Once considered a novelty, telecommuting has now become mainstream, thanks largely to technology.
More than 38 million people, or 37 percent of the total U.S. workforce, work from home at least once a month, according to the report "Telework and the Technologies Enabling Work Outside Corporate Walls" released Thursday by the Consumer Electronics Association.
The CEA survey found that among telecommuters, 98 percent use computer technology, such as PCs and printers; 90 percent use communications equipment, including cell phones and fax machines; and 75 percent use accessories, such as surge protectors and docking stations.
Home workers cited the ability to focus on tasks without disruption and running a home-based business as the greatest incentives for working from home. Top benefits included flexible hours, reduced travel time, and higher productivity.
(Credit:
Consumer Electronics Association)
"Technological advances, economic considerations, and the promise of augmented efficiency have elevated working from home from a novelty to a reality," Steve Koenig, CEA's director of industry analysis, said in a statement. "Employees believe their performance is enhanced and their quality of life improves. It's a mutually beneficial proposition for employers and employees."
Technology vendors have also benefited from the growth in telecommuting.
Only 34 percent of teleworkers can tap into their employer's computers and other technology from home, while 31 percent don't have access to an employer-provided cell phone or fax machine. As a result, more than half of today's teleworkers will spend on average $925 over the next year on tech products, said the report, driving more than $19 billion toward the consumer electronics market.
(Credit:
Consumer Electronics Association)
The environment has been another beneficiary, the CEA said. The company's research showed that just one day of telecommuting saved between 16- and 23-kilowatt hours of electricity, equal to 12 hours of electricity use. That single day also helps at the pump, cutting out 1.4 gallons of gas on average and slashing CO2 emissions by 17 to 23 kilograms.
The CEA is a trade association comprised of more than 2,000 consumer electronics companies. The report was compiled by CEA Market Research, which surveyed 1,221 working adults online between July 22 and July 29.
A lot of companies have torn down the PC Berlin Wall and now allow employees to use Macintosh computers as well as PCs. Apparently, this creates some interesting dynamics for PC support people.
From what I've heard, most organizations settle in at approximately 95 percent PCs, and 5 percent Macs. Seems like a small and manageable percentage, but here's the rub. According to some services vendors and PC administrators I've talked to, a large portion of the Mac users are executives--CEOs, COOs, chief legal counsel, etc. These folks get top priority and can be very demanding, so network and endpoint administrators have to be on their toes and establish strong Macintosh "chops" quickly. As a result, some IT professionals claim that 5 percent of Macs may as well be 20 percent of the total PC population. Thus 5 percent equals 20 percent.
Historically, IT pundits would point to this inefficiency as a reason why organizations should not allow employees to use Macs. Heck, maybe some analysts still do. There is more in play than just labor cost and accounting here however. "C-level" people tend to get what they want and, obviously, they want Macs.
Do Macs make these folks more productive, creative, or engaged? I don't have any data suggesting that they do, but this would be a worthwhile study. In any case, if Macs make the mucky-mucks happy and a happy worker is a productive worker, those excess PC support costs may be well worth it.
|
Lotus knows there's more to work than just email.
Connect with people. Get live feeds. Create widgets. Work securely online or off. Try IBM Lotus Notes.
|
 |
The California Supreme Court on Thursday upheld a long-standing state law ruling that employers can't restrict employees from working for a competitor or soliciting former clients when they leave the company.
That may be good news for California-based tech employees who want to take their skills to another company, or head a start-up that may directly compete with their former employer. "Noncompete" contracts, in place largely to protect an employer's intellectual property, began being used by companies during the dot-com boom to prevent losing valuable workers in a competitive technology labor market.
Microsoft and Google battled over a noncompete clause in 2005, when Google hired Kai-Fu Lee, an expert in speech recognition technology, even though he had signed a noncompete agreement at Microsoft. Google unsuccessfully worked to move the case from Washington to California, in hopes that the noncompete clause would be ruled invalid. The case was eventually settled outside of court.
The California law has been in existence since 1872, forbidding "noncompete clauses" that restrict management employees' options in their next job or business. But the law has been interpreted differently throughout the state, and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has ruled in favor of allowing a company to limit their employees' future job choices, as long as it doesn't prevent them from working in the same field.
Thursday's ruling was a response to the Edwards vs. Arthur Andersen case, stating clearly that Edwards, a tax manager, signed an invalid noncompete clause. The court said in its final disposition (see PDF) that "Non-competition agreements are invalid...in California even if narrowly drawn."
- prev
- 1
- next
