DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluating the Success of Telecommuting at the Census Bureau1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluating the Success of Telecommuting at the Census Bureau1 Joint Statistical Meetings - Section on Survey Research Methods EVALUATING THE SUCCESS OF TELECOMMUTING AT THE CENSUS BUREAU1 Jennifer A. Guarino and Julie A. Bouffard U.S. Census Bureau, 4700 Silver Hill Road, Rm 3087/3, Washington, DC 20233 Keywords: web surveys, logistic regression In the spring of 2000, the Census Bureau’s Labor Management Partnership Council chartered a workgroup Abstract to develop recommendations for a pilot telecommuting program. The workgroup recommended testing a six- Many administrative programs have been launched at month telecommuting pilot, involving all interested the Census Bureau with little prior testing and employees who receive supervisory approval within evaluation. In an effort to create programs that are three areas at Census: Services Sector Statistics mutually desirable for both employees and the agency, Division (SSSD), Demographic Surveys Division the Census Bureau has started to thoroughly evaluate (DSD), and the Commerce Administrative Management such programs before full implementation. The first Systems (CAMS) office of the Financial and program to undergo a large-scale, comprehensive Administrative Systems Division (FASD). The evaluation was a telecommuting pilot that involved telecommuting pilot permitted participants to work from employees working in three areas at Census. The home or a telecommuting center a maximum of two purpose of the evaluation was to measure the effect of days in a two-week period. telecommuting on key factors such as performance, productivity, and job satisfaction. In an attempt to The Partnership Council recommended a formal attribute any differences in these factors to evaluation of the pilot to identify any critical issues telecommuting, the evaluation required the collection of related to telecommuting. In addition to identifying repeated measurements before and after the pilot. In this problems, the evaluation sought to provide feedback on paper, we compare results from the pre- and the design of the pilot, the amount of interest by post-telecommuting periods to determine what changes employees, and the effect of telecommuting on factors occurred as a result of the telecommuting pilot. such as morale, productivity, performance, and job Furthermore, we use logistic regression to measure satisfaction. associations between participation in the telecommuting pilot and work performance. The telecommuting pilot evaluation marks the first large scale assessment of an administrative program initiative 1. INTRODUCTION at the Census Bureau. The Census Bureau has historically introduced many administrative programs There are many reasons why the Federal government is with little to no prior evaluation of the effects on work eager to adopt telecommuting. Research shows that or morale. Therefore, we designed this evaluation to be telecommuting can improve employees’ productivity, a comprehensive, ground-breaking evaluation that would motivation, and concentration in addition to reducing detail the effects of telecommuting on the Census stress and tension among coworkers (OPM, 2001; Joice, Bureau’s work and employees. It is our intention for 1993; Allenby, 2001; Bellinger et. al., 1992). this evaluation to serve as the premier model or standard by which all forthcoming initiatives at the Census Despite the success of early telecommuting, the number Bureau are evaluated. of telecommuters has not dramatically increased (Armour, 2001; Ballard, 2001). Companies in both the 2. METHODS private and public sectors exhibit managerial reluctance to make changes that comply with telecommuting The telecommuting pilot ran from June 4, 2001 to (Joice, 1993; Bartlett, 2001). In addition, concerns November 30, 2001. The evaluation team gathered data about security risks, restraints on productivity, meeting in three stages: pre-pilot (February to May, 2001), pilot conflicts, and jobs that are unsuitable for telecommuting (June 4 to November 30, 2001), and post-pilot have seemingly stunted the expansion of telecommuting (November 30 to December 13, 2001). (Ballard, 2001; Armour, 2001). 1 This paper reports the results of research and analysis undertaken by Census Bureau staff. It has undergone a Census Bureau review more limited in scope than that given to official Census Bureau publications. This report is released to inform interested parties of ongoing research and to encourage discussion of work in progress. 