Teleworking was considered to be a good way to reduce congestion in cities before the COVID-19 epidemic. After the COVID-19 pandemic experience, teleworking is now seen as a way to reduce the carbon footprint of companies. This can reduce the amount of space used in offices, and thus energy consumption for lighting, heating, and cooling. The amount of commuters is also reduced. This reduces CO2 emission for a company, but the full extent of this impact has yet to be quantified.
Long-distance Working is on the Rise
Teleworking, which was introduced as a temporary measure in 2020 has now become an integral part of many offices. There is little desire to return to the previous working arrangements despite concerns over isolation and coordination challenges. Most professionals choose remote work for at least one day per week to cut down on commute time. Remote work also allows professionals to look at jobs that are much farther away from their homes than they did before. Human Resources departments, in a highly competitive job market are increasingly considering candidates from further away.
Teleworking is not always welcomed by all HR departments, because it can be detrimental to the business. The fact that teleworking is more common could lead an employee to assume that if they are well established in their position, the company will be happy to allow them to relocate for family or lifestyle reasons.
Teleworking and its environmental impact
Teleworking can reduce commutes but its environmental benefits should be carefully considered. Teleworking doesn’t eliminate the need for additional trips to run errands or take care of children, but it can reduce them. In order to evaluate the ecological impact of teleworking, it is also necessary to consider the home energy consumption and the duplication digital equipment in order to achieve optimal working conditions at both home and office.
The environmental benefits of teleworking could also be diminished if employees move to remote locations, which may lead to changes in land use and an increase in vehicle usage in semi-rural regions. Teleworkers may choose to live far away from their workplaces, which can lead to significant CO2 emission for long-distance commutes. A manager who lives in Cornwall or the Scottish Highlands but works in London may fly frequently. Even infrequent flights would have high carbon costs.
What about business travel
Teleworking is not feasible without an analysis of the long-distance business travels, and especially those that are made by companies. When an executive or sales rep flies for a conference, meeting or trade show, it is important to evaluate the need for the trip as well as the choice of transportation. It is the same when a salesperson drives long distances to attend appointments that can be handled by video-conference or telephone. It is not the role of HR to prohibit travel, but rather to facilitate discussion on acceptable travel criteria and low-carbon transport methods.
Employers should therefore establish rules which give priority to train travel in the case of journeys less than eight hours. Second, limit all non-essential trips to reduce office disruption. HR should encourage managers and directors to adopt eco-friendly practices, by providing them with guidelines on travel and transport. HR can foster environmental awareness by using the carbon footprint.
Consistency is important
What is the legitimacy of asking employees to reduce their paper usage if managers continue to fly to head office for meetings that are not essential? Consistency in actions is key to establishing credibility for an environmental commitment. It is helpful to use existing sustainable practices such as reimbursement for public transport, the use of recyclable paper, lowering temperatures in offices, automatic computer shutdown at midnight, vegetarian menus offered in canteens, carbon awareness training and recommending digital means of sending and clearing email. As beneficial as they may appear, these practices have a greater impact on the workplace than the actual work. Ecological transition must be integrated into the workplace, workforce and work itself. Human resources management in an organization is crucial to fostering deep reflections on the environmental significance of work.
What is the future of HRM in terms of greening?
It is not enough to inform employees of best practices during awareness events. Here are some steps HRM can take to make it more sustainable:
- First, environmental issues and impacts must be included in job descriptions. This will make ecological awareness an important factor in recruitment, training and internal promotion. The efforts of employees in meeting the company’s environmental commitments should be taken into account when evaluating their performance.
- Second, The HR department should assess the relevance and usefulness of practices in relation to the company’s larger ecological mission. It is important to evaluate the ecological impact of every task based on the contribution it makes to the greater good of the society and not just for its appearance. This is a difficult task.
HR directors often observe different perspectives from employees. Some see the company’s eco-efforts as crucial for their loyalty while others are indifferent or hostile when their freedom of action is restricted. To initiate a comprehensive reflection on the environmental impact of teleworking, collaboration with departmental and general management as well as social partners is essential. This reflection must also consider the wider tensions that are caused by business trips, while balancing quality of work with quality of life and environmental considerations.
