Jul

I was driving into Toronto last week and encountered the usual traffic jam, which stretches from Burlington to downtown in the morning and the reverse in the afternoon. This turns what would ordinarily be a 40 min trip into a two-hour ordeal.
Of course sitting in an air-conditioned car when the outside temperature is 35 with a humidex of 40 is a blessing – you begin to enjoy the long drive. Especially when like me you don’t have air conditioning in your home.
The Toronto highways are equipped with helpful overhead led signs that flash different messages like “amber alert” or “don’t drive and talk on your cell phone” “seatbelts save lives” “War Is Peace”, “Freedom Is Slavery”, “Ignorance Is Strength” and occasionally some information about traffic problems. Although telling you that traffic is extremely slow when you are already stuck in slow traffic is not a real mood elevator.
Anyway this particular day was one where we were under a smog alert. We have a lot of alerts in Toronto now: Smog, heat, humidity, cold, etc.
So as I passed under one of these helpful signs and noticed that today’s message was “smog alert: reduce vehicle use”.
Imagine that. Telling me to reduce my vehicle use when I am stuck in gridlock. Should I have gotten out of my car and started walking? Would that have helped? I guess the degree of chaos caused by my now driverless vehicle would cancel out my good will gesture but at least my heart would have been in the right place - much like the sign. But of course no good would have come out of it. Such is our society today that good intentions are more important than results.
So the radio and the highway signs tell us to reduce vehicle use during smog alerts and everyone nods and says “yes capital idea” and then we all jump in our cars.
Of course there isn’t really an alternative is there? During these heat waves the instructions given to the general populace are to reduce traffic by car pooling or taking transit.
Car-pooling however isn’t much of an option since the city is so spread out and just because your neighbours live in Markham and work in Toronto there is no guarantee they are going to the same part of town that you are.
As for transit – crowded airless malodorous and sometimes dangerous trains and buses are not only an insult to the civialized man and woman they are quite often slower than taking the car.
And yet there is another alternative to this that would not only reduce vehicle use but it would also make people much more productive.
Telecommuting.
Why aren’t people urged to work from home on smog alert days? They are asked to do so during blizzards. If we could get 20% of the vehicles off the road during smog alerts it would have a wondrous effect.
In the first place it would almost certainly eliminate the pollution emitted by those cars since they would be sitting silently in the driveway. Secondly with less cars on the road there would be less congestion therefore less idling vehicles and less smog!
Yet I don’t hear our Lord Mayor advising such a thing.
Why?
Look if you spend most of your day answering email and talking on the phone you can work from anywhere. I have been working from a home office since 1990 and I find I am much more productive that way.
Of course some employers are a little reticent to do this – they seem to think that their employees will goof off. Yet they have no compunction about offshoring thousands of jobs to some unknown and unseen group of people halfway around the world.
Surely they can trust you all to do some form of productive work?
Now not everyone can work from home. Some people don’t have an office and others with small kids just can’t manage it. And of course if you work in manufacturing you can’t build cars from your home office.
But I bet 20% of us can.
Think about it. Does your company have a policy on telecommuting? Maybe it’s time you started talking about it.
And if any policy makers are reading this feel free to steal this idea. I have more important things to do anyway.
Popularity: 5% [?]
July 18th, 2005 at 11:06 am
Only a Canadian would put on the air conditioning when it’s 35.
July 18th, 2005 at 11:52 am
heh, 35 celsius.
July 19th, 2005 at 2:14 am
I agree 100% about the telecommuting. And also about the stupid signs on the 401. I was back home (in Ontario) for Christmas and did a lot of back and forth across Toronto which prompted me to blog when I got back out West…
…I pity the people who drive the 401 regularly and have to put up with the sign-nanny constantly nagging them about wearing a seat-belt, not using the cell-phone, allowing space while following, signaling, checking blind spots, not drinking and driving, thinking positive thoughts, and generally reminding them that everything they need to know they learned in kindergarten.
If I was put in charge of the signs, the messages would be more like, “Drive Clean, No Celine” (accompanied by a stick figure with a line through it), or “It’s 8 A.M., how fast do you think it’s moving beyond the next transfer?”, and the word “Express” would generally be surrounded with ironic single quotes. I wonder what the impact on traffic fatalities would be?
