Why the instruction of “compulsory teleworking” is so ambiguous… and (therefore) so little respected



He has become the symbol of the bad student of re-containment. This week, the oil giant Total was pinned for having encouraged its teams to come and work face-to-face. Disregarding government instructions, the group’s Covid referent invited to observe two days of work on site ” in order to preserve the social link “, Even though 270 cases of Covid have been identified among employees at the La Défense headquarters since 1er September. An invitation… which looked quite frankly like an instruction.

SMEs, large groups, multinationals, or civil servants … The list of companies and administrations resistant to the directives of ” widespread teleworking Provided by the government has lengthened in the week, going against the recommendations of the WHO, the scientific council and the government. “ Teleworking is not an option but an obligation “For workers, employees or self-employed who can exercise their activity at a distance, valiantly recalls the Minister of the Economy Elisabeth Borne.

Teleworking is “not an option” but “an obligation”, insists Elisabeth Borne

But in fact, few employers have a real chance of being worried… and they know it. Because the health protocol is based on three major ambiguities:

  • Eligibility for teleworking is left to the sole discretion of the employer, without discussion with the employee
  • There is also the “Flexibility” tolerated in a large number

To read the remaining 86%,
test the offer at 1 € without obligation.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *