Do you think that the trend should be toward pp working more out of their home.?

Question

It would save on energy and would help with polution, why is this not more of a trend? We could do it , and it would be kind of like recycling. The government could give tax breaks 4 this. What do you think. i know not all jobs could do this, but there r a lot that could.

Answer 1

If u allow your hubby to do work at home, it may work.

Answer 2

absolutely- I love the idea of telecommuting-

however most employers are just too controlling to allow their employers to do this.

I think it's a great idea-  if your work is done what does it matter how or where you got it done.

The smart companies will start to do this- but corporate America is still full of insecure people in management positions that need to feel they have absolute power over everything and everybody!

Answer 3

Work performance is the biggest hindrance. Supervisors have enough problems when they can see if their employees are spending to much time at  the water cooler chatting with co-workers.  It is hard to measure output when all you see is how much paper has passed through their in-box(or bits through their computer).  Trust is not something that comes easily when a supervisor's own performance rating is based on the performance of subordinates.

I think like all other changes in the workplace time will change attitudes as older workers are replaced with new workers who will try new methods of supervision of telecommuters.

I don't think tax breaks will be necessary but might speed things along.  Look at  all the advantages:  save gas, employees save time and stress eliminating commutes, companies save cost of work space.

Some problems will still persist.  Training for many jobs continues throughout their careers.  remote training has many disadvantages.  Think of how easy it should be to educate college students from home, Yet few use this method.  Many jobs require trust and inter-personnel relationships to function.  How much do you trust advise you get from yahoo answers is an example of the need for person to person contact for trust to flourish.  You want to look them in the eye.

Answer 4

Yes. Good idea. Pass all the heating, lighting, wear and tear costs on to the employee. Make employees have large portions of their homes dedicated to files, pc and other office equipment. Only pay a portion of telephone calls, car fuel, installation of specialist equipment. Make them deal with their own confidential office waste and sue them if the employee does not deal with it appropriately. Make them do accounts for their stationery/equipment. Take away the idle chatter and peer support in stressful jobs. Sounds good for the Environment and for the Employers too! LOL.

Answer 5

I used to work as a full time tele-commuter.  Before I retired my company was cutting down on tele-commuting because it was being abused.  The company discovered people who were supposed to be tele-commuting that were working second jobs instead.  So naturally, instead of putting tighter requirements for tele-commuting or better monitoring, they decided to eliminate it altogether.  One of the drawbacks of tele-commuting is that it gives work a much bigger influence on your home life.  It also makes work too convenient and you end up working too much.

Answer 6

For smaller companies this is becoming more of a reality quicker than older and larger companies.  Small organizations seem to be able to adopt environmental / conservation practices much more quickly -- most likely because they are more responsive.

I us to work for a small publishing house that had a staff of 18.  The bulk of our work was writing, editing, conference calls, reviewing print materials, etc.  All tasks that could easily be done from our homes.  On any given day we had only six-to-eight people in the office -- the rest telecommuting.

Not sure how the study was conducted, but our VP determined at the end of one year we were operating about 11% more efficiently.

I think tax breaks and government incentives in this are would be a great idea.  The U.S. is shifting from an industrial economy to a communications / service oriented economy -- this would only increase the range of companies here that can engage in having more-and-more employees working from home.

Answer 7

Yes, naturally there are some jobs or services that could not be performed at home , but those that can, should.

Answer 8

I'm not sure what you mean by "save on energy and help with pollution".  of the 50 percent of people who use the computer, most have it on all day, connected to electricity, and coal in part still produces electricity....so there is no saving on energy and pollution.  But looking at it in the long run...it's like investing your money.  I believe you should not put all your eggs in one basket...i.e. I believe you should work both on and off the internet.  And I believe you should do one office type work and simultaneously one type of work that you'd be using manual labor.  I think this is only smart to do because say the grid went down, then no one would be working and have income....then what?

Answer 9

You betcha!  Unfortunately, the government (in the USA) is very slow to implement this themselves.  There is a mandate to most agencies to have a certain percentage of certain departments working from home by a certain date.  Local management in may cases has delayed it for years, and got away with it.