July 19th, 2005 at 6:17 am
The only nanny message I agree with is the one telling motorists to be careful around motorcylists - trust me we need all the help we can get in that daily battle.
July 19th, 2005 at 6:33 am
I’m going to rain on the parade here and say that telecommuting is a great idea but only if your workforce is technically proficient. Otherwise it is a nightmare because you have a bunch of ninnies eating up I.T. resources with issues that would never arise in the corporate office. For example:
- Most employees are clueless about network security and have difficulty configuring their cable/DSL routers to allow VPN traffic and remote control to/from the corp network. This eats up I.T. resources like crazy because either the company has to buy everyone the same sort of router (to reduce I.T. staff training and support costs), or they have to be prepared to support about a dozen different types of routers.
- Pushing software updates or security patches via the VPN connection can be time-consuming and eats network bandwidth like crazy if a big chunk of the VPN users are doing it at the same time.
- Most home users do not keep their anti-virus signatures and definitions up to date. In the corp network this can be controlled and enforced but not so with home PC users — unless the corp is prepared to send a standard-issue PC to each telecommuter’s home.
- If they are using their own home PCs, most users are not too thrilled with the idea that corp-standard anti-virus and remote control software will be installed. They don’t want us to know that they are really surfing porn half the day, or that their kid is using it 60% of the time to play some SpongeBob game. On the other hand., supporting VPN users without software push and remote capability is a huge drain on I.T. time and frankly not worth doing.
- Most telecommuters do not have any sort of online or offline backup system. Corp offices always have tape or other backup systems, plus offsite storage. If you trash something on your home PC, it’s gone for good, whereas on the corp network you at least stand a chance of being able to recover it. The only way around this is to religiously save everything on the network drives via VPN, and if you’re staying connected to VPN all the time, you’re driving up the company’s network bills.
- Some telecommuters who receive a corp PC will be lazy and decide not to buy their own computer because the company is giving them one for free. They will then try to install kids’ games and other useless stuff onto it, which will not be possible because the telecommuting PC adheres to corp domain security settings, which usually restricts users from software installation and other computer-breaking things. This will lead to a long running battle between the I.T. security dept and the line depts about what is (and is not) necessary and prudent domain security.
- Some telecomuters will be clueless and surf the web via their VPN connection rather than their own cable/DSL connection. It will be slower but it also imposes larger costs for the company because now they are paying bigger bandwidth costs.
- Harder to control information dispersal at the end of the employee relationship. You have no idea what that guy is doing with all the stuff stored at home once he gets his pink slip. He won’t be able to connect to the corp network but he could still make copies of stuff and hand it off to your competitors.
- Replacement of failed hardware components is more difficult. It requires the user to either drag the computer in or for I.T. staff to visit the home. It almost always requires an I.T. staff visit even if the user drags the box in, because the average joe is okay with disconnecting all the wires but most people don’t know, and can’t be bothered to learn how to hook it all up again.
In the right hands, with the proper technical knowledge, telecommuting saves time and energy. But in the average joe’s hands, it doesn’t. It just creates a lot of work for the supporting staff, and sucks their attention away from *real* productivity-enhancing projects.
July 19th, 2005 at 9:05 am
Chris; I being self employed of course am unaware of those issues. However it sounds like you have the makings of a very nice memo - most people are clueless because nobody tells them these things.
A company with a sound telecommuting strategy can easily educate people around this and those who abuse it can have their telecommuting rights revoked pretty quickly.
July 19th, 2005 at 1:42 pm
The problem is really just general ignorance of computer functionality. It’s not just a question of crafting a policy, it’s making sure people understand the hows and whys of telecommuting, and particularly networking. Most of the companies I have worked for, large and small, do not devote sufficient resources to employee technical training. We give them the equipment to be more productive, but no instruction to go with it. The only company I ever saw get this right was IBM, oh, and a dot-bomb where all the employees were I.T. tech-heads and could do it all themselves.
July 19th, 2005 at 2:01 pm
Chris I am talking about simply using phone and email for documents. Not everone needs to access mainframes. I have a large client right now where half the staff is offsite contractors ( I am one of them) we do everything via phone and email. The company is so new that they don’t have a formal It infrastructure yet.
