<DOC>
[107th Congress House Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:82424.wais]
TOWARD A TELEWORK-FRIENDLY GOVERNMENT WORKPLACE: AN UPDATE ON PUBLIC
AND PRIVATE APPROACHES TO TELECOMMUTING
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY AND PROCUREMENT POLICY
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 6, 2001
__________
Serial No. 107-125
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
82-424 WASHINGTON : 2002
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland TOM LANTOS, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
STEPHEN HORN, California PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
JOHN L. MICA, Florida CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington,
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana DC
JOE SCARBOROUGH, Florida ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
BOB BARR, Georgia ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
DAN MILLER, Florida DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
RON LEWIS, Kentucky JIM TURNER, Texas
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DAVE WELDON, Florida WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
CHRIS CANNON, Utah DIANE E. WATSON, California
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida ------ ------
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho ------
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee (Independent)
Kevin Binger, Staff Director
Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
James C. Wilson, Chief Counsel
Robert A. Briggs, Chief Clerk
Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Technology and Procurement Policy
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia JIM TURNER, Texas
STEPHEN HORN, California PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
DOUG OSE, California PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia
Ex Officio
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Melissa Wojciak, Staff Director
Victoria Proctor, Professional Staff Member
James DeChene, Clerk
Mark Stephenson, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on September 6, 2001................................ 1
Statement of:
Robertson, Bob, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income
Security Issues, U.S. General Accounting Office; Teresa
Jenkins, Director, Office of Workforce Relations, Office of
Personnel Management; David Bibb, Deputy Associate
Administrator, Office of Governmentwide Policy, U.S.
General Services Administration; Harris N. Miller,
president, Information Technology Association of America;
Mark Straton, vice president, global marketing, Siemens
Enterprise Networks; and Robert M. Milkovich, managing
director, CarrAmerica...................................... 12
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Bibb, David, Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of
Governmentwide Policy, U.S. General Services
Administration, prepared statement of...................... 38
Davis, Hon. Thomas M., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Virginia, prepared statement of................... 4
Jenkins, Teresa, Director, Office of Workforce Relations,
Office of Personnel Management, prepared statement of...... 29
Milkovich, Robert M., managing director, CarrAmerica,
prepared statement of...................................... 70
Miller, Harris N., president, Information Technology
Association of America, prepared statement of.............. 49
Robertson, Bob, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income
Security Issues, U.S. General Accounting Office, prepared
statement of............................................... 15
Straton, Mark, vice president, global marketing, Siemens
Enterprise Networks, prepared statement of................. 61
Turner, Hon. Jim, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Texas, prepared statement of............................ 8
TOWARD A TELEWORK-FRIENDLY GOVERNMENT WORKPLACE: AN UPDATE ON PUBLIC
AND PRIVATE APPROACHES TO TELECOMMUTING
----------
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 6, 2001
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Technology and Procurement Policy,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Thomas M. Davis
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Davis of Virginia and Turner.
Also present: Representatives Morella, Capito, Moran and
Norton.
Staff present: Melissa Wojciak, staff director; David
Marin, communications director; Amy Heerink, chief counsel;
George Rogers, counsel; Victoria Proctor, professional staff
member; James DeChene, clerk; Mark Stephenson, minority
professional staff member; and Jean Gosa, minority assistant
clerk.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Good morning. Welcome to the
subcommittee's second oversight hearing on Federal
telecommuting. The telework initiative gives employees the
flexibility to work outside the traditional workplace,
generally at home or in telecenters. Today, we're going to
evaluate the progress of the Federal Government agencies'
efforts to promote the initiative. We will also review
agencies' compliance with section 359 of Public Law 106-346,
the fiscal year 2001 Department of Transportation appropriation
bill.
I want to take a moment to thank Congresswoman Connie
Morella, Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito, Congressman Jim
Moran, and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton for joining us this
morning. Congressman Frank Wolf wanted to be here today, but he
was called to the White House this morning.
As many of you know, Mr. Wolf has been a longtime supporter
of telework and is responsible for the inclusion of section 359
in last year's transportation appropriations bill. This year he
introduced H.R. 1012, the Telework Tax Initiative Act, which
would provide a tax credit to eligible telecommuters.
Advances in computer and telecommunications technology have
facilitated the rapid growth of telework in the private sector.
While companies enjoy increased productivity, job satisfaction
and employee morale as a result of telework programs, the
Federal Government's success has been inconsistent. Over the
past decade, there have been executive plans to encourage
Federal telecommuting, but a more formalized plan with
comprehensive guidelines was never introduced. Section 359 and
the related conference report language strived to change that.
Section 359 directs Federal agencies to establish telework
policies as a means to ease congestion and permit 25 percent of
their eligible work force to telecommute by April 23, 2001. An
additional 25 percent must be permitted to telecommute each
year over the next 3 years. The conference report requires OPM
to assess the effectiveness of the program and to report to
Congress.
Our March 22nd hearing revealed that if telecommuting is
used strategically, it can be an effective recruitment and
retention tool in the Federal workplace. For example, an
aggressive telecommuting policy may help the Federal Government
address the shortage of information technology workers. As the
Federal IT work force nears retirement eligibility, they may be
enticed back to the Federal work force on flexible terms while
taxpayers benefit from a knowledgeable and experienced work
force. In fact, a December 2000 survey conducted by the Merit
Systems Protection Board found a possible correlation between
the availability of telecommuting and Federal employees'
intention to leave Federal service.
The March hearing also helped identify some of the key
barriers to Federal telecommuting, including the availability
of computer and telecommunications equipment, managerial
attitudes, funding and insufficient marketing and education
about the concept. In fact, some Federal employees still report
confusion about their agencies' policies, and some don't even
know if teleworking is an option for them. Furthermore, Federal
managers in particular are resistant to telework, because they
are no longer in a position to monitor employees directly.
Thus, managers need to shift their focus from process-oriented
performance measurements to results.
But the Federal workplace culture will not change
overnight. It's a long and gradual process. That's why I'm
pleased that OPM and GSA have already made concerted efforts to
promote telework and address these persistent concerns. In
addition to training sessions for employees, managers and top-
level officials, OPM partnered with GSA to create a one-stop
telework Web site to educate the work force and provide a
variety of resources about telework, including links to agency
policies, sample telework agreements, telecenter information,
OPM guidance and OPM's study highlighting agency success
stories.
OPM's recent Interim Report on Telework in the Federal
Government indicates that the barriers I mentioned still
inhibit telework--they still inhibit telework. For the report,
OPM surveyed Federal agencies about their telework policies.
The data showed that the total percentages of teleworkers in
the Federal work force has doubled to 3.1 percent since 1998,
but it still remains very low. Agency narratives and followup
discussions reveal that agencies are inconsistent in tracking
their teleworkers, especially those who telecommute on a
nonscheduled basis or less than 52 days per year.
Based on this information, OPM concluded that Federal
teleworkers are likely undercounted. It's been a challenge for
OPM to compile accurate statistics about Federal telecommuters
because there is no governmentwide standard for data
collection. This is an important concern that I think has to be
addressed since the report is intended to provide a baseline
from which to assess the progress of Federal telework.
Today the subcommittee will ascertain what oversight
measures OPM will use to ensure Federal agency compliance with
section 359. We'll determine whether OPM provides adequate
guidance to assist agencies in determining which positions are
eligible for telecommuting. In addition, we'll look forward to
hearing about further action OPM will take to clarify the
initiative and provide employees with guidance to ensure
successful telework experiences. We'll also determine if GSA is
using section 359 as a marketing opportunity to expand its
advertising efforts for and increase utilization of the
telecenters. Since OPM's interim telecommuting report reveals
that there is no official system in place to efficiently and
reliably count teleworkers and compile related data, the
subcommittee will review the current tracking system and any
suggestions for governmentwide standardization.
The subcommittee will hear testimony from Robert E.
Robertson, the Director of Education, Workforce and Income
Security Issues, GAO; Teresa Jenkins, the Director of Office of
Workforce Relations, OPM; David Bibb, Deputy Associate
Administrator of Real Property within the Office of
Governmentwide Policy, GSA; Harris Miller, president of the
Information Technology Association of America; Mark Straton,
the vice president of global marketing, Siemens Enterprise
Networks; and Robert Milkovich, the managing director of
CarrAmerica.
We anticipate having with us today members of the full
committee who are not on the subcommittee, as well as Members
who are not part of the full committee, but have a strong
interest in this. I ask unanimous consent they be permitted to
participate in today's hearing, and without objection, so
ordered.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Thomas M. Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.003
Mr. Davis of Virginia. I would now yield to Congressman
Turner for any opening statement.
Mr. Turner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I commend you on
having this second hearing on this important issue of
telecommuting. We all know that the Federal Government faces a
human capital crisis, and the Federal work force is indeed
aging, and it requires us to be innovative in ways to not only
attract and retain Federal workers, but to improve worker
productivity, morale, and, as I said, retention and
recruitment.
We know that advances in technology in recent years have
made telecommuting a far more feasible and attractive choice
for employees and employers alike. Today we're told that about
19 million people telecommute, and the number is increasing
rapidly. Despite the fact that telecommuting has been an option
for Federal employees over the last decade, as we'll hear today
from the Office of Personnel Management, only about 45,000
employees, or 2.6 percent of our Federal work force,
telecommute once a week, and almost half of those are in one
agency. Even though there's been a marked increase in
telecommuting, we're still clearly behind the private sector.
As some of our witnesses today will testify, the private sector
offers valuable insights to us in how to address the barriers
faced by organizations attempting to promote telework among
their employees.
As the chairman mentioned, Federal law requires agencies to
develop a plan that allows 25 percent of the eligible Federal
work force to telecommute. As of April 23, 2001, an additional
25 percent must be permitted to telecommute each year over the
next 3 years.
