Place of work and working conditions
| Index | << Prev | Next >> |
[ |
Commentary
The practice of working away from the employer’s premises is complex, not least because, as this study has shown, it encompasses a wide variety of types of worker. These range from unskilled workers in agriculture and construction workers, to sales staff, drivers, people who work in caring roles, such as home helps, and employees who would normally be office-based but can work away from the office. The latter category can be broken down further into those who predominantly work away from their employer’s premises or from home and those who sometimes do, and those who use IT (teleworkers) and those who do not.
In terms of incidence, most countries report an increase over the past decade in the prevalence of office workers working at home and teleworking. This is largely due to the development of IT, which enables employees to work remotely from the office. Overall, in the NMS, the incidence of remote working is not as high as in many of the 15 countries that formed the EU before May 2004 (EU15), although it is growing, despite evidence of some hesitation on the part of employers in some of the NMS.
Working away from the employer’s premises raises a wide range of health and safety issues. People working on construction sites and in agriculture are exposed to higher risks than are office-based staff in all countries. In the case of people performing office-based tasks either at home or at a workstation that is remote from the employer’s premises, a number of potential health and safety risks arise. For those working on computers, these risks include inadequately designed workstations, a lack of risk assessments and health and safety and ergonomic checks, and a higher propensity to work without taking adequate breaks. Evidence also suggests that employers and employees are not as aware of their rights and obligations regarding the health and safety of remote workers as they are in relation to office-based staff.
However, despite the potential health and safety risks, working away from the employer’s premises would appear to have numerous benefits. For example, the development of IT enables many employees to work from home who previously would have been obliged to be present in the office each day, thus allowing them to improve their work–life balance. In most countries, employees who work from home either predominantly or partly report a better work–life balance and, as a result, higher levels of job satisfaction. This can translate into a range of benefits for the employer, including higher levels of employee motivation, reduced staff turnover and a lower sickness absence rate.
Employees with family and caring responsibilities find it easier to combine their work with these responsibilities if they can work at home some or most of the time. Likewise, people with other types of commitments find that they can better juggle these with their work if they can work remotely.
There is also evidence that teleworking and working from home improves flexibility in the organisation of work. Employees working in this way in several countries reported that they had more control over their start and finish times, their pace of work and the order in which they performed tasks.
In addition, many employees engaging in teleworking or working from home reported reductions in commuting time, thus enabling people to use their time more productively, while at the same time reducing traffic congestion and pollution levels.
However, some potential disadvantages to remote working emerged in the studies. While the development of IT is an enabling factor, it has also allowed employers to monitor and control the output of their employees more closely, potentially causing stress and burnout if this leads to an increase in the pace of work. In many countries, employees working away from the employer’s premises reported that they were working longer hours than their office-based colleagues and were also more likely to be contacted by their employer outside normal working hours.
Moreover, in the case of working from home – either teleworking or not teleworking – the problem of how to prevent a blurring of boundaries between work and non-work is a major issue. In most cases, it would seem to be the responsibility of the individual employee to ensure that work does not spill over into private life. However, some companies have procedures in place that try to address this issue and the social partners in countries such as Finland and Denmark are debating how to reduce this problem.
Additionally, workers who spend a large part of their working life working remotely from their employer may be at risk of social isolation. This is a recognised problem in many countries and this study contains examples of the kind of arrangements employers put in place to counteract it. These can include virtual discussion forums and regular meetings and contact with the office. Trade unions in some countries have issued guidance on how to reduce social isolation.
Finally, in terms of future developments, as telecommunications technologies continue to develop, it is likely that certain forms of remote working, such as teleworking, will increase. This is particularly likely to be the case in the NMS, where teleworking currently tends to be less well established than in the EU15. However, in EU15 countries such as Greece, where the incidence of teleworking is relatively low, telework is expected to become much more widespread in the coming years. It remains to be seen, however, whether the incidence of full-time teleworking will ever increase to the extent that it accounts for a significant proportion of the EU workforce.
Many governments are aware of the potential benefits of teleworking and homeworking and are seeking to promote these ways of working, as part of wider strategies to improve work–life balance, increase female labour market participation and improve access to the labour market for certain groups.
Andrea Broughton, Institute for Employment Studies
| Index | << Prev | Next >> |