As I was sitting in traffic, in NJ, and also, coincidentally, hearing the guys on the radio talk about how the infrastructure just can't support more roads/more lanes (at least not without some apocalyptic eminent domain and construction), I was thinking...what if businesses, at least those for which it's possible (possible, regardless of whether it's preferable, yes I realize it's a challenge due to the perception that no one gets anything done at home) could be convinced to do all that they can to offer telecommuting?
I wanted to ask this from the viewpoint of a consumer, though. Obviously it won't work at all for restaurants, car washes etc, but offices? Maybe. If you showed up to a business, say an insurance agency where you buy your insurance, and the person you need to talk to, you talk to him at a space set up for you to do videoconferencing, because he works from home, would you be put off by that? Obviously there would be SOME live people there in any situation to do such physical interaction as necessary, but some or all of the people you need to speak to at length would be telecommuting. Would you accept that?
Also, what about schools? Couldn't we have students telecommute to school? Isn't the day coming where schools become paperless and everything's done via a terminal at their desk, and if so, why not extend that to them doing it from home? Perhaps at home 3 days a week and at the school building 2 days a week (for PE or whatever). And yes, two way video, so the teacher can verify the student is present.
Thoughts? And feel free to comment on whether, if these things were done, are enough jobs able to be telecommuted that it would be enough to relieve the pressure on transportation infrastructure. Would tax incentives for converting eligible jobs to telecommuting work? Tax penalties for NOT doing it?
I wanted to ask this from the viewpoint of a consumer, though. Obviously it won't work at all for restaurants, car washes etc, but offices? Maybe. If you showed up to a business, say an insurance agency where you buy your insurance, and the person you need to talk to, you talk to him at a space set up for you to do videoconferencing, because he works from home, would you be put off by that? Obviously there would be SOME live people there in any situation to do such physical interaction as necessary, but some or all of the people you need to speak to at length would be telecommuting. Would you accept that?
Also, what about schools? Couldn't we have students telecommute to school? Isn't the day coming where schools become paperless and everything's done via a terminal at their desk, and if so, why not extend that to them doing it from home? Perhaps at home 3 days a week and at the school building 2 days a week (for PE or whatever). And yes, two way video, so the teacher can verify the student is present.
Thoughts? And feel free to comment on whether, if these things were done, are enough jobs able to be telecommuted that it would be enough to relieve the pressure on transportation infrastructure. Would tax incentives for converting eligible jobs to telecommuting work? Tax penalties for NOT doing it?
Facebook
Twitter