1290 Joint Statistical Meetings - Section on Survey Research Methods 2.1 Design of Telecommuting Pilot Internet link. The link contained an embedded identification number so that employees would not have 1. Universe - The divisions that participated in the pilot to log into the survey. After three to five days, all were selected based upon the level of support exhibited employees received a generic reminder asking them to by division management and the major occupational complete the survey. We then sent a personalized series within each division. The intention was to have a follow-up e-mail that contained the survey link to balanced cross-section of employees who occupy the nonrespondents asking them to respond promptly. The major job series within the Census Bureau participate in surveys stayed in the field for roughly two weeks. the pilot. There were roughly 500 employees and supervisors in the pilot areas. Qualitative Data: We used focus groups to: 1) capture qualitative data that could not be measured by a survey 2. Selection procedure - Employees who wished to or were unanticipated by evaluators, and 2) collect telecommute completed an application. Applicants’ information to assist in the content development of the supervisors were authorized to select telecommuters. questionnaires. We recruited employees for the focus groups in a random fashion; however, the groups did not 3. Mandatory Training - There were three mandatory contain a random sample since participation was phases of training for telecommuters: overview training, ultimately voluntary. employee/supervisor training, and laptop training. The overview session encouraged employees to take part in In addition to focus groups, the evaluation team issued the program. Employee/supervisor training provided suggestion boxes for each participating area in order to tips for a successful telecommuting experience. The capture information that may be too sensitive or laptop training instructed telecommuters on how to undesirable to express during a focus group. access their e-mail remotely. There were nine components of the evaluation 4. Frequency of telecommuting - Telecommuters were conducted throughout the stages of the telecommuting permitted to telecommute no more than two days in a pilot, in the following chronology: pay period (two weeks). Pre-Pilot Phase: 5. Technical limitations - Due to the sensitivity of data 1. Focus Groups with Employees and Managers in the on internal Census networks, telecommuters did not Participating Areas, 2/01. have access to any servers or data that reside within the Census firewall from a remote site. Telecommuters 2. Pre-Pilot Web Survey of All Employees in the were not permitted to work with data protected under Participating Areas, 3/01. We collected quantitative Title 13 of the US Code from their remote location. measures from employees on their work performance, productivity, job satisfaction, commuting factors, and 2.2 Methods for the Evaluation opinions about telecommuting before the pilot began. We obtained an 88% response rate. The evaluation team used both quantitative and qualitative methods to collect data. We used web 3. Focus Groups with Supervisors of Selected surveys to collect quantitative data. Qualitative data Telecommuters, 5/01. were gathered through focus groups and suggestion boxes. 4. Pre-Pilot Web Survey of Supervisors of Selected Telecommuters, 5/01. We administered a short web Quantitative Data: We used WebSurveyor software to survey to all supervisors who managed telecommuters. design the web surveys. The surveys were single-screen The survey requested information regarding scrollable forms in html format. We chose this format telecommuters’ current performance and productivity. for two reasons: 1) there were no complex skip patterns Supervisors with more than one telecommuter on their in the questionnaires, and 2) to minimize the time to staff completed one survey for each telecommuter. We complete the survey. All survey instruments underwent obtained a 93% response rate. thorough testing in the form of expert review, cognitive testing, usability testing, and field testing. Pilot Phase: 1. Focus Groups after Month 1 of the Telecommuting In addition to providing the software for questionnaire Pilot with telecommuters, their coworkers and development, WebSurveyor also hosted the surveys on supervisors, 7/01. their site. Employees received a personalized e-mail inviting them to participate in a survey by clicking on an 2. Focus Groups after Month 2 of the Telecommuting 1291 Joint Statistical Meetings - Section on Survey Research Methods Pilot with telecommuters, their coworkers and Likewise, more telecommuters were female (64%) than supervisors, 8/01. non-telecommuters. Telecommuters were also more likely to be non-supervisory and, on average, higher Post-Pilot Phase: pay-graded than non-telecommuters. Telecommuters 1. Focus Groups after the Telecommuting Pilot with worked primarily as statisticians and computer telecommuters, their coworkers and supervisors, 12/01. specialists. 2. Post-Pilot Web Survey of All Employees in the 3.1.3 Most unable
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evaluation of the Puget Sound Telecommuting Demonstration
