Covid-19: in companies, the future of teleworking under debate

What will the world of work look like after Covid-19? For over a year, millions of French people have gotten used to working at home. Meetings on Zoom, conversations with colleagues on Teams and the chat on the knees: telecommuting has become their new routine. And many have taken a liking to it.

If since June 9, these employees have been allowed to return to their workplace, some refuse to completely revert to their old way of working. According to a survey by the Institut Montaigne, 60% of French people thus wish, “once the Covid-19 epidemic is over, that companies set up the possibility for employees to telework during part of the working time and be face-to-face on the other part”.

If the government should announce at the beginning of September the protocol in force in the face of the threat of the Delta variant, in companies, managers, human resources and directions are thinking about “post-Covid” and weighing the pros and cons. And many have already entered into negotiations with employee representatives. At the heart of the questions: the concrete organization of this “hybrid” mode over the long term, but also the redefinition of the workspace.

Thomas Coutrot, economist and statistician, specialist in conditions and health at work, analyzes for France 24 the difficulties of this transition between “crisis telework” and “cruise telework”.

France 24 : What conclusions can we draw from this year and a half of teleworking?

Thomas Coutrot: The first and most important thing is that we have made a huge leap. Before the pandemic, teleworking only concerned 3 or 4% of workers. During the first confinement, this figure climbed, in just a few weeks, to 30%. There has really been a trivialization of use and this now seems irreversible.

The other lesson to be learned from this period of “crisis teleworking” is that the employees, in the great majority, found their account there. even if they suffered from the pace in 100% teleworking. Today, several studies show that a large majority of them agree to continue working from home, but two or three days a week.

Now, the whole question is how to go from this “crisis telework” to a more sustainable “cruise telework”. During the pandemic, everything was far from perfect: many employees noted an intensification of their workload and put aside their right to disconnect. These working conditions are not sustainable in the long term. This is why the social dialogue that starts in companies, which will determine the form to be given to teleworking, will play a major role.

>> To read also: “Covid-19 and teleworking: ‘There will be no going back'”

Can you recall what legal framework governs teleworking today? Can we expect this to evolve? While the Medef has been meeting since Wednesday, can we expect a position on its part to guide the employers?

Since 2017, the labor code has been very flexible with regard to the use of teleworking. It only depends on one thing: the double volunteering, of the employee and the employer. Roughly speaking, it is enough to agree to the turning of a corridor for teleworking to be possible.

In November 2020, the social partners, with the exception of the CGT, succeeded in reaching an agreement, after arduous negotiations, on a national inter-professional agreement. The latter insists on this notion of double volunteering but it does not govern the details of the organization of teleworking. On the contrary, it poses the need to negotiate within companies directly and has nothing prescriptive about it.

And today, I do not see this legal framework evolving, whether on the side of the government or the social partners. The Medef has also stated on several occasions that it wants to keep this flexibility on the organization of teleworking.

It is hardly surprising on the part of the employers’ organization. The bosses are in a strong position in the negotiations. For good reason, since the ordinances on the labor code in 2017, which led to the merger of the works council (CE), staff representatives and the health, safety and working conditions committee (CHSCT) into a social and economic committee (CSE), employees are less well represented. Not to mention that employee representatives have to deal with the great diversity of employee profiles, and therefore their demands. It’s very difficult.

What could be the sticking points in these negotiations?

If some bosses, especially in SMEs, are still reluctant to telework, the majority seems to have realized the obvious and to be ready to set up this hybrid system, half-teleworking, half-face-to-face.

But the dialogue between bosses and employees will not be easy. There are a lot of questions. First of all, how to organize yourself concretely? Before confinement, studies highlighted that people working from home often suffered from isolation, deprived of their colleagues. It disappeared with the pandemic. It’s quite easy to explain since, this time around, the whole company was teleworking. The collective became virtual but it still existed. Faced with this observation, should we favor compulsory days of presence at work or leave them flexible? And how many days do we grant? And how do we organize communication between on-site and remote employees?

More problematic still, the question of the material. Who pays, how much, for the computer, office or electricity used during teleworking? During the crisis, it was resourcefulness that prevailed. But here again, the question will have to be decided and this could entail a very significant cost for companies.

There is also a major issue in the organization of offices and space. Because if employees want to generalize teleworking, they do not want to lose “office life” when they are there. However, for some companies, teleworking is the possibility of saving money by cutting back on space and facilities. More and more of them want to adopt a “flex-office” system, when employees no longer have a fixed and personal position but share it with several people. And it is far from being unanimous.