Is this trip necessary?
Cutting commuting
could alleviate many of our gridlock woes
This article by Brendan Read
appeared in the Vancouver Sun on Thursday, November 4, 2004
The debates over land use and transportation solutions to resolve congestion
and cut pollution for the Lower Mainland are approaching their own gridlock.
The traditional "answers" pose undesirable choices. New roads entail
construction, upkeep and emergency services, plus health care and
environmental damage costs.
They incur lost property taxes buried by pavement and promote sprawl that is
also subsidized. Transit lines are expensive to build and operate, and
demand people change their lifestyles.
Yet the best route out of this jam may be to ask the old Second World War
question: "Is this trip necessary?" Many people in a growing array of
occupations -- accountants, call centre agents, engineers, managers,
programmers, teachers, writers -- are working from home. Students are
minimizing trips by going online.
Personal computers with high-speed connections, advanced phone switching and
voice over the Internet give home workers equal quality access to customers,
colleagues and data.
E-mail, instant messaging, cellular and "walkie-talkie" wireless, audio,
data, video and web conferencing enable co-workers and supervisors,
professors, students and classmates to stay in touch.
These technologies are making traditional face-to-face supervision
unnecessary. A 2002 study of Canadian executives by International
Communications Research found that 94 per cent of managers often send e-mail
rather than meet one-to-one; 67 per cent do so very often.
In February 2003, the Calgary Herald quoted Bob Schultz, professor of
strategic management at the University of Calgary's Haskayne School of
Business, as saying that e-mails "give managers the ability to respond to
more people than before. Managers don't have enough time to do face-to-face
meetings with everyone."
Any activity that does not entail in-person interaction with others or
require manipulating equipment can be done from home, full-time or
part-time. This cuts down on trips, congestion, accidents, pollution,
emergency services and demand for tax dollars.
With home working, people can live where they can afford to while minimizing
their contribution to gridlock and global warming.
Employers can reach beyond Lower Mainland commuting distance to tap workers.
That boosts employment and income in struggling Interior communities.
The more people who work from home, the more room there will be on roads and
transit for those who have to travel. Also, the less strain on our power
grid caused by sudden peaks and valleys when people go to work and come home
again.
Having employees work from home provides disaster protection by distributing
the workforce. Evacuations are minimized, enabling emergency services to
reach the scenes quicker. Putting your people into one office makes them
more vulnerable to earthquakes, fires, power blackouts, severe storms or
terrorist attacks. I left my Manhattan office on Sept. 11, 2001, and worked
from home after that.
Home working has been shown to save companies money and boost productivity.
AT&T saved more than $150 million in 2003 with it; ARO, a Kansas City,
Mo.-based call centre outsourcer estimates it has gained more than $1
million a year since switching to home workers.
Employees stay longer, work harder and are healthier. Workplaces are "germ
factories" that cost employers plenty in lost output.
Even so, organizations need prodding. While executives and managers prefer
to have the option of face-to-face supervision, it is a luxury society can
no longer afford.
Governments must look at ways to encourage home working. One method is to
charge per-employee commuting fees on a fair formula, such as the average
per-day workplace transportation and environmental expenses. In exchange,
corporate taxes would be lowered across the board.
Exemptions would be granted if organizations certified that employees worked
from or are based from home, or that they need to be at the sites in person.
That acts as an incentive for full-time and part-time home working without
penalizing necessary in-person activities.
Government departments and post-secondary institutions would also pay these
fees, but get them back plus top off the difference in extra money for their
programs for every person working or studying from home. Non-profits would
also benefit from a similar rewards program.
Authorities should also look at tax deductions for vacated but still-leased
properties and for voice or data equipment used by home workers. Landlords
would be given extra incentives or leeway to convert or demolish unused
offices.
Because society has assumed commuting is necessary, we have borne the price
of transportation demand. But with changes in work and study and with roads,
transit, environment, land and taxpayer resources approaching breaking
points, it is time to end the free ride.
Brendan Read is vice-president, Vancouver Island for Transport 2000 BC, a
provincial transportation advocacy association, and the author of Home
Workplace.
Illustration: ? Photo: Vancouver Sun / Driving to work involves congestion,
accidents, pollution, emergency services and demand for tax dollars.
|