    Evaluation of the Puget Sound Telecommuting Demonstration Dee Christensen, Michael Farley, Maureen Quaid and laurel Heifetz Washington State Energy Office Introduction Program Implementation The transportation sector accounts for 28 percent of all Twenty-five organizations and about 250 telecommuters, energy consumption in the United States and is a major their co-workers, and supervisors are involved in the contributor to the nation's air pollution problems (U.S. Demonstration. WSEO conducted an extensive recruitment Department of Energy May 1991. State Energy Data of organizations representing a cross section of the Paget Report). Recent improvements in automotive fuel effi­ Sound economy. Each organization received assistance in ciency have been overwhelmed by increases in vehicle developing telecommuting policies and procedures, select­ miles travelled. According to the Federal Highway ing telecommuters, and training their telecommuters and Administration, between 1960 and 1980 traffic volumes their supervisors. almost doubled, while the population grew by 26 percent. Also, traffic congestion is expected to increase by Recruitment 400 percent over the next 20 years on the interstate freeway system and over 200 percent on surface roads. Initial recruitment of potential participating organizations for the Demonstration began with the June 1989 In order to reduce energy consumption and air pollution in "Governor's Conference on Telecommuting: An Alternate the transportation sector, vehicle use and traffic congestion Route To Work.· At the conference, organization repre­ must be decreased. Transportation demand management sentatives were surveyed to determine their level of (TDM) strategies attempt to accomplish this by promoting interest in pursuing the telecommuting option within their alternatives to single-occupant vehicles such as transit, organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of a Program to Reduce Bullying in an Elementary School Jordan Elizabeth Davis Western Kentucky University, J E [email protected]
    Western Kentucky University TopSCHOLAR® Masters Theses & Specialist Projects Graduate School 8-2011 Evaluation of a Program to Reduce Bullying in an Elementary School Jordan Elizabeth Davis Western Kentucky University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/theses Part of the School Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Davis, Jordan Elizabeth, "Evaluation of a Program to Reduce Bullying in an Elementary School" (2011). Masters Theses & Specialist Projects. Paper 1079. http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/theses/1079 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by TopSCHOLAR®. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses & Specialist Projects by an authorized administrator of TopSCHOLAR®. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EVALUATION OF A PROGRAM TO REDUCE BULLYING IN AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Psychology Western Kentucky University Bowling Green, Kentucky In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Specialist in Education By Jordan Elizabeth Davis August 2011 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would first like to thank my committee. I appreciate each committee member’s time and hard work on this project. More specifically, Dr. Jones has been very encouraging and flexible. Without her assistance, my thesis project would not have been possible. I would also like to thank my colleague, Kristin Shiflet. She has kept me on track throughout the course of my school psychology internship. She provided motivation and was responsible for implementing materials from the Bully Free Classroom. Kristin also collected the data and coded all information for confidentiality purposes. Her efforts and dedication to this project is much appreciated.
    [Show full text]
  • New Employee Onboarding Six Month Evaluation Page 1 It Has Been
    New Employee Onboarding Six Month Evaluation Page 1 It has been several months since you began employment with the University. You have been presented with information on the University’s culture, mission, vision, values, policies, procedures and benefits. You’ve attended new employee orientation and perhaps other employee development training. Your feedback on your onboarding experience at the University is important to us. Please complete both pages of this evaluation and mail or email it to HR King Bldg/Rm. 222C. Page 1: Please indicate Yes (Y) or No (N) for each statement. Page 2: Answer the questions in the space provided. Use the rating scale to provide your overall opinion of how well the University implemented the new employee onboarding process. Please include your name on the evaluation. How do you feel about your experience? ______I feel eager to begin work. ______I feel welcomed at UNC Charlotte. ______I work in a friendly and supportive environment. ______ I feel engaged and productive in my work. What do you now know about the University and your job? ______I received essential information about the University’s culture, mission, vision and values. ______I received information in a timely manner. ______I know what is expected of me by my supervisor. ______I know what is expected of me by my coworkers. ______I know what my performance expectations are. ______I understand my job responsibilities. ______I understand the purpose of my job. ______I understand how my job fits into the mission of the University. ______I have the essential supplies, equipment, and support to do my job or know where to find them.