So far there have been very few problems.
July 19th, 2005 at 3:34 pm
So ah… is your large client publicly traded? What are they doing about SOX legislation? That’s another reason why telecommuting can be dicey. Corporations these days need to hang on to all of that information. Many don’t like using regular old POP mail retrieval because it is insecure as hell.
I’m not saying the phone and email idea is a bad one, but as the company grows, the infrastructure will grow. You’ll start recruiting people who are very skilled in their roles but have no I.T. knowledge whatsoever. And then you’ll start encountering the same sorts of issues that every other company has with its remote population.
July 19th, 2005 at 4:57 pm
They are not and will not ever be publicly traded but lots of companies aren’t - most search firms, most law firms, etc. there’s plenty of room for telecommuting outside of the large cap firms and even those have plenty of employees with laptops who travel - what is the difference between an employee with a laptop and a blackberry on a plane and one sitting at home?
July 19th, 2005 at 4:59 pm
BTW SOX as it exists now is an over reaction - look for the teeth of that one to be knocked out sometimes soon.
July 19th, 2005 at 6:23 pm
What the 401 doesn’t need are more distractions!
Man o’ man people drive like maniacs on that highway, too many lanes with too many vehicles and too many a–h—s … and car farts to boot.
Chris Taylor has many good points but in some companies telecommuting is pretty useful and others not so much but in some situations it seems like a good idea.
By the bye, do you guys who commute on the 401 put vaseline on your bumpers before you leave in the morning or what?
July 19th, 2005 at 7:37 pm
Well, the difference between a guy with a Blackberry and laptop on a plane vs. a guy with a desktop sitting at home is actually pretty simple. You don’t really want me to get into this, do you? =)
Blackberries connected to a corporate BES are just syncing the data stored on the corp’s mail server — which is, 9 times out of 10, backed up and stored offsite. If you lose the BB, your corp IT dept can deactivate mail flow to the device within seconds. Corp BES servers also communicate with RIM using the extremely secure 3DES encryption method.
Corp laptops typically use Win2003 Active Directory and its associated security features. They are usually fitted out with software (like SafeBoot) that encrypts all of the data on the hard drive and requires authentication prior to booting. The primary encryption key from which all the other organizational and user keys are made is stored by the corp I.T. department and thus if the laptop is lost somehow, the data onboard can not be poached.
Home-user Blackberries are usually connected to the user’s POP mail accounts and that information is backed up nowhere, and nevermind offsite. If you lose the device, you are probably not sitting at home, and thus deactivation has to wait until you can notify Rogers, or until you can modify the settings on your BlackBerry Web client. Also, the BlackBerry Web client that communicates with RIM uses the far less secure SSL protocol, not 3DES.
Home desktops rarely use domain-level security because very few home users have gone to the trouble of setting up an Active Directory domain. They typically use share-level security which is less secure and easily breached by trojans. They also rarely have SafeBoot or similar encryption software installed, so the only thing that protects the data is the lock on the front door.
P.S. I totally agree about SOX but do not expect major amendments until 3-5 years down the road when everybody realises how much this is costing them.
July 19th, 2005 at 7:43 pm
Chris so what would be wroing with someone using a laptop from home? Not their home desktop.
July 19th, 2005 at 8:06 pm
Heh, nothing, and I think we’re agreeing on more than we disagree. Meatster, I’m not saying telecommuting is an evil, horrible idea. Like I said initially, it’s a great idea — if and only if the end user knows what he’s doing technically. If he/she doesn’t, THEN it’s an evil, horrible, resource-busting idea. Somewhere after my second reply this thing went off the rails, I think.
July 19th, 2005 at 9:19 pm
But it generated more comments than most of my posts do!! I should post more technical stuff just generate more debate.
Coming up, which spam filter is the one true God….
July 20th, 2005 at 10:24 pm
More technical stuff my arse! I’d rather more important things such as how you keep your sanity on the 401 on a daily basis.
I know that Canadians pride themselves on thier cool but the passive-agressive nature of the metro driving/commuting culture around Toronto is rather disturbing.
What’s with that?