Teleworking: HR’s role in assessing the ecological impact

Sandrine Fremaux, Professor at Audencia Business School and Yvan Barel, Lecturer at Nantes University explore how HR can ensure their business truly using teleworking to ecological advantage.

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, teleworking was mainly considered a convenient way to reduce urban congestion. Nowadays, after the experience of the pandemic, it is also seen as an ethical way to combat companies’ carbon footprint. It can save on the use of office space, and therefore reduce energy consumption on lighting, heating and cooling. It also cuts the amount of commuting that employees must do. While this obviously lowers a company’s CO2 emissions, the true extent of its positive impact on carbon reduction has not been quantified.

The rise of long-distance working

Introduced as an emergency measure in 2020, teleworking has now become a permanent feature in many offices. Despite concerns about isolation and the challenges of coordinating with colleagues, there appears to be little desire to revert to previous work arrangements. Many professionals prefer remote work at least one day a week, primarily to reduce commuting time. Additionally, remote work allows them to consider jobs located much further from home than before. In a competitive job market, Human Resources departments are capitalising on this trend by increasingly considering applicants from more distant locations.

However, not all HR departments welcome the move to teleworking, as it may not suit the smooth running of the company. But the fact that it has become more pervasive, might mean that an employee who is well-established in their job, might assume that the company would be happy for them to move further away, should they wish to do this for lifestyle or family needs.

The ecological consequences of teleworking

While teleworking reduces commutes, its ecological benefits need careful consideration. It doesn’t eliminate additional trips for an employee’s daily errands, childcare, or leisure activities, which might even increase as a result of teleworking. Evaluating teleworking’s ecological impact also requires considering home energy consumption, and the duplication of digital equipment for optimal work conditions both at home and in the office.

Moreover, the environmental gains of teleworking may diminish if employees relocate to remote areas, potentially leading to land use changes and increased vehicle use in semi-rural areas. Lastly, teleworkers might choose residences far from their workplace, leading to significant CO2 emissions for occasional long-distance commutes. For instance, a manager living in the Scottish Highlands or Cornwall but working in London might fly regularly. Even infrequent trips would result in high carbon costs.

What about business travel?

It is difficult to consider teleworking without a broader analysis of long-distance travel, especially company business trips. Each time an executive or sales representative flies to a meeting, conference or trade fair, the necessity of the trip and choice of transport should be evaluated. The same applies when a sales representative drives long distances for appointments that could be handled via video-conference or phone. The HR department’s role is not to ban travel but to facilitate discussions on justified travel criteria and the most efficient low-carbon transportation methods.

So, the first step for employers is to establish rules that prioritise train travel over air travel for journeys under eight hours. The second step is to significantly limit non-essential travel, which also reduces office disruptions. The HR department should support directors and managers in adopting eco-friendly practices by guiding their transport choices and travel approval criteria. Using the carbon footprint as a tool can help HR foster ecological awareness.

The need for consistency

What legitimacy is there in asking employees to limit their paper use if top managers continue to fly regularly for non-essential meetings at head office? The credibility of a commitment to the environment depends on the consistency of actions taken. Existing sustainable practices, such as reimbursing public transport, using recyclable paper, improving thermal insulation, lowering office temperatures, automatically switching off computers at midnight, offering vegetarian menus in the canteen, providing carbon impact awareness training, and recommending digital methods for sending and clearing emails, are helpful. However, as beneficial as these may seem, they primarily impact the working environment rather than the work itself. It is crucial that ecological transition is integrated throughout the workplace, the workforce, and the work itself. In this context, a company’s human resources management (HRM) plays a crucial role in fostering a deep reflection on the ecological significance of work.

Towards the greening of HRM?

Greening HRM must go beyond merely informing employees about best practices at occasional awareness events. Here are some practical steps HRM should consider:

• Firstly, ecological issues and impacts should be included in all job descriptions, making ecological awareness a criterion for recruitment, a topic for training, and a factor for internal promotion. Annual appraisals should consider the efforts made by employees to meet the company’s ecological commitments.
• Secondly, HR should evaluate the usefulness and relevance of practices in terms of the company’s broader ecological mission. The ecological impact of each task should be assessed based on its genuine contribution to the common good and the real needs of society, rather than merely for appearance. This is a challenging task.

HR directors typically observe diverse perspectives among employees: some see the company’s ecological efforts as essential for their loyalty, while others remain indifferent or even hostile when their freedom to act is limited. Collaboration with general and departmental management, as well as with social partners, is crucial to initiating a thorough reflection on the ecological impact of teleworking. This reflection should also address the broader tensions caused by business travel, balancing the quality of work, quality of life at work, and ecological considerations.