Today we will explore the Federal Government's progress in
developing telework-friendly policies and determine what the
Congress and the agencies need to do to make telecommuting a
viable option for Federal employees.
I welcome all of our witnesses today, and, again, I thank
the chairman for his continued interest in this important
subject.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Jim Turner follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.005
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Mrs. Capito.
Mrs. Capito. Yes. Thank you. Good morning. I'd like to
begin by thanking Chairman Davis for inviting me to offer an
opening statement this morning. I enjoyed participating in the
last hearing on telecommuting, and I'm happy that you've
invited me back. Although I'm not a member of the subcommittee,
I greatly appreciate the opportunity to share with you my views
on the importance of telecommuting in today's world.
As you may know, the district which I represent plays home
to the one and only telecenter in the State of West Virginia.
The telecenter is located in the town of Ranson in Jefferson
County, about an hour outside of Washington, DC, in an area
known as the eastern Panhandle of West Virginia. Over the past
several years, there's been a dramatic increase in the
population in the eastern Panhandle of West Virginia. In fact,
many Federal employees are relocating to West Virginia in
search of a peaceful, family friendly environment. In the past,
these individuals would face a difficult, congested daily
commute through Hagerstown, MD, on 270 and ultimately onto 495.
Today, however, thanks to advanced commuter technology, many of
these individuals are capable of telecommuting from work
stations only miles from their homes in Jefferson County at the
telecenter.
Unfortunately, most Federal employees in West Virginia
can't take advantage of this exciting opportunity. While
interest in telecommuting is high among those Federal
employees, gaining agency approval is an arduous, frustrating
and bureaucratic process.
Despite the fact that telecommuting and other forms of
working at a distance have been thoroughly proven and are
already commonplace in the private sector, there remain those
who are steadfastly opposed to this practice. Why? As the
proverb tells us, all things seem difficult before they seem
easy. Certain people are just slow to change their way of
thinking.
In my opinion, it is time for all of us to embrace the
practice of telecommuting. Clearly GSA needs to improve their
effort to market the concept of telecommuting to agency
management. Emphasis should be placed on the need to comply
with the recent changes in the law requiring 25 percent
telecommuting participation among Federal employees.
Additionally, efforts to streamline the telecommuting approval
process should be promoted, and the length of time from inquiry
to implementation of telework should be decreased.
Employee interest in telecommuting should be met with
enthusiasm, not skepticism, and whenever possible management
should encourage employee participation in telework. It is time
to stop resisting the changing structure of our work
environment and start using the high-speed computing technology
to its fullest potential.
On a positive note, since this committee's telecommuting
hearing last March, the telecenter in my district has made
great progress in promoting and marketing its services to local
citizens. Under the capable management of Neil Jagedny, who's
in attendance this morning, I'm certain that the Jefferson
County telecenter will continue to make great strides. In fact,
last June, GSA provided $130,000 in additional funding to
assist the Jefferson County telecenter as it moves to become a
self-sustaining entity.
But funding alone is not enough. We need more Federal
agencies to actively promote and encourage employee
participation in telecommuting programs. The Jefferson County
telecenter can no longer afford to have dozens and dozens--and
I think it's almost as many as 70--interested workers stuck in
a confusing, lengthy and frustrating application and approval
process. Those Federal employees who live in the eastern
panhandle and have a legitimate reason to telecommute should be
authorized quickly by their respective employers. It just makes
sense. Almost every name on the waiting list represents a
wasted opportunity.
Ladies and gentlemen, after years of discussion, now it's
time for action, and I'm hopeful that we can demonstrate
leadership necessary to realize the vast potential of
telecommuting. And I look forward to listening to the testimony
of today's witnesses. Thank you very much.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much.
Mrs. Morella.
Mrs. Morella. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to
thank you for holding this followup hearing on teleworking in
the Federal workplace. With 25 Federal agencies located in
Montgomery County, MD, my district, this decision is of utmost
importance to me and my constituents.
I also want to thank you for the courtesy of allowing me as
a member of the full Government Reform Committee, but not of
this subcommittee, to appear here today because of the interest
that I have in this issue. I want to thank you also for your
leadership on this issue, and I want to thank someone who is
not here today again--that is Mr. Wolf--for all of his efforts
to ensure the Federal Government's support of telework programs
and incentives. I look forward to the day that the entire
Federal work force will telework to the maximum extent
possible.
Now, while there is no magic bullet that will solve all of
our Nation's problems, teleworking becomes--it comes pretty
close. As has been noted, for every 1 percent of the Washington
metropolitan region work force that telecommutes, there is a 3
percent reduction in traffic delays.
And during the last hearing, we heard from several Federal
agencies, including the Office of Personnel Management and
General Services Administration. And from the panelists'
presentations, a few questions were raised that I hope will be
addressed during this hearing. First, how is the government
encouraging telework for all qualified Federal employees?
Second, how are the government agencies addressing obstacles
that block teleworking implementation, such as security issues?
In addition, what has been done to address these concerns?
Finally, what can we do to facilitate a solution for telework
programs within the Federal Government, and more specifically
in Montgomery County, MD?
Today we are acting as architects of a new mobile work
environment, and with the cooperation of the Office of
Personnel Management and the General Services Administration,
the Federal Government will once again be an example to the
States and to the private sector.
So, again, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity
to attend this hearing this morning. I certainly look forward
to hearing from our witnesses.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Well, thank you very much, Mrs.
Morella.
We're going to now call our panel of witnesses to testify.
Robert E. Robertson, the Director of Education, Workforce and
Income Security Issues, GAO; Teresa Jenkins, the Director of
Office of Workforce Relations, OPM; David L. Bibb, the Deputy
Associate Administrator of Real Property within the Office of
Governmentwide Policy at the GSA; Harris Miller, the president
of the Information Technology Association of America; Mark
Straton, the vice president of global marketing for Siemens
Enterprise Networks; and Robert Milkovich, the managing
director of CarrAmerica.
As you know, it's the policy of this committee that all
witnesses be sworn before they testify, so if you'd rise with
me and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much.
We've had the testimony ahead of time. To afford sufficient
time for witnesses, we'd like you to limit your comments to 5
minutes. There's a light down here in front. When it turns
orange, you have 1 minute left. When it's red, your 5 minutes
are up, and you want to move to summary. Your total written
statement is going to be made part of the permanent record.
I'll begin with Mr. Robertson, and we'll move right down
the line. Welcome, and thank you for being here.
STATEMENTS OF BOB ROBERTSON, DIRECTOR, EDUCATION, WORKFORCE,
AND INCOME SECURITY ISSUES, U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE;
TERESA JENKINS, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKFORCE RELATIONS, OFFICE
OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT; DAVID BIBB, DEPUTY ASSOCIATE
ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTWIDE POLICY, U.S. GENERAL
SERVICES ADMINISTRATION; HARRIS N. MILLER, PRESIDENT,
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; MARK STRATON,
VICE PRESIDENT, GLOBAL MARKETING, SIEMENS ENTERPRISE NETWORKS;
AND ROBERT M. MILKOVICH, MANAGING DIRECTOR, CARRAMERICA
Mr. Robertson. Thank you for inviting us to be part of
these hearings. Good topic. Good issues. As you're aware, the
work that we'll be discussing today had its origins with a
request that we received from Mr. Armey last spring. He was
essentially interested in identifying potential regulatory tax
and liability barriers that concern private sector employers
who are considering establishing telecommuting programs. And in
July, we briefed Mr. Armey and several other Congressmen on the
results of that work, and what we'll be doing this morning
basically is summarizing that work and talking about its
application to the public sector.
But before I go on to the summary, I'm going to have to
admit that I'm going to have to use my glasses. Despite having
increased the size of the type, I still can't see it. It's
tough losing your eyesight.
In a nutshell, here's our bottom line. Perhaps the biggest
challenge to establishing and expanding telecommuting programs
in both the public and private sectors involve management's
concerns regarding the effect of telecommuting on the operation
of their particular organization. These concerns are not
necessarily new. They relate to assessing whether an employer
has the types of positions and employees that are suitable for
telecommuting, protecting proprietary and sensitive data, and
establishing cost-effective telecommuting programs. In short, I
don't think I can overemphasize the fact that the extent to
which telecommuting programs are established or expanded rest
in large part on a manager's belief, after having looked at all
of these concerns, that his or her organization's operations
are going to fundamentally benefit by establishing a
telecommuting program.
Now, apart from these management concerns, certain Federal
and State laws and regulations, including those that are
governing taxes, workplace safety, work force recordkeeping and
liability for home workplace injuries, can also act as
potential barriers to telecommuting for both the public and
private sectors. Of all the barriers that are related to the
laws and regulations, what we'd like to do today is focus your
attention on the one that we believe is a key emerging
challenge. That involves the applicability of State tax laws to
interstate telecommuting arrangements. Here the basic question
for the private sector involves possible increased State tax
liabilities for the employer and employee when an employee
telecommutes from a State other than the one in which the
employer is located. Similarly, from a public sector viewpoint,
interstate telecommuting arrangements could open up the
possibility of some States double-taxing the income of Federal
telecommuters.
Overall, the application of State tax laws to telecommuting
arrangements, as well as the application of other laws and
regulations that were enacted before our transition to a more
technological and information-based economy, is evolving, and
the ultimate impact of these laws and relations remains
somewhat unclear at this time.
Let me just conclude with some observations on the
implications of these barriers for the future of telecommuting.
To begin with, we need to acknowledge that telecommuting offers
a new set of opportunities that could benefit employers,
employees, and society as a whole. These have been mentioned
earlier in the hearings.
However, whether these opportunities are realized will
depend on resolving fundamental questions about how
telecommuting effects an employer's ability to manage employees
and other resources. As we noted earlier, some of those
questions deal with the suitability of telecommuting as a work
arrangement, as well as questions about data security and
overall costs. Knowing the extent to which these questions
apply to Federal agencies would provide important information
for making decisions about telecommuting by Federal workers.
This was referred to earlier by Representative Morella, trying
to get a handle on just how extensively these obstacles apply
to the Federal agencies.
Realizing the full potential of telecommuting also requires
that we look beyond internal management questions and concerns
to the laws that govern an organization's operating
environment. Some of these laws were put in place before we
could imagine a world in which employees lived in one State,
but, through technology, worked in another distant State. As a
result, these laws may unintentionally discourage
telecommuting. Further examining how current laws and
regulations could potentially impact telecommuters and their
employers would provide the opportunity to mitigate their
possible effects.
In conclusion, pursuing the question of how to promote
telecommuting is really a question of how to adapt current
management practices as well as laws and regulations to
changing work arrangements that are and will be part of the
information age in which we now live.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement, and I'll be
happy to answer questions at a later time.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. OK. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Robertson follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.017
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Ms. Jenkins.
Ms. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee,
I appreciate your invitation to come here today to discuss the
progress OPM has made since March in promoting telework within
the Federal Government. We take our role very seriously and are
intensely focused on fulfilling our responsibilities under
Public Law 106-346. On March 22nd, then acting OPM Director
Steve Cohen discussed plans for assessing the status of
telework in the Federal Government and the barriers agencies
confront as they move to increased telework participation.
Today, I will describe our activities since the March hearing,
as well as upcoming initiatives.
Agencies were surveyed in April, and the results were
included in the Interim Report on the Status of Telework in the
Federal Government. The survey identified 76 agencies that have
telework policies covering the majority of their employees.
Only 18 agencies reported having no telework policies. The
April survey indicates that the percentage of Federal employees
who telecommute at least 1 day per week has nearly doubled
since 1998, but the percentage is still small, 2.6 percent
today, compared to 1.4 percent in 1998.
The data reported in April reflect an undercount of actual
telecommuting practices within agencies. Some agencies were not
yet tracking regularly scheduled or ad hoc teleworkers. Other
agencies had no formal telework policies in place at the time
of our survey. Still others had only draft policies or were
modifying existing policies to comply with the public law.
We have contacted agencies that reported having no or only
draft policies in place in April, and considerable progress is
being made toward formalizing and fully implementing telework
policies. In addition, since April, OPM has engaged in a number
of activities to assist agencies in increasing their telework
participation. We shared best practices and aggressively
marketed telework. We provided agencies with our study, a
compendium of successful telework stories that illustrate how
Federal agencies have overcome common telework barriers.
In late June, OPM and GSA launched a joint Web site to make
it simple for agencies to acquire all the information they need
about teleworking in the Federal Government. We advised
agencies to consider all positions as appropriate for telework.
This positive analytical approach focuses managers' attention
on job characteristics for determining whether a position is
suitable for telework.
When the agencies report to us later this year, we will
have more reliable data to help refine calculations of actual
telework utilization. And although Federal agency progress has
been significant, much work remains to be done. Management
reluctance, employee fears are two major barriers to telework
implementation. Our next steps include a telework leadership
seminar for top-level agency officials in October, an Internet-
based training module by November to break down major telework
barriers, a satellite educational broadcast to Federal
facilities in November, a conference in January aimed at agency
supervisors and managers, and a telework guide for managers and
supervisors to be published in the fall.
Also in the fall, the Interagency Telework Issues Group,
which was formed in September 2000, will provide OPM and GSA
with recommendations in the areas of data security, computer
equipment, legal and procurement issues, human resource
management issues, health and safety, training and taxes. We
are also assisting agencies with assessing the impact of
telework on productivity, recruitment, work force stability,
and these demonstrated benefits should help to change the
perspectives of managers unconvinced that telework can assist
them with their human capital challenges.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that telework is good for business,
for employees and the environment, and thank you again for
inviting me, Mr. Chairman. I will be happy to respond to any
questions.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much. I appreciate
you being here.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jenkins follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.024
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Mr. Bibb, thanks for being with us.
Mr. Bibb. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and members of the
committee and subcommittee. I'm David Bibb from the General
Services Administration, and today I'll discuss GSA's telework
efforts within our own agency and our support of telework
governmentwide.
Telework, sometimes referred to as telecommuting, can be
defined as performing agency work outside of the primary office
facility. This includes working at home, in a telecenter or in
the field directly supporting customer agencies.
Public Law 106-346, which we've heard about this morning,
was enacted last fall. It requires each Federal agency to
establish a policy under which eligible employees of the agency
may participate in telework to the maximum extent possible
without diminished employee performance. GSA has established
that required policy. Our agency has a little over 14,300
associates in our work force. Approximately 12,000 of our
associates are eligible to telework, based on the broadest
interpretation of eligibility.
Under GSA's policy, 100 percent of these 12,000 eligible
persons may participate in telework, subject only to
concurrence by their supervisors that this won't diminish their
performance. Approximately 2,500 or 21 percent of GSA's
eligible associates telework on a regular or ad hoc basis.
Approximately 800 telework on a regularly scheduled basis 1 day
per week. An additional 200 telework on a regularly scheduled
basis 1 day per pay period, and we estimate another 1,500
telework on an ad hoc basis.
We are finalizing an electronic questionnaire to solicit
additional feedback from GSA associates about teleworking,
including more information about potential barriers to
increasing the telework participation level beyond the 21
percent that we now have, such as agency culture and managers'
apprehension.
In addition to telework, GSA also supports other programs
that help to reduce transportation congestion, energy
consumption and associated vehicle emissions. Approximately 59
percent of all GSA associates participate in the alternative
work schedule program. This gets those employees off the
highways 1 or 2 days per 2-week pay period. Also 29 percent of
our GSA associates participate in the transit subsidy program.
In addition to efforts within the agency, GSA supports
Public Law 106-346 on a governmentwide basis by its public
building service operation of telecenters and by its office of
governmentwide policy support of OPM's promotion of telework
governmentwide. GSA's Public Buildings Service has provided 15
telecenters in the metro Washington area. It offer a combined
total of 326 fully equipped workstations.
The telecenters--at this point, Mr. Chairman, I'd like--
some of the member numbers I will give you are slightly
different from my printed testimony, because we were working
with the center directors and completed updating them last
night. The telecenters currently serve 462 Federal teleworkers,
representing 19 executive branch agencies, and although
utilization over the years has followed a slightly downward
trend, center directors are now reporting a positive uptick in
usage. The current overall utilization rate is 55 percent; 45
percent of those are Federal workers. The other 10 percent are
private sector employees.
The centers as a group do lose money, and they're currently
being subsidized by GSA's Public Buildings Service Federal
Buildings Fund. However, it is possible as OPM works to carry
out the telework provisions of Public Law 106-346 that overall
increasing numbers of teleworkers in the Federal Government
will result in greater utilization of the telecenters. In fact,
our updated figures show that the number of Federal telecenter
users is up 11 percent since the law passed last fall. Center
directors also report an upsurge in inquiries by Federal
employees about potentially working in the centers. Since the
March 2001 telework hearing, our marketing efforts of the
telecenters have concentrated on improved signage, open houses,
telework training seminars, brochures and local newspaper ads.
Another role for GSA is in the policy arena. For example,
GSA's Office of Governmentwide Policy worked with OPM
associates to develop the one-stop Federal telework Web site
that's already been mentioned today.
In response also to a request from Congress, we recently
awarded a contract to identify technology barriers and
solutions for Federal home-based telework. The study we hope
will be done in early 2002.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate having the opportunity to
appear here today, and I'm prepared to answer any questions the
Members may have.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bibb follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.032
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Mr. Miller, thanks for being here.
Mr. Miller. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm Harris
Miller, president of the Information Technology Association of
America, representing 500 of the largest IT companies across
the United States, and I'm very pleased to let you know, Mr.
Chairman, that my son Derrick, who attended high school with
your son, helped to draft this testimony.
The simple message I have----
Mr. Davis of Virginia. If this is anything like his
graduation speech, it's going to be spectacular. Thank you very
much.
Mr. Miller. Very kind of you, Mr. Chairman.
The simple message is that 21st century work is no longer a
place, and those managers and those organizations who continue
to think that work means that you have to be in a certain place
at a certain time simply do not understand the realities of the
21st century.
Congressman Turner mentioned the figure of 2.6 percent of
Federal employees are telecommuting as opposed to about 10
percent in the private sector, but I would contend it even
understates how fast the private sector is moving, because if
you eliminate from the private sector jobs which cannot be
telecommuting, such as manufacturing and certain retail jobs,
in fact it's much higher in the private sector. It's probably
close to 20 percent now. So the Federal Government seems to be
falling even farther behind.
So my message to the Federal managers is--not to
blaspheme--let thy employees go. To me, the issue really is, to
a large extent, attitude. There are certain legal and
regulatory administrative barriers which have already been
mentioned, but basically it's psychological. One has to
understand that workers can be and, in fact, are frequently
more effective and more productive.
For example, AT&T teleworkers work 5 more hours per week at
home than AT&T office workers. JD Edwards, one of the largest
global software companies, teleworkers are 20 to 25 percent
more productive than their office counterparts. AT&T estimates
it saves over $3,000 annually per teleworker. Telework can cut
corporate real estate costs by 25 percent or more, and, of
course, teleworkers save substantial time by not being engaged
in a commute.
Also an interesting data point from AT&T's survey, 77
percent of employees working from home for AT&T reported much
greater satisfaction with their current career responsibilities
than before teleworking.
So we see the benefits are clear, more hours, more
productivity, cutting costs, saving time and psychologically
for the employees frequently much higher satisfaction, much
happier, much more productivity.
There's, of course, also the challenge for the managers,
and I admit myself to be a bit of a lay convert. I'm one of
those people who also believe that you need to manage people,
you need to see them. But I've come around and realized now
that many of my employees do now telework. They are very
productive. They are very much engaged, and I suggest the
Federal managers need to open their ears and eyes and minds to
this opportunity.
Let me talk about some of the other benefits that haven't
been discussed here very extensively. One of the big issues
that this Congress and our Nation is wrestling with is getting
more broadband into the homes. In fact, Congress has a big
debate potentially coming up here about that issue in the very
near future. One people--one factor people have not focused
enough on is the relationship between telecommuting and
broadband. In fact, as it turns out, if you look at people who
have broadband in the homes, that it's now only about 7 or 8
percent, which is pretty disappointing considering what we
expected in 1996 when we passed the Telecommunications Reform
Act. But it's interesting that about 80 percent of those people
are telecommuters. What that tells me is that if people have a
real reason to have broadband, they will get it, because it
affects their work.
Imagine a part of northern Virginia in Congressman Davis'
district or Congresswoman Morella's district or Congresswoman
Capito's district where it enabled you--a lot of Federal
employees who got together and negotiated broadband into their
neighborhood and reduced rates because they could be more
effective telecommuters, set up kind of a buying co-op that
would convince the cable company or the satellite company or
the telephone companies, the competitive local exchange
carriers to offer broadband because they knew they had a built-
in customer base because there are so many Federal employees
concentrated in Virginia, Maryland and West Virginia and other
places around Washington, DC. So there are some great
opportunities to drive more broadband.
Let me talk about a couple of other challenges, though. One
Congresswoman Morella mentioned, the information security
challenge. This is not just a challenge for the Federal
Government. It's a challenge for the private sector. We need to
make sure that if people are working at home, they have
information security. But another challenge is to make sure the
technology is current. You can't have one version of software
in the office and another version on the home computer. So the
challenge is to make sure that all the technology is kept
current, and that's something people are learning to live with.
The regulatory barriers were already mentioned by the
witness from GAO, so I won't go into them in great detail, but
certainly we share his concern about the taxation issue, home
deductions, and we certainly hope that we won't have a repeat
of that effort by OSHA a couple of years ago to think about
trying to regulate teleworking. I think everyone realized that
was a very silly idea and hope it's gone away.
One last issue I'd like to mention, Mr. Chairman, is
contractors. We're talking today primarily about Federal
employees, but keep in mind, a huge percentage of the IT work
is done for the Federal Government by IT contractors.
Contracting officers almost never allow the contractors to
allow their workers to telecommute because there is no specific
leadership from the Congress or from above, and that could also
provide the same kind of benefits we've been discussing. If an
IT worker is working for one of the major companies in the
Washington area or anywhere around the country that provides
services to the government, if they are encouraged to telework,
that provides the same benefits, cutting down on commuting
time, cutting down on pollution, increased productivity. But if
the contract officers have the mindset that the person who is
the contractor has to be sitting in a particular office at a
particular time from 8 to 6 every day, then you're not going to
get over this barrier. So, again, I believe it's psychological.
It may require legislation for Congress to direct the agencies
to do this, but right now I don't see any regulatory barriers.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you. Let me just add that we
are putting that in our bill, working with your groups and so
on, and that we'll be introducing a little later this session.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.039
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Mr. Straton, before I get to you,
Ms. Norton may have to go off to another hearing. I want to
allow her to make a few comments. She's tried to take a
leadership role in this area.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I thank
you for inviting me here to this subcommittee hearing. I'm a
member of the full committee, but not of this important
subcommittee. I am a member of the Transportation Committee,
and I regard this as a transportation issue and a major
transportation issue.
I very much thank Chairman Davis with whom I have worked so
closely on regional and District of Columbia issues for
focusing as he is on telecommuting. I'm very concerned at what
I can only call negligible progress in the Federal sector here.
I was very glad to hear about what GSA is doing. Clearly we
have a huge amount of unevenness here.
Mr. Chairman, I do have a suggestion as to what we might do
to clear up a lot of our transportation problems on which you
and I work so closely. Just have more of the residents of the
region understand that the way to countermand this
transportation problem is to do what so many of you are already
understanding you must do, and that is move to the District of
Columbia. You will not need telecommuting. You will not need
transportation. You will live in one of the variety of
beautiful neighborhoods in our town, and this problem will go
away. Now, inevitably, some of you will have to go to Fairfax.
Others of you will make your way to Montgomery. The only reason
they are there in the first place--when I was here--when I was
growing up----
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Ms. Norton, let me just join you. I
would particularly give that to my Democrats, a welcome to
move----
Ms. Norton. I'll take that, Mr. Chairman. I do want you and
my good friend Connie Morella, who chairs the District
Subcommittee, to know when I was a child growing up in the
District of Columbia, Fairfax and Montgomery were cow country,
and as far as those who live in the District of Columbia are
concerned, they still are. Montgomery and Fairfax is there only
because there was not enough room in the District of Columbia
for the entire Federal presence. The reason that Montgomery and
Fairfax have become so prosperous is because first of the
Federal presence, which then spawned everything else, including
the whole IT sector.
Seriously, though, we have a terrible national crisis. I
only hope some parts of the United States have done better than
we have in this region, because we are the poster child for a
transportation crisis, and we are sitting on our thumbs and
doing nothing about it. You would think, given the fact that
this part of the country is way ahead of other parts in IT,
that telecommuting would be far advanced here, and, in fact,
the opposite is the case. Traffic problems are sapping the
energy and the money out of this region. If, in fact, somebody
is looking where to locate, whereas normally locating near the
Nation's Capital or locating particularly in Montgomery or
Fairfax would have been prime places given the work force and
given the other advantages, this part of the country is
becoming just the opposite place now to come, and I think
places in the far West where there are equally good work
forces, where they have telecommuting further advanced and
where traffic is not a problem that it's become here are likely
to overtake us in competition.
If I may say so, Mr. Chairman, as a person who chaired a
Federal agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, I
believe that a--and concentrated on management and on reform of
the agency when I was there under President Carter, I believe
that the challenge really lies in management. Until management
understands how to supervise and hold employees accountable who
indeed are engaged in telecommuting, I don't think that there
is a great incentive for them to change the culture that, in
fact, has been a part of the culture of our country and of the
Federal Government forever. I don't think that they will know
how to do it on their own.
I was pleased to hear the OPM testimony, because I believe
you've got to begin at the top on this one. You've got to make
managers understand how to do it. We're not born into this
world knowing how to supervise people who work from home. We
know how to hold you accountable if you are sitting right under
our nose. This really envisions an entirely different way to
manage employees, and the Federal Government is way behind on
understanding that, because we have not given our own managers
who are very good at managing the tools to cross over from the
old industrial society management to the new management that a
technological society demands. And that is why I think the
chairman's leadership here in focusing us so that we come up
with true remedies--and I want to say, Mr. Chairman, if it
takes legislation, fine. I do believe the Federal Government is
quite capable of doing it with hearings like yours that involve
the kind of oversight that give the government the incentive to
move far more rapidly on telecommuting.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much, Ms. Norton.
Mr. Straton, thank you----
Mr. Straton. I'd like to ask you----
Ms. Norton. Mr. Chairman, I will be back. I'm going to
another hearing, but I will be back.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thanks.
Mr. Straton. With your permission, Mr. Chairman, after I
read my statement, I'd like to take about an additional 60
seconds and just show you some examples of what we're doing.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Good idea.
Mr. Straton. Mr. Chairman, ranking member, and other
members of the subcommittee, thank you for providing Siemens
the opportunity to discuss this experience as a pioneer and
leader in teleworking. Siemens is one of the oldest and largest
electronic companies in the world, operating in 192 countries.
In the United States we employ over 85,000 people in 700
locations with presence in each of the 50 States. At Siemens we
both use and sell teleworking technologies. Siemens views
teleworking simply as a means to allow for geographic
dispersion of the work force using electronically supported
communications and collaborations.
Siemens initially deployed teleworking because of
significant cost savings opportunities, but other benefits have
accrued over the years. As a result, teleworking became a
mainstream part of our business model in 1996. Today 20 percent
of our employees are full-time teleworkers, and roughly 40
percent are what we would call mobile workers.
Teleworking has enabled us to decrease our office space by
35 percent nationwide, resulting in annual cost savings of over
$3 million in the 3,000-person enterprise networks division
alone. Productivity increases of over 20 percent are typical,
with no decline in customer satisfaction. In addition, we have
grown to appreciate the benefits to our employees' families and
ultimately our communities.
Business benefits are measurable and recurring, from entire
departments to individual employees. Teleworking allows us to
retain high-performing employees who contribute beyond their
peers and enables us to help dual-income families. It also
allows us to recruit part-time workers with great talents who
previously had been unavailable to us, stay-at-home parents who
want to work while the kids are at school, or retirees who want
continued income and intellectual challenge. For example,
through teleworking, Siemens retained a high-performing
Virginia-based contracts administrator whose husband was
transferred to Texas. Instead of going through the exhaustive
and costly process of rehiring, retraining and agonizing over
whether the new hire could match the employee's standards,
Siemens placed her in the teleworking program.
While the Siemens business units continue to thrive with
such solutions, our employees also reap significant quality-of-
life benefits. We all are aware of the cost of living and the
choices families must make, PTA meeting or late-night project,
coaching Little League or overcoming deadlines. Successful
businesses realize that these concerns impact employees'
quality of work, tenure, loyalty and motivation.
Teleworking solutions can mitigate seemingly difficult
choices, because geography and time zones become transparent.
Businesses with telework programs can attract and retain the
best in a highly competitive environment. Society also benefits
from teleworking. The actions taken by hundreds of teleworkers
can reduce traffic congestion, energy consumption and
pollution, a practical, not wacko environmentalism.