    [Show full text]
  • Job Evaluation – Trends and the Digital Environment
    Job Evaluation – Trends and the Digital Environment Why does digitalization have an impact on job evaluation? Job evaluation and grading have been a evaluation and grading in order to develop core HR process over many years, whereby a more flexible approach for agile organiza­ organizations typically rely on one single tions on the one hand and enable a digital evaluation method. Those methodologies organization and a digital culture on the have not undergone any significant changes other hand. In this context, digitalization and have not been directly impacted by acts as a catalyst for the development of any other major trend. The HR process of job architectures and grading structures as job evaluation and grading often requires a these have to sustain the digital organiza­ high level of technical expertise and partially tion. Correspondingly, the methods and an ongoing support of resources, depending tools of job evaluation have to also meet on the chosen evaluation method ology. the requirements of digitalization. Job evaluation and grading build the funda­ mental framework for other HR processes What is driving this trend and what role in the talent lifecycle. does job evaluation play in light of the digital transformation? While this implies no real need for change, we observe an emerging trend in the mar­ ket to alter traditional approaches to job Job Evaluation – Trends and the Digital Environment Enabling digital transformation digital culture. The concept of “network of through job evaluation teams” has evolved where employees are Larger projects in the area of job evaluation highly networked and collaborate across and grading are typically triggered either by teams and projects, and goals frequently a single event or by multiple factors – both change.
    [Show full text]
  • Wendell C. Taylor, Phd, Mph
    Taylor 1 WENDELL C. TAYLOR, PHD, MPH CURRENT POSITION AND ADDRESS Associate Professor (with Tenure) of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health 7000 Fannin Street, Suite 2670 Houston, Texas 77030 Telephone: 713.500.9635 Fax: 713.500.9602 E-mail: [email protected] EDUCATION Institution Degree Date Conferred Field of Study The University of Texas Health MPH 1989 Community Health Science Center at Houston Practice School of Public Health Houston, TX (Postdoctoral Fellow: 1987–89) Arizona State University PhD 1984 Social Psychology Tempe, AZ Eastern Washington University MS 1974 Psychology Cheney, WA Grinnell College AB 1972 Psychology Grinnell, IA PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 09/2009–Present Admissions Officer Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health Houston, TX 09/1999–Present Associate Professor (with Tenure) of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health Houston, TX October 3, 2019 Taylor 2 09/1999–09/2001 Convener of Behavioral Sciences Discipline The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health Houston, TX 09/91–08/99 Assistant Professor
    [Show full text]
  • Whistleblower Protections for Federal Employees
    Whistleblower Protections for Federal Employees A Report to the President and the Congress of the United States by the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board September 2010 THE CHAIRMAN U.S. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 1615 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20419-0001 September 2010 The President President of the Senate Speaker of the House of Representatives Dear Sirs and Madam: In accordance with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. § 1204(a)(3), it is my honor to submit this U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board report, Whistleblower Protections for Federal Employees. The purpose of this report is to describe the requirements for a Federal employee’s disclosure of wrongdoing to be legally protected as whistleblowing under current statutes and case law. To qualify as a protected whistleblower, a Federal employee or applicant for employment must disclose: a violation of any law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; a gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety. However, this disclosure alone is not enough to obtain protection under the law. The individual also must: avoid using normal channels if the disclosure is in the course of the employee’s duties; make the report to someone other than the wrongdoer; and suffer a personnel action, the agency’s failure to take a personnel action, or the threat to take or not take a personnel action. Lastly, the employee must seek redress through the proper channels before filing an appeal with the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”). A potential whistleblower’s failure to meet even one of these criteria will deprive the MSPB of jurisdiction, and render us unable to provide any redress in the absence of a different (non-whistleblowing) appeal right.
    [Show full text]
  • Work-Study Evaluation Form
    Work-Study Evaluation Form 1: EMPLOYEE INFORMATION Employee Job ID Date Supervisor Job Title Period of Review □ Mid-Fall □ End of Fall □ Mid-Spring □ End of Spring □ Mid-Summer □ End of Summer 2: CORE VALUES Performance Category Rating Comments/Notes/Examples Attendance and Punctuality □ Exceeds expectations Reports for work consistently and on time; Meets expectations provides timely notice of need for absence □ Does not meet expectations or deviations from schedule □ Quality of Work □ Exceeds expectations Work is completed accurately, efficiently, Meets expectations and within deadlines □ □ Does not meet expectations Judgement & Decision-Making □ Exceeds expectations Makes thoughtful, well-reasoned decisions; Meets expectations exercises good judgment; exhibits □ Does not meet expectations resourceful problem-solving □ Initiative & Flexibility □ Exceeds expectations Demonstrates initiative; seeks out additional Meets expectations responsibility; identifies challenges & □ Does not meet expectations solutions; adjusts to unexpected changes □ Communication □ Exceeds expectations Written/verbal communication is clear, Meets expectations organized, & effective; listens and □ Does not meet expectations comprehends well □ Teamwork & Cooperation □ Exceeds expectations Respectful of and works well with Meets expectations colleagues; contributes to group goal □ Does not meet expectations achievement □ 3: LEARNING OUTCOMES Learning Outcome (from Posting) Rating Comments/Notes/Examples □ Needs Improvement □ Adequate □ Displays Mastery □ Needs Improvement
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation of Middle School Teachers' Perceptions on Bullying Stewart Waters1 & Natalie Mashburn2 Abstract Introduct
    Journal of Social Studies Education Research www.jsser.org Sosyal Bilgiler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi 2017: 8(1), 1-34 An Investigation of Middle School Teachers’ Perceptions on Bullying Stewart Waters1 & Natalie Mashburn2 Abstract The researchers in this study investigated rural middle school teachers’ perspectives regarding bullying. The researchers gathered information about the teachers’ definitions of bullying, where bullying occurs in their school, and how to prevent bullying. Peer-reviewed literature associated with this topic was studied in order to achieve a broader understanding of bullying and to develop a self-administered survey addressing these issues. A total of 21 teachers participated in the survey and the results of this study convey the need to recognize bullying in many forms, appropriately address bullying when it occurs, and incorporate preventive actions that will discourage bullying and encourage acceptance. Keywords: Bullying; Middle School; Teacher Preparation. Introduction Middle school can be a transformative and exciting time for students. However, during these important developmental years, bullying continues to be a persistent and serious issue. In more recent years, national and international concerns relating to the harmful effects of bullying have increased significantly (Thompson & Cohen, 2005). According to Frey and Fisher (2008), bullying has become a part of life for countless students, and can take on many forms within contemporary schools. As a result, bullying has placed a considerable amount of pressure on administrators and teachers to effectively respond to bullying (Bush, 2011). Often, teachers and administrators can be unaware of bullying, making it difficult to develop appropriate policies that are proactive instead of reactive. In 2003, Seals and Young stated that bullying is a persistent and insidious problem that affects roughly one-fourth of the students in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Workplace Education Program Effectiveness. INSTITUTION Colorado State Dept
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 399 435 CE 072 557 AUTHOR Burkhart, Jennifer TITLE Evaluating Workplace Education Program Effectiveness. INSTITUTION Colorado State Dept. of Education, Denver. State Library and Adult Education Office. PUB DATE 96 NOTE 15p.; For related documents, see CE 072 551-559. PUB TYPE Guides Non-Classroom Use (055) Reports Evaluative/Feasibility (142) EDRS PRICE MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Adult Education; Comparative Analysis; *Evaluation Methods; Formative Evaluation; *Industrial Training; Program Effectiveness; Program Evaluation; Summative Evaluation; *Workplace Literacy IDENTIFIERS 353 Project ABSTRACT This guide, which is intended for project directors, coordinators, and other professional staff involved in developing and delivering workplace education programs, explains the workplace education evaluation process, the main approaches to evaluation, and considerations in selecting appropriate evaluation instruments. Discussed first are the importance of program evaluation and measurable outcomes. Special attention is paid to the importance of evaluating "soft skills" training and elements business wants from evaluation (those which involve key players, use multiple evaluation measures, incorporate continuous feedback, useevaluation findings to review/revise training as needed, assess program outcomes through measurable outcomes). The similarities and differences between formative and summative evaluation are detailed, and several noninstructional factors that may influence training outcomes are mentioned. Described
    [Show full text]
  • 30-DAY PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEE EVALUATION Human Resources Office
    30-DAY PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEE EVALUATION Human Resources Office Employee Name Position Date Hired Completion of 30-Day Probationary Period Completion of 90-Day Probationary Period The University's future success requires that only those employees with proven skills and good habits be granted regular employment status. Therefore, please give your professional judgement as to whether the above individual should be continued in the employ of the University by completing in detail the following review. Please evaluate the employee on the following qualities. Be specific. When evaluating, or describing, the employee's qualities, the appropriate form of the answer might be, for example: PUNCTUALITY: "Unacceptable, because employee has been late two times in the last 30 days;" or, QUALITY OF WORK : "Too many errors in typing,:" or "Does a wonderful job of keeping floors clean." ATTENDANCE PUNCTUALITY INITIATIVE/ SPEED OF LEARNING DEPENDABILITY/ WORK HABITS/ ORGANIZATION QUALITY OF WORK/ ACCURACY QUANTITY OF WORK RELATIONS WITH OTHERS (SUPERVISOR/ OTHER EMPLOYEES) SKILLS/ EXPERIENCE/ TRAINING ADEQUATE FOR POSITION PERFORMANCE POTENTIAL 04/09 NS Page 1 of 2 30-DAY PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEE EVALUATION Human Resources Office During the initial 30-day probationary period, has the employee sufficiently proven that the probationary period should be continued for an additional 60 days? If not, is it your judgement that the employee be terminated? If termination is appropriate, please summarize the specific reasons for that decision: Other comments: Signature of Immediate Supervisor Date Signature of Department Head, if necessary Date Signature of Director of Human Resources Date Distribution: Original Human Resources- File Copy Immediate Supervisor Copy Department Head Copy Employee 04/09 NS Page 2 of 2 .
