Work from home as much as possible, has been the commandment for the past two years. But a lot of work could of course not take place at home, such as in care or at the police. Differences also arose where working from home was possible. Employers turned out to be quite arbitrary about whether and under what circumstances they worked from home could/should be or at the office.
The interests, opportunities and risks of being able to work from home or not are by no means equally distributed among different groups of workers. It is important to consider the consequences this has for the quality of work and legal position in the labor market policy. This is all the more true now that it is likely that hybrid work will probably remain in more normal times and may even increase.
To trust
Over the past two years, many more companies have started using ICT applications to allow their employees to work from home, which has also changed the organization and social ties of work. Certain groups of employees within companies gained more trust and, by extension, more autonomy. These were generally the higher-earning employees in the company.
Prior to the pandemic, middle or lower-level staff work, which technically could have been done remotely, was often organized on location due to a lack of trust. To put it bluntly, these workers were required to be present at the workplace because the employer wanted to exercise authority and supervision in this way.
Of course, the pandemic has temporarily changed that situation, but it could well be the case that in the future this relationship of authority will no longer be exercised by an attendance requirement, but by means of strict ‘remote control’ ICT applications at home.
Check
It is not good for mutual relationships if some of the staff are much more under the control and authority of the employer and others are more or less free to make their own choices. Moreover: if large groups of workers work from home, work processes will be very different, which can have many consequences for matters such as work consultation and employee participation. As a result, the balance of power in the company can change drastically.
All kinds of promotion and reward trajectories are becoming much less clear; after all, it is more difficult for the homeworker to compare himself with colleagues. It also becomes much more difficult to check whether equal treatment is practiced in the company.
Teleworkers in lower and middle management should not be disadvantaged on a professional level, in particular with regard to career progression, further training, access to internal company information and other specific rights within companies.
It would therefore be a good idea, in addition to the already existing legal obligation to equal treatment for temporary agency workers and permanent employees, workers with temporary and permanent contracts and workers with part-time and full-time contracts, also a duty to equal treatment of home workers and location workers by law. to arrange.
Klara Boonstra is director of the Wiardi Beckman Foundation (WBS) and professor of employment law.
For an extended version of this article, see http://www.wbs.nl/werkplek