Teleworking can present opportunities to improve the
quality of life for many Americans. For example, a key
individual in Siemens became ill with multiple sclerosis that
forced him to reconsider full-time employment. Teleworking came
to the rescue. He continued to share his intellectual capital
with his coworkers, impacting our business as if he were at his
desk 5 days a week.
Our teleworking success did not occur overnight. We had to
decide to adopt teleworking as a business practice using
technology to facilitate and management to enable. Siemens
faced some of the concerns identified in the recent GAO report
for the Honorable Dick Armey. The report cited management
concerns in key areas. The identification of employees in
positions suitable for teleworking, the security of sensitive
data and the ability to remotely monitor teleworkers, the
impact of teleworking on a business' profitability all are
valid concerns, and, coupled with liability and privacy issues,
they are at first glance significant hurdles to implementing
teleworking. But imagine, if you will, a three-story building
in an office complex ensnarled in nonstop traffic with over
25,000 square feet for 60 employees sitting at their desks in a
high-rent area. Day by day in sweltering summer heat or snowy
winter days, the workers commute in to receive calls from
clients seeking technical assistance. Now envision the same
group of workers dispersed in over 23 States, not worrying
about the road conditions or the issue of the latch-key
children. They continue to perform their jobs; in fact, are
more likely to process more calls, stay with Siemens and
maintain high customer satisfaction.
This is the new Siemens customer technical support center,
completely operated by teleworking agents. We now manage our
teleworkers in a variety of methods, including by objective, by
measurable and realtime data and by the traditional performance
measurements. The teleworking requires that managers be very
clear in job responsibilities and objectives and quick and
forthright in performance communications. Our technology allows
us to interact with our teleworkers by ensuring their business
numbers ring them at home, on their cell phone or in a hotel
environment. This flexibility allows our managers the
opportunity to maximize interworking with our teleworkers and
maximize the employee's opportunities to succeed.
As with any business practice, teleworking must be
evaluated through an ongoing dialog between management and
employee to ensure common business goals are achieved. In sum,
once acclimated, both management and employees simply view
teleworking as a way of doing business at Siemens and not an
individual privilege.
Mr. Chairman, we applaud your leadership in focusing
congressional attention on teleworking and its potential
benefits to government. We believe teleworking can help
incentivize Federal workers to stay in Government and can be
used as a recruiting tool. In addition, as Siemens has
demonstrated, teleworking programs can also reduce costs and
improve productivity.
We owe a debt of gratitude to Congressman Wolf for his
determined efforts to expand teleworking opportunities for both
public and private sector employees. We believe the Telework
Tax Incentive Act introduced by Congressman Wolf is also a
model to incentivize private sector organizations to implement
teleworking programs.
Siemens also recommends that the Federal Government look at
ways to partner with the private sector and consider pilot
programs that capitalize on the expertise and lessons of
private sector programs. After all, for most of human history,
people worked out of their homes. It is only recently with the
rise of industrial and information revolutions that large
centralized office complexes have become commonplace, and
commonplace only because communication and information were
bound to a single location. Now, today, communication and
information are not limited to single locations, because new
technologies have enabled a mobile and distributed work force.
For example, by 2002, there will be more mobile phones in the
world than wired phones, and by 2006, the Internet will be
accessed more by mobile devices than wire devices.
Recently there was a lot of publicity and consternation in
the press regarding the President's month-long vacation.
However, after having watched the coverage of this and many
Presidential vacations, I could not help but think to myself
that Presidents often telework, and being a marketing guy, I
couldn't also help but think what a PR opportunity it could
have been. If Presidents can telework with the most important
job in the world, why can't the average worker do it with maybe
just a little bit less responsibility?
Mr. Chairman, Siemens appreciates this opportunity to
discuss the issues confronting implementation of a teleworking
program. We are proud of the success of our program and feel
strongly that the teleworking business model can be transferred
to the public sector. We fully support your efforts to expand
teleworking opportunities.
With that, let me just very quickly show you a couple
pictures. This is just an example of a teleworker coming into
our Reston office. And you go into a computer, and you sign
into a cube. And, Tim, if you can show the next slide. And what
the teleworker sees is they see a schematic of the teleworking
area, and they click on the cube that they would like to have
for the day, and then their phone number and their PC all go
there.
Now, I think this is one of the most interesting pictures.
Rather than having filing cabinets, etc., the teleworkers have
cabinets, much like you would have in a high school, and they
go to the cabinets and they have some shelves there. You'll
often see pictures of their families, open cans of Coke, and
you can see that they have a cart. And I have an example of it
right here. Let me just walk around you for a second. And they
put their PC on the cart, and they roll the cart over to the
cube, and as you can see, this is a live cart. It was very
heavy to get here. Thank you very much, Tim. Full of things.
You'll see things, like I said, like pictures, personalization,
just like people would do in an office.
And then the next picture is just--it looks like a regular
office cube, because it is. The only difference is that the
telecommuters' phone automatically rings just like it was their
office all the time, and when they leave the office, their cell
phone automatically rings if they would like it to, just like
if you called their office number.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you. Thank you very much. That
was a good spin on the President's vacation. The President's
telecommuting initiative. You ought to let Ari Fleischer know
about that.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Straton follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.046
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Mr. Milkovich, thank you.
Mr. Milkovich. Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee on
Technology and Procurement Policy, I thank you for your
invitation to speak here today on issues relating to commercial
real estate solutions for the private sector, specifically as
it relates to teleworking. I'm going to work between two sets
of paper here. One is my written testimony, and then the other
is to address some of the questions that were submitted to me
in the invitation letter dated August 27, 2001 from the
Chairman.
I would like to say thank you to Mark. Having been on a
plane quite a bit lately, I thought this was a self-
administered beverage cart. So I'm glad to know I have seen
these, though, with the work in the----
Mr. Straton. Some days it is.
Mr. Milkovich [continuing]. Private sector.
Again, I am Robert Milkovich, managing director for
CarrAmerica, and I would like to give just a quick history on
CarrAmerica Realty Corp. We are a publicly traded real estate
investment trust [REIT]. We were born out of the Oliver Carr
Co. in 1993. Many of you in the NCR region know the Oliver Carr
Co., which has operated here for over 40 years. Currently, we
are in 12 markets across the country. We have 287 buildings
that total well over 20 million square feet of commercial
office space.
I bring this to your attention because in 1997, we saw
quite a movement for the alternative workplace solution in the
private sector. With that, our research and data that we
collected, we invested in HQ Global Workplaces, essentially an
executive suites operator. Concurrent to that, we piloted a
target program called NOWSPACE in Atlanta, GA, and that
essentially was turnkey office space which included the
furniture, fixtures and equipment that people could come in and
what we would determine as plug and play. You could essentially
contract for the space on a Friday and be up and running on a
Monday. This program was successful enough that we also
deployed those efforts into the Dallas market as well. We find
that the drivers behind this were the need for speed, growth,
flexibility and low capital expenditure to entry. It also
helped in employee recruitment and retention, to highlight a
few items. I offer this as a background insofar as our company
is concerned because we see a trend in the private sector.
Another case study that I would like to utilize is what we
refer to as the Schwab Hotel experience. In an effort to meet
the demands of a longstanding customer, we built, operated an
office hoteling facility for Charles Schwab in Walnut Creek,
CA. This facility was opened to meet the needs of the employee
base at Schwab that lives north and northeast of San Francisco
and battles traffic congestion into the city. The space is
equipped with FF&E and a sophisticated reservation software
system to allow employees to schedule and manage their time
more efficiently. The reservation system has the ability to
track and report on space utilization. This attribute is
paramount to management for controlling costs and monitoring
the work force. Now, the employee-manager relationship can be
tracked electronically, and communication can be made simple.
Another powerful attribute of this facility is the
capability for employee recruitment and retention. Equally
important, this modern technology promotes the seamless
integration of the employee's workspace at a variety of places.
The experience enables employees to work from a multitude of
locations, thus spending less time commuting and more time
productively at work. The benefits are endless, supporting the
Clean Air Act and other responsibilities that corporations must
meet in today's competitive world.
The economic benefits are substantial. Most telework and
hoteling programs strive to capture a minimum ratio of one
workspace per two employees. This in simple math can result in
a cost savings in annualized rent of as much as 25 percent. In
fact, most of the insurance companies that we have interviewed
target 33 percent as a goal. For large private sector space
users, this can have a substantial impact to the bottom line.
Let me address a couple of the items that were in the
invitation letter. One was managerial barriers that we have
encountered in the private sector that we have identified. One
is managing from a distance for employers. That is obviously a
big cultural issue, and we also see it from the employee's
standpoint. Employees' concern about career path and being
connected to the organization. Certainly technology can help to
bridge this gap, but there is that old style of management that
still believes in out of sight is out of mind. This also calls
to question should people work from home or a third place such
as a telework center.
Another issue that I address in your letter is the private
sector implementation, two other cases that I will bring to
bear here. One is Aetna. As an example, they have instituted a
program whereby claims processors can work from home, managers
can easily monitor the number of claims processed, and the
benefit to the company is less office space. I think this is a
particular situation that addresses how private sectors can
monitor the workload.
You also have the most successful model that has been out
there in the private sector, and that is large accounting firms
that are practicing and perfecting this type of business model
for years. The genesis of this success is due to the nature of
the work. To be profitable they must have employees in the
clients' offices, requiring less office space for themselves.
Telecommuting offers significant benefits to the private
sector, and those are obvious in space reduction, flexibility,
employee recruitment and reduction.
Concurrently, or in conclusion, I should say--I am looking
at the clock now. My apologies. In conclusion, teleworking in
the private sector is an effective tool in use by many
companies for employee recruitment and retention and offers an
economic benefit. Thank you.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Milkovich follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.051
Mr. Davis of Virginia. We are going to start with
questions. I will start with Mrs. Capito.
