Telecommuting: Why don't you stay home?
by on 05.18.05
A lot of modern jobs consist of sitting in front of a computer all day, sometimes emailing the person in the next cubicle (or has instant messaging replaced that now?) and phoning someone down the hall. All of this could be done from home, thanks to the internet, with many benefits to individuals, society and the environment. It's just a more elegant way of doing things.
"Despite slow growth in jobs and travel, traffic congestion continues to worsen, researchers say, costing Americans $63.1 billion a year. The 2005 Urban Mobility Report measures traffic congestion trends from 1982 to 2003, reflecting the most recent data available. If today’s higher fuel prices are factored in, the cost jumps another $1.7 billion." It's even worse than that because the UMS report doesn't seem to count the many health costs associated with stress, air pollution, etc. A good way to judge the gravity of these costs is to read this report by the World Health Organization (WHO). It states that by reducing air pollution in Europe (diesel is quite popular there) the EU could save 161 billion euros (approx. $204 billion US) per year from fewer diseases and deaths caused by bad air quality. It is estimated that air pollution reduces the life of Europeans by 8.6 months on average.
"The transboundary nature of PM [particulate matter] pollution requires that all countries take measures that will benefit the European [and world] population," said Roberto Bertollini, Director of the Special Programme on Health and Environment of the WHO, in the report I mentioned earlier.
This is serious stuff and telecommuting, along with better urban planning, clean energy sources and efficient transportation (public and private), is a partial solution that must not be underestimated. The International Telework Association & Council (ITAC) claimed last September that 44 million Americans worked from home in 2004, up 7.5% from 2003 despite (or because of) a slow economy. These people are burning less oil, putting less pollution in the air, stressing less about spending hours in traffic and not seeing their families, and lets not forget that telecommuting also increases the chance of employment for mothers with young children, the handicapped, people living in remote areas and other marginalized groups. Of course not all jobs can be done remotely, but in the "information society" the possibility should be given serious consideration.
If you live in the USA, you can see how your city ranks in traffic congestion by going here.
Trivia: The telecommuting motto is "work is something you do, not something you travel to." ::EU pollution deaths cost billions , ::ITAC, ::June 2004 WHO report, ::Solve the Gas Crisis by Working From Home and ::2005 UMS report.
[by MGR]
I work as a web developer, the perfect job for telecommuting because everything is on the Internet. Heck, with broadband and some solar panels I could work from the top of Everest.
I've asked my employer about telecommuting at least part time instead of driving the 43 miles to and from work and they said "That's nice, but we need you here if something happens."
Haven't they heard of telephones?
I work in the software industry, and I can't telecommute. There's no way, when the shit hits the fan and we have to figure something out or make a tough call *now*, to replace face - to - face discussion in a conference room.
There's another problem with telecommuting. It's our isolationist suburban lifestyle that makes it so hard for people to choose to move into dense urban communities anyway. Encouraging that will probably worsen the root problems.
Have to sympathize with Nonny Moose (see end of this post) & respectfully disagree with Ben. My software developer spouse, who spends about 75% of his time putting out fires, has been primarily telecommuting for the last three years--and it has all the benefits the article claims. I also think it makes one more connected to the community because your home becomes the center of your life, and not just where you eat & sleep after an exhausting commute. I grew up with work-at-home parents, and I believe it's a more natural life for a family, one that harkens back to the days when many folks worked at home--either on the land, or in their craftsperson's studio or other business. Regarding work-at-home IT, all meetings can happen over the web with live video feed; software allows developers to debug remote machines; and so much of the work is being distributed overseas anyway, that I just don't think companies have an excuse for insisting their employees sit in traffic to spend their day in a cubicle. Some of the industry leaders, including Microsoft, are very flexible about this if the employee is worth it, and others should follow their lead.
the answer is : CONTROL
I'm glad you are mentioning telecommuting as a good way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other damage to the environment. I work at home, and seldom drive anywhere at all. The only equipment I use is an energy-efficient laptop and a phone. With that, I tutor children in math all over the world, without leaving my house. I have had students from most of the 50 states and from Australia - and I don't need to travel anywhere - only to my website at www.aristotletutors.com.