    [Show full text]
  • BOT Report 09-Nov-20.Docx
    REPORT 9 OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES (November 2020) Bullying in the Practice of Medicine (Reference Committee D) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the 2019 Annual Meeting Resolution 402-A-19, “Bullying in the Practice of Medicine,” was introduced by the Young Physicians Section and referred by the House of Delegates (HOD) for report back at the 2020 Annual Meeting. The resolution asks the American Medical Association (AMA) to help (1) establish a clear definition of professional bullying, (2) establish prevalence and impact of professional bullying, and (3) establish guidelines for prevention of professional bullying. This report provides statistics and other information about the prevalence and impact of professional bullying in the practice of medicine, and makes recommendations for the adoption of a formal definition and guidelines for establishing policies and strategies for preventing and addressing incidents of bullying among the health care staff. Bullying in the practice of medicine for physicians can begin in medical school and can endure throughout a physician’s career. Bullying is not limited to physicians and can happen among other members of the health care team. Bullying has many definitions, all commonly referring to the repeated abuse of a target by a perpetrator in a work setting. Bullying occurs at different levels within the practice of medicine, and affects the victim as well as their patients, care teams, organizations, and families. Nationally recognized organizations have established guidelines on which health care employers can base their internal policies, and many organizations have implemented anti-bullying or anti-violence policies. Bullying in medicine needs to be stopped and prevented for the sake of patients and care quality, the well- being of the physician workforce, and the integrity of the medical profession.
    [Show full text]
  • Telecommuting Sample Guidelines
    Telecommuting Guidelines This template highlights basic information that might be included in a telecommuting policy. Organizations may elect to prepare a separate legal telecommuting agreement with details on the arrangement, which is signed by the employee and a company representative. Purpose What is the purpose of issuing telecommuting guidelines (outline eligibility, options, and equipment responsibilities)? This is where you might mention how it links with business and/or work-life objectives. Scope What is the definition of telecommuting at your company? From what locations can an employee work? How many days per week or month should they work virtually to be considered a telecommuter? Is telecommuting ongoing or temporary? Can it be implemented with teams or entire divisions? Is it a stand-alone option or can it be implemented in conjunction with other flexible work arrangements? How does telecommuting impact policies regarding timecards, breaks, and overtime? Eligibility Who is eligible to work a telecommuting schedule? Are regular and part-time employees eligible? Exempt and nonexempt? Is telecommuting available to union-represented employees at all locations? Is there a length of service requirement employees must fulfill prior to requesting a telecommuting arrangement? Here is a good place to make a statement about telecommuting not being a benefit or entitlement and that requests must make good business sense. Requesting a Telecommuting Schedule What steps do employees need to follow to request a telecommuting schedule? Are they required to review employee considerations or complete a self-assessment? If so, where are these tools located? Are they required to develop and submit a business plan? Is there a business plan template available for them to follow? If so, where is it located? Do they need to involve their team in the development of their plan? This is a good place to make a statement about how telecommuting proposals will be considered — in light of operational, workload, and performance factors.
    [Show full text]