Mrs. Capito. Thank you.
I believe, Mr. Robertson, you may be able to answer this
question. In thinking of the telecenter in Jefferson County
where I mentioned there were seven folks who have been on the
waiting list for quite a while to try to telecommute at least 1
day a week, from a variety of different agencies, now when you
look at a private company, lots of times they will have, you
know, a structure where there is a personnel office that is,
you know, handling all of these kind of concerns. Do you see
that one of the problems is the variety and the vast
differences between the different agencies in the Federal
Government, that is one of the stumbling blocks, or is it
something else?
Mr. Robertson. We didn't specifically look at telecommuting
centers, but I imagine that when you have several different
Federal agencies working out of the same center with several
different sets of rules and regulations, you know, they can act
as obstacles to making the most efficient use of that
telecenter.
Mrs. Capito. Well, may I ask then, Mr. Straton from
Siemens, in your telecommuting experience are all the rules and
regulations centered in one personnel office, or is it done
through the different departments?
Mr. Straton. Yeah. We have learned a lot about how to do
it, and there is actually in the handouts that we have a good
overview of some of the policies, so we have pretty explicit
agreements with each teleworker. Now, one of the things that we
do differently and is a problem that we encountered is
teleworking--employees love it, so they are like, OK, I want to
telework 2 days a week, but what they want to have is they want
to have an office fully functioning, and then they want you to
have a fully staffed office at their home. So one of the things
that we had to do is you can't be both. You make a choice. It's
either an office worker or a teleworker. And that doesn't mean
you wouldn't allow somebody to telework a day a week or
something like that, but you are not going to pay for both as a
company because the driver for the company is productivity and
cost savings, and I think those are the right drivers for the
government as well.
So I would say that yes, we have common practices we
differentiate between teleworkers and office workers. And the
other thing is that teleworkers, they still need that
community, and so that is why I think the hoteling concept that
I showed you is specific to in this particular case a sales and
engineering function so that when they do come in, they do get
together. So I think that is something you have to think
through because the communications when you are dispersed
becomes key.
Mrs. Capito. That is the end of my questions. Thank you.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. OK. Thank you.
Mrs. Morella.
Mrs. Morella. You know, it comes down to leadership, a
belief, a commitment to doing what is right, trust. This
reminds me of our Y2K, Mr. Miller, the whole concept of the
need to trust, and then it comes down to security also. And I
just wondered if--maybe I will start off with Mr. Robertson. If
you would indicate what you have seen with regard to the
security issue.
Mr. Robertson. Well, we have talked about it already this
morning. I think the point has been made that the security
issues are big in the public and private sector, even before
you throw in telecommuting to the mix. And when you throw in
telecommuting, and you are talking about accessing possibly an
organization's central data base, then, you know, you raise the
level of concern. And there are people who can talk more about
how to build firewalls and so on and so forth. But it is an
issue in both the public and private sector.
I am not sure, you know, what the solution is or if there
is an easy solution beyond using the technology as best as
possible to secure that data, but there could be simple ways of
addressing some of the security concerns, too, just through--
and this is very nontechnical--but basically having in the
Federal Government, for example, making sure that all workers
were aware of how to handle sensitive data, and making sure
that all Federal workers who are telecommuting in particular
understood what to do and how to handle this type of data. And
it may in some cases, require that there be some limits on the
use of certain types of sensitive data by Federal
telecommuters.
Mrs. Morella. You know, one thing I noted in listening to
the wonderful testimony that each and every one of you
presented, I don't think there is any partnerships going on or
any sharing of best techniques or standards or practices with
the public sector and the private sector. I mean, we hear from
ITAA and from Siemens and CarrAmerica about how teleworking is
succeeding. It seems to me there should be more of a sharing.
Would any of you like to comment on whether there are any
attempts to do that and whether or not you think this is a
stellar idea that we should develop further?
All right. Mr. Bibb.
Mr. Bibb. I would just say from the standpoint of GSA,
yeah. It is a great idea, and we are trying our best to do
that. We are prime members of the International Telework
Association and Council, which is a joint partnership of
private sector firms and the Federal Government. In fact, we
are trying to do that in many of the arenas where we operate.
And our Web site which we have talked about, the joint OPM-GSA
Web site, does contain the best practice success stories and
that sort of thing.
So, yes, it makes all the sense in the world, you are
absolutely right, to learn from the private sector firms, and
we think vice versa in some cases.
Mrs. Morella. And you may want to have an exchange of
people, too. I mean, they may want to go visit and see how it
is working. Do you want to comment on that, Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. I would agree from the private sector
standpoint. I was very interested to hear Ms. Jenkins comment
about the telework leadership seminar. If there is some role
for the private sector to play in that in terms of giving some
examples, companies like Siemens could testify about their
success, if that is helpful, to give real-world examples.
Let me go back to your first question, Congresswoman
Morella, about the security. I think that is an excuse, not a
reason, for telecommuting. I certainly agree with what Mr.
Robertson says. There are myriad challenges, but as we know
from where the government itself already is when they are not
telecommuting, they are pretty far behind in information
security, the recent GAO report on Department of Commerce just
being one very glaring example of how the government is behind.
There is no intrinsic reason though the telecommuters,
whether they are telecommuting from a telecenter that
Congressman Capito talked about or telecommuting from their
home, that they cannot be properly outfitted with the
technology and the people and the processes to secure
information. Obviously there are some types of jobs that are so
sensitive that you would never want to have anybody outside the
building, but for most of the government work force we are
talking about, I don't see any obstacles whatsoever that can't
be overcome fairly straightforwardly.
Mrs. Morella. Can be overcome.
Did you want to comment on that Ms. Jenkins?
Ms. Jenkins. Yes, please. As far as partnering with the
private sector, we have done a lot of work with AT&T since
their testimony here in March. They participated with us within
a strategic planning session, acting as our advisors and
consultants on how we can help the agencies comply with the
public law, and we are continuing to partner with them. We have
learned a great deal from AT&T. They have helped us to expand
our thinking about how we can increase the number of
teleworkers. They have talked to us about training efforts that
they found to be appropriate, and we have adopted many of their
philosophies.
And as far as our upcoming leadership conference, we do
plan to extend an invitation to both Siemens and AT&T. We think
that it is important for agency leaders to hear firsthand about
how telework can actually work and help them with their human
capital issues.
And on the issue of security, we have a number of things
that we have been doing at OPM. We have had many conversations
with the Federal CIO Council, particularly the security
committee, on how we can perhaps establish some governmentwide
guidance for agencies to use. We encourage agencies to include
the security officials on their planning team when they are
establishing telework policies. We also encourage managers to
precede a telework arrangement by addressing security issues
with their employees, and ensuring that they have up-to-date
virus protection and proper firewall software on their
computers. Thank you.
Mrs. Morella. I thank you.
And I know my time has elapsed, but I just want you to
think, Mr. Bibb, about the fact that you have 100 percent
participation in Frederick, MD. Are there particular factors
there that you don't find in Montgomery County, MD, where we
could establish such a record?
Mr. Bibb. Well, as you know, we are going to be taking a
look at the feasibility of a couple of centers in Montgomery
County, MD. I don't have answers to that, but that will
certainly be some of the items we are looking at as to whether
we can make a go of it. We will be responding to the report
language in the House appropriation bill and giving you a full
report on how those compare.
Mrs. Morella. Splendid. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you.
Let me just note that our colleague Mr. Moran has just
joined us, another strong champion of telecommuting here in the
Washington suburbs.
Jim, do you want to make any statement at this point?
Mr. Moran. It is not necessary. I am sure that anything
profound and constructive has already been said that could be
said from the dais, so----
Mr. Davis of Virginia. I think I got most of that in my
opening statement.
Mr. Moran. I trust you did. And certainly Mr. Turner had a
statement. I am sure that covered it as well.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Well, we finished the panel. And let
me ask a few questions as we go through the panel.
First of all, great testimony. Let me start; we have heard
a great deal about the need for incentives to promote telework.
As you know, Mr. Wolf has introduced the Telework Tax
Initiative Act. In Virginia, Governor Gilmore introduced the
Telework Virginia, a public-private matching program to provide
financial incentives to Virginia businesses to start or expand
existing telework programs.
Can any of you think of any incentives that could encourage
Federal agencies and employees to embrace telecommuting more
fully? And let me just say, we are working on our CERA bill
coming out of this committee that will, I think, enhance
Federal contractors, Mr. Miller, with what you suggested,
allowing them to use more telecommuting in what they are doing.
A lot of this is managerial, and managers are just not
comfortable; they are in the old paradigm. But having heard
AT&T's testimony last time and what Siemens and Carr have done
shows us that the private sector has found this to be excellent
for recruiting and retention.
Mrs. Norton mentioned the traffic situation. It has many
good elements if we can learn to utilize it correctly. But are
there more incentives that we can give you at the Federal level
to make it more palatable so we could move this faster? We have
used the stick. I mean, I think Mr. Wolf's legislation was kind
of the stick. We give you deadlines and so on.
Mr. Miller. I think in the private sector the incentives
are--frequently simply are strictly financial. You simply say
to a manager, here is a way to save money. It was covered in
testimony from my colleague on the left about Siemens, the
savings in real estate, the more productivity out of the
workers, and obviously it is much tougher in the Federal
Government where you don't have as many bonus systems. But
there are SES bonuses given based on various performance
factors, and this could be looked at perhaps as one element of
the incentives for managers to save money in terms of making
the work force more productive, and that may incent them to
promote more telecommuting.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. And I would think from a parking
perspective and some of these problems around some of the
buildings where you have it up, it could help on all of those
kind of things.
Mr. Straton and then Mr. Milkovich.
Mr. Straton. Yeah. I just want to echo what Harris said. I
think if you look at Siemens as a model, IBM also is another
good model, what drove both these companies was cost. We were
under intense competitive pressure, and we had to reduce our
expenses, and because it is difficult to ask managers to
change, it is difficult to manage in a distributed environment,
it takes different skills. You have to do different things.
So, you know, the one thing that you could do, I think, to
get it really widespread within the Federal Government and then
I think it has a ripple effect into the private sector is you
just simply tell them that they have to reduce their real
estate expenses, and the rest will follow. But people don't
change unless they have to.
Mr. Milkovich. Let me submit, obviously we have talked
about the backbone being cultural, technological, you know, the
kind of social benefits, if you will, I think, from the private
sector, Mr. Straton is on, that there has to be an underlying
economic benefit. It has to be a reduction in space. It has to
be a better efficiency on occupancy levels and use of space.
I think that the Federal Government is in an enviable
position in the sense that you control a substantial amount of
leasehold interests, so you have a lot of room to make those
type of moves. I am not sure I am correct on this, so it is
almost a statement in the way--formed in a question, and that
is, if a particular department is able to reduce its real
estate costs, if there is a way that they could see that
benefit to their department, it would be recorded or somehow
recognized for that department, I think you would see a
stronger shift toward teleworking.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. OK. Let me ask--sure. Ms. Jenkins.
Ms. Jenkins. All the things that were stated I think are
important incentives, and I think the Federal Railroad
Administration is a good example to follow relative to the
space reduction and the incentive to encourage managers to
allow more employees to telecommute.
In addition to what has been said, and it sort of follows
upon what has been said, is that it seems to me the most
important and critical incentive is tying telecommuting to the
business needs of an organization, and that would also include
the human capital challenges that managers are feeling right
now with a potential huge numbers of employees about to retire;
that utilizing telework as a retention strategy, utilizing
telework as a recruitment tool to gain the best and the
brightest college graduates into the public service are real
incentives for managers, and that is what it is that we are
trying to do at OPM is trying to get that word out and really
tie the impact of telecommuting to the business of an
organization.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. It just seems that right now we are
getting the worst of all worlds. We are not getting any office
space reduction from this plan yet because we just don't have
the penetration in the work force that we ought to have. And
yet we are spending money for these telecommuting centers. So
it is really a net cost right now. And the reaction we tend to
get is, ``I guess we have to do it. Congress wants us to do it.
And we really don't understand what it can do for our work
force and for other things.''
But when you listen to Siemens and you listen to Carr and
you listen to IBM and you listen to AT&T and some of these
private companies and how it is helping them in their business
plan, you feel like you ought to do a seminar with some of your
managers and show them what the possibilities are.
Ms. Jenkins. Yes. And that is exactly what we intend to do.
There is really good data out. AT&T particularly has done a
cost-benefit analysis relative to the impact of telecommuting
on productivity, and we plan to push that information out. The
Internal Revenue Service, an aspect of the Internal Revenue
Service has done a cost-benefit analysis which we intend to
help them market. It is wonderful to talk about the money that
can be saved when you don't have to recruit for individuals
that leave your organization. It's estimated between 93 and
100--150 percent of annual salary is spent on recruiting, and
we need to translate that into dollar figures for Federal
agencies. So that is something that we are planning to do, not
only in our October leadership conference, but also in our
January conference where we really get to the managers and the
supervisors.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. OK. Sure. Mr. Bibb.
Mr. Bibb. Just to make one point. On the space reduction, I
don't want to leave the impression that this is a space
reduction program. I have done a lot of interaction with the
private sector, and in some companies it may result in space
reduction. In others it may not result in space reduction at
all, but it may result in getting the job done better. It may
result in much lower turnover rate, the ability to attract and
retain good employees.
So the whole thing, from my perspective, is it is about the
business. How do you best get the business done. How do you
offer the associates or employees the best range of a
combination of working in the office, working at home, working
in the field and linking that all together with the technology.
And that calls for a lot of careful planning, a lot of thinking
and a lot of willingness to make those options available.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Well, there are many benefits. And I
think, as you say, you don't employ this with one thing in
mind.
But, clearly, on recruiting and retention, we find some
specific examples in the testimony today about people who you
can get into the business and you can retain them because they
can spend more time at home with their families and do other
things. That is something, with the Federal Government spending
as much as money it does recruiting and retaining people, that
is a plus.
Also, you will get some space reduction, obviously, with
your work force; and you walk through Siemens and you see it.
Third, traffic reduction. This helps people who aren't
telecommuting by getting a few cars off the road. It is much
cheaper over the long term to move cars off the road than it is
building new highways. That is a byproduct. It is not the
reason we are doing this, but it can be a significant
byproduct.
Also, on very bad days, an employee might get off down in
Dale City in my district or out in Reston or out in West
Virginia, see what the traffic is like and say, ``This could be
a long day today,'' and they can telecommute on that given day.
And fourth is something that we haven't talked enough about
but it was mentioned in the testimony today and that is
productivity increase. The fact of the matter is that people
who telecommute are working after their 40-hour weeks, are
working more hours at home than employees who don't
telecommute. It is a cultural change, and their job can become
part of their life this way but not interfere with the other
parts of their life.
So those seem to me to be really significant benefits.
I have more questions, but let me ask my friend, Mr. Moran,
if he would like to ask any questions at this point.
Mr. Moran. Thank you, Tom.
I appreciate you holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman; and
for all of the reasons that you just listed it is imperative
that we find the obstacles to expansion of telecommuting and
then find ways to address those, overcome those. So I would
like to bring up two such potential barriers.
First of all, in terms of the Federal Government, I want to
ask Mr. Bibb and Ms. Jenkins to comment on the security aspect.
Because in northern Virginia, for example, the largest Federal
employer by far is the Department of Defense. Yet my sense is
that the telecommuting that goes on within the Defense
Department is pretty limited, and my--I would guess that, if we
pushed them, the first thing they would come up with is
security. We can't compromise the data that our employees are
dealing with. Then, of course, normally we would be intimidated
into--or at least inhibited from pursuing that any further.
I would like for you to address that aspect of the security
of information that is dealt with when you are using home
computers. Obviously, we have had some very public examples of
some of our chief executives in intelligence agencies, for
example, compromising intelligence that they had available
through their home computers, and that became a problem. So I
would like to see how you would address that.
And let me just give an opportunity for the private sector
people to think about the second thing, which is the Tax Code
and how the Tax Code is related to telecommuting, both the tax
advantages, potentially, for individuals, but also some of the
complications. For example, if there are two State income tax
regimes that you might have to deal with if you are
telecommuting. So I just want to get you prepared for that.
And Mr. Bibb and Ms. Jenkins.
Ms. Jenkins. Well, certainly, within the Defense
Department, I agree that the security issue is the biggest
obstacle there. At 0.5 percent of the work force telecommuting
right now, or as of April, that is a huge obstacle to overcome.
Some of the things that we are doing in OPM to help
overcome the governmentwide obstacle to security is working
with the Federal CIO Council and the Security Committee to come
up with some ideas that will help us to help agencies such as
Defense overcome this concern of theirs.
We also already have a number of pieces of guidance that we
have provided to the agencies to help them to overcome some of
the security concerns that they have, such as making sure that
they have the proper firewall protection and virus updates and
simple things like, if your computer is home, make sure it is
secure and away from your children so that there aren't any
accidents that might occur while the computer is at home. Those
simple things we are publicizing to the agencies so think
about.
Coupled with that is that when agencies plan their
telecommuting programs they must include a variety of
stakeholders and individuals within the organization to help
plan the program and some of the most important people are the
security officials and to identify how they can overcome some
of the security obstacles that--and to prevent problems. So we
realize that, particularly for the Defense Department, their
culture is such that they are more concerned about the security
issue than perhaps some other agencies and we need to work
perhaps personally with them to help them overcome some of
their obstacles.
Mr. Moran. You began your response by noting that only one-
half of 1 percent of the largest agency in the Federal
Government has any telecommuting going on.
Ms. Jenkins. Yes, sir. A lot of work to do.
Mr. Moran. Yes. I wonder if it isn't to some extent a
generational thing, too, in terms of management wanting hands-
on control over employees. But, Mr. Bibb, unless you have
something to add to Ms. Jenkins' very comprehensive and very
good response, informative response, let me ask Mr. Miller
about the tax implications of telecommuting in the private
sector.
Mr. Miller. Could I first address your first question, Mr.
Moran?
I think that we have to make a bit of a distinction here,
because telecommuting frequently blends together two concepts.
There is telecommuting from home and there is telecommuting
from telecenters which are controlled by the government in one
way or another, either directly or through contracting with a
private vendor. And it seems to me that even in the most severe
security concerns of the Defense Department at least many of
these telecenters can be just as secure in terms of protecting
the information technology, the data, etc., as they are if they
were coming into the Pentagon or some other Defense Department
building that is immediately approximate to the Defense
Department. So it seems to me that this can be a bit of a bogus
issue.
If the issue really is legitimately concerned about
security and we don't want people taking things home,
nevertheless they still may be able to work at a telecenter in
Dale City or some other relatively remote location, and so we
need to make that distinction. I think it is very important.
Mr. Moran. I appreciate that, Mr. Miller. But, of course,
these telecenters in the long run are going to be only a
marginal amount. I suspect the most telecommuting is going to
take place at the home if it is really effective. Because to
get to a telecenter that has a sufficient critical mass of
employees and resource equipment, supplies and so on, it is--
you have a transportation hassle there, anyway. So, I mean, if
you are coming from, you know, south of Springfield and trying
to get into the Springfield mixing bowl where we have a
telecenter, we have defeated the purpose in large part.
But I do think there is a security issue with home
computers, where the individuals use that computer for personal
use as well. And when you can attach cookies on your--on banner
ads and so on, it seems to me it is pretty easy to then access
information that is being used for work. I mean, it may be my
ignorance, but I don't know how you buildup sufficient
firewalls to prevent--to separate your personal usage and
official usage.
Mr. Miller. Actually, it is not. I mean, the technology is
there; and the technology has been developed to a large extent
for exactly the reason that telecommuting has become so popular
in the private sector. And the private sector is no less
worried than the public sector is about data being compromised
when it is used by telecommuters.
The trick is not whether the technology exists or not. The
technology does exist. The trick is to make sure people
implement it.
As you know, part of the problem is that people don't
always update their technology. They don't always make sure
that they have the latest anti-virus software. They don't make
sure that the firewalls are current. So part of the big
challenge here is again a management challenge.
It is one thing to tell people that the technology is
available, which means that people can't come in through remote
locations and access data bases if they do A, B and C. It is
another thing to make sure they do A, B and C.
Mr. Moran. And it is not just the employees'
responsibility; it is the employers' responsibility to instruct
them.
Mr. Miller. Absolutely. Fortunately, there are monitoring
systems. There are technologies available and companies that
specialize in monitoring to make sure that both central
locations and remote locations are following the procedures. So
you do have to in a sense put another layer of protection on.
You would have to have some kind of monitoring system to make
sure that the telecommuter would have his or her computer
monitored. And if the monitoring service found out that they
hadn't updated their firewall or hadn't updated their software
or whatever was necessary to protect the information technology
then basically it would cut that telecommuter off until he or
she had updated that technology to the appropriate levels of
security.
But I don't think the vulnerabilities are quite as high as
you might be imagining if the corporation or the government do
everything possible to use the latest technology that is out
there.
Mr. Moran. Well, invariably, if there is a will there is a
way. Although I suspect that this is one area where our defense
and intelligence agencies are going to find an easy excuse not
to do anything.
Mr. Miller. On the tax issue, I certainly agree with you,
Mr. Chairman; and I notice that the GAO mentioned--or Mr.
Moran, rather, mentioned this in his testimony also, that this
whole tax liability and multi-State jurisdiction--as you know,
we have 7,500, approximately, taxing jurisdictions. It is
particularly a challenge for small businesses because they are
not used to having to pay employees in all types of
jurisdictions. They are used to, in most cases, just having
employees in one jurisdiction. Also, some States are now trying
to use the presence of employees as an excuse to set up what is
a so-called nexus which, as you know, is a big issue in terms
of interstate taxation.
So it is something that is potentially going to become a
problem as more and more small businesses--most large
businesses, frequently they already have employees in multiple
jurisdictions. So it is a pain, but it is a pain they are used
to dealing with. But when you are talking about a small
business and trying to incentivize them, the tax--multiple
taxing issue can be a problem.
Mr. Moran. Well, a clever business, or at least a business
with clever accountants could easily locate their--if it is a
business that buys supplies and equipment and so on on line,
they could simply locate their employees in those jurisdictions
that have the lowest sales tax regime and maximize the
opportunity through telecommuting.
But did you want to add something, Mr. Straton?
Mr. Straton. I don't really have much to add. The only
thing I would say is you would take the Defense Department--I
mean, when these guys are on the battlefield or, you know, out
doing practice sessions they are communicating. They are
teleworking. I mean, you have a very small subset--or it is
small, but you have a subset of employees that have very, very
secure information. They clearly should be in a secure
environment. But you have a whole other subset that, you know,
they are ordering supplies or whatever it is. It just doesn't
matter.
So, as it relates to us, my view would be for secure--you
know, there is janitors come in and clean things at night.
Stuff is not locked up, PCs not turned off. You are probably
more secure at home. I don't know what a 3-year-old is going to
do with confidential Siemens software information. So I don't
think it is a big issue. I think it is a big excuse, to be
honest.
Now, as it relates to the government, I mean, and the
taxation for us, it has not been a problem. I think the
companies gaming the system, as you stated, needs to be thought
through; and I think you have to make sure the company is not
in a position or the employers are not in a position when they
are paying taxes to multiple States.
I think that the Wolf idea of a tax incentive to jump-start
this thing is a good idea. I think a better idea, though, is to
have the government take a leadership role at the senior
levels. I think with all the government agencies you just say
that, you know, over a certain period of time you have got to
have 10 percent less real estate; and I guarantee you, you
will. And you will probably have better results and everything
else.
Yes, what other private sector issues? You just have to
make sure that the laws for liability, privacy and performance
issues don't penalize the companies. I will give you an
example.
One of the--you know teleworking is not a right. And I have
had that problem in my own department where we actually had a
secretary who teleworked. Circumstances changed, and she had to
come back in. And so, needless to say, she got upset. So my
point is that, in the performance things, you can have the
exact same job and two different people and that job can--one
of those people can telework and one of them can't. And there
is a lot of factors that come into it--whether they have small
kids at home, how responsible they are with their performances.
So that is an area that I am probably the most nervous
about being penalized as an employer, because it becomes a
fairness issue, for example. But it really comes down to can
the job telework and does their performance allow them to
telework.
Mr. Moran. Thank you. Oh----
Mr. Milkovich. I will just add real quickly on the two
jurisdictional tax issue. I think it hits at the heart of
recruitment; and it could potentially, depending on the
company, hit at the heart of recruitment and retention. And I
think private sector companies today are starting to view
teleworking as part of a standard offering, much like a 401(k)
plan or medical benefits. Many people are asking about
teleworking today.
Let me digress for 1 quick second just to say that when I
talk about space efficiencies it is not always as if the glass
is half empty. I also think that teleworking is a very potent
tool to manage your growth. As agencies grow, that can't
acquire the space fast enough, teleworking is an excellent tool
to facilitate the growth.
Mr. Moran. That is a very good point. I didn't ask anything
of GAO because your report is so extensive, comprehensive. You
have done a good job at looking at all the problems.
Mr. Robertson. May I make an observation, anyway?
Mr. Moran. Sure.
Mr. Robertson. I guess this goes back--you know, we have
been talking, and it is not on the tax issue so much as the
data security issue that we have been--seem to come back to
several times during the hearings. I am just--to me, that whole
discussion is it an issue, is it an issue is a great
illustration of what, I think, Representative Morella was
talking about at the beginning. And that basically had to do
with, you know, we have really got to get a really good handle
on the extent to which these management obstacles that we have
talked about as GAO and as a group today exist in each
individual Federal agency. I think that should be a prime
action area for OPM, basically.
Mr. Moran. That is true. Thank you very much.
Chairman Davis, thank you again for having this hearing and
for the generous time you allotted for the questions and
responses.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. Thank you.
I have just a couple of questions.
First of all, at the GSA, you have gotten beyond, I think,
to some extent, managers' fear of letting employees work
outside the workplace. But that seems to be the major paradigm
that we need to move. How do you manage if you can't see the
people? It seems to me that is our biggest obstacle for
managers. How have you gotten beyond it? What do we need to do
to change that?
We have seen, you know, from the testimony of the private
sector how they have moved well beyond that and are actually
being more productive.
Mr. Bibb. Well, I think we--we haven't totally gotten
beyond it. They are still plenty of supervisors who have some
distrust. But, yes, our numbers are good, and it has been a
combination of things.
One is our continued emphasis that this is a way of getting
the work done, that it makes sense for both the supervisor and
the employee. If it does make sense, then there ought to be
teleworking.
Second way is to continue to discuss with our supervisors
that you measure the work the same way you measure the work
when they are in the office. You set performance targets and
they are hit or they are not. And if they are not then you have
the same performance discussion.
In my own case, half of my associates telework, and they
are held to the same standards as any others. So that is the
basic way you are able to monitor the performance.
I think the other piece--and have good, sound policies in
place. The other piece is cultural, and it does in part come
from the top with the recognition that this is a viable way to
work. It will be supported and where it makes sense we will go
after it.
So it is a combination of having the right policies in
place, common sense approach and top management support.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. OK. I think that is all the
questions. Let me just ask about the OPM tracking system that
we are working on, imperfect at this point. What are we doing
to try to improve it and get a good baseline?
Ms. Jenkins. Well, the tracking system that we are working
on governmentwide is under the auspices of the Human Resource
Data Network, which is a system that will streamline and
improve reporting and eliminate paper records within human
resource offices. So we have already established data elements
that can be included in either the government's payroll or
personnel systems that would be able to track the number of
teleworkers.
We won't be able to get that system in place as quickly as
we would like--hopefully in 2002. But I am not sure at this
point that it will happen in 2002. Meanwhile, we are providing
agencies with some guidance, and many of them are taking our
guidance.
For example, the Defense Department has decided that one of
the ways that it is going to help with its tracking system is
to require all telecommuters to be on agreements, even their ad
hoc episodic telecommuters. That will help them to better
track. Other agencies are doing something similar, and there
are even other agencies that are requiring their various
departments to report to them monthly so that they can get used
to the fact that they are going to have to be reporting their
teleworkers on a regular basis and to help them to establish
and refine their current tracking system. So it is an issue
that we are addressing governmentwide.
But we have also seen significant progress within the
agencies because they fully understand that there is a
requirement to report to OPM on their progress and they are
making strides in establishing and refining their tracking
systems.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. OK. Thank you.
Let me just ask one other question. Are there any union
issues on this where you have to renegotiate to try to do this
kind of thing? Any prohibitions under agreements that anybody
is aware of?
Ms. Jenkins. What is required under the Federal labor
management relation statute is that there is an obligation by
Federal agencies to negotiate telework with their employee
unions, things like telework. And we know that agencies are
doing that and we--one of my other jobs at OPM, besides the
Work-Life Programs, is the governmentwide Labor and Management
Relations Program; and we have brought