Amazon.com Widgets

Should other states follow Virginia Governor Timothy Kaine initiative of having 20% of the state's workforce telecommuting by 2010?

  • I agree that other states should have 20 percent of their workforce telecommuting by 2010, because that is the direction both business and American households are heading.

    Much more work is able to be done by telecommuting, in today's world. That is the direction that business is heading, and this also helps each household save money on gas and other expenses, as well as be able to keep up more with what is going on at the house. It is the future, so it should be implemented.

    Posted by: ToyMatt
  • Yes, because there are so many benefits to telecommuting for everyone.

    Not only does telecommuting cut down on fuel consumption, emissions and
    traffic, but it can be very beneficial to the worker, because it eliminates
    a lot of stress involved with commuting. People work better with less stress and may be much healthier in the long run.

    Posted by: MarsBIue
  • To have more workers telecommuting, it would be environmentally friendlier, with fewer commuters on the roads, and it would cut down on carbon emissions.

    If workers are allowed to work from home, or anywhere they choose, this will eliminate the need for employees to drive to far-flung offices from the suburbs. Fewer drivers on the road means less burning of fossil fuels, which would be a step towards less reliance on foreign oil, too.

    Posted by: D3vinGooble
  • Yes, states should make room for telecommuting to happen.

    Twenty percent of the workforce is a big chunk of working individuals. So, I don't think that states should put a lot of pressure on meeting this goal, of having exactly one-fifth of the workforce telecommuting by a certain time. Rather, I think that the states should accommodate the possibility of this occurrence and pave the way for more telecommuters to come into existence. Single parents, pregnant moms, stay at home parents, disabled individuals, anyone who would otherwise have to pay for transportation would benefit from the opportunity to telecommute. That's just about everyone! I just would make sure that these "telecommuting jobs" were available on all professional and career levels.

    Posted by: gnorknik
  • I agree that the idea of workforce telecommuting would be good.

    The idea of workforce telecommuting is good. It is my belief that many people need to use this method to go to work. It should be the only way for people to go to work.

    Posted by: LushQuinton58
  • If telecommuting will help save money and limit the use of gasoline and wear and tear on roads, this is a good idea.

    Taking people off the roads by way of telecommuting to work is a very positive thing. There are multiple positive factors from this. First is the reduction in cost of powering office buildings as fewer people work in them. Second is the reduction of traffic congestion and pollution from fewer commuters in cars. Third is the reduction in use of gasoline, which is a positive for the pocketbook of both the commuter and the nation as we reduce our reliance on foreign oil. There is also the issue of less wear and tear on roads, meaning less maintenance required, meaning fewer taxpayer dollars expended, meaning a reduction in the tax burden on the people.

    Posted by: MariaR
  • Other states should follow Virginia Governor Timothy Kaine in the telecommuting movement, because there are great benefits for the company and the environment by doing so.

    With telecommuting, you would help out not only the business in transportation and time costs for having meetings, but also the environment, because you wouldn't have to transport as many people to different locations for a meeting.

    Posted by: BDanielle
  • I think that telecommuting is the wave of the future so I support it.

    I think that a lot of money is wasted with office space and people putting in reimbursement requests for gas mileage and things like that. Telecommuting is the wave of the future, anyway, because most of the work that can be done at the office can be done at home via computer. So it would conserve our resources if people who work for the state submit their work from home.

    Posted by: AlondraH
  • I think this is a good goal for all states, because it just makes sense to utilize technology to solve infrastructure and resource issues.

    I think a minimum of 20% telecommuting jobs is a good goal nationwide, although I wouldn't force it on individual employees. I'd bet more than 20% of workers would gladly switch to telecommuting. And once employers realize the savings in terms of facility use, they'd jump on board. It only makes sense to utilize technology to help conserve on resources like gas, on infrastructure like roads, and on facilities and electricity.

    Posted by: Th4Fire
  • I believe that all state governments should consider telecommuting as an option, in order to help reduce pollution and increase overall air quality.

    Telecommuting is an option I definitely believe all state governmental offices should consider. In light of the increasing levels of air pollution over the years, telecommuting makes good sense as a way to reduce pollution and increase overall air quality - in addition to being a good way to help alleviate high levels of congestion and traffic, and improve road quality.

    Posted by: Quibarce
  • I oppose government-directed telecommuting, because each case is unique and dependent on the type of job and the person involved, which may or may not be sufficient to fulfill a state initiative.

    This issue of telecommuting is not dependent on any state initiative and should not be a method of conserving energy, because the company initiating the telecommuting job strategy may or may not have jobs conducive to this type of environment. Some people would take great advantage of this type of position, so this is very dependent on the type of person. Other jobs require personal contact to succeed and would also not be conducive to this type of environment.

    Posted by: DisillusionedGilberto67
  • No, because many jobs cannot be done remotely, and many workers need supervision.

    Your plumber, electrician, doctor and day care worker cannot work remotely. Many more people with IT, financial, or managerial jobs can do so remotely, but will do laundry, watch TV, or play video games, instead of doing their work. Perhaps 20% of jobs can be done remotely, but even then, many of those workers shouldn't be. In addition, this won't end all traffic, since those who work at home will still need to drive to stores. Nor will this end demand for childcare, since trying to work at home with young children neglects them or the employer, depending upon priorities.

    Posted by: Pir4And

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.