffers from many limitations:

- Limits in relations with the firm (hierarchy, colleagues, ...)

Most contracts define telecommuting (and should be determined as discussed in the model contract) from the windows of availability "during which the teleworker must be contacted by the company. Obviously if this range is 100% for hours now, there is more room for freedoms for the teleworker.

In general, this range is 5 or 6 hours, eg from 9 am to 12 pm and 14 to 17 h. These times must be negotiated, and it is not easy, if we want to, for example, "pick up the kids at school .. . The possibility of permanent liaison with Blackberry or Ipod is rarely sufficient ...

- Limits in relations with customers

Customers can impose very stringent schedules to suppliers (visiting hours, Delivery, ...)

- Limits in relationships with family

If we do not live alone (e), the inter-professional life and private life is not always easy going for the whole family. If one does not work in times "normal" routine (for example, between 8 am and 18 pm), it means that you work early morning or late evening, or Saturday, or Sunday. This flexibility, satisfactory to the teleworker Will also satisfactory for his family?

other hand, if the workload is too Importantly, the actual working time will tend to exceed the contractual working time even more than in the case of a traditional work in the office

- Restrictions related to their abilities

must be able to live properly scheduling this freedom. First, we need the type of business and activity that is exerted allows schedules that are chosen in part yourself. On the other hand, we must be able to organize its own activities without the constraints imposed by the permanent hierarchy or colleagues.

All these reasons explain why those who already have considerable autonomy and freedom in the choice of hours in a traditional organization "office" adapt readily to teleworking. But it's not so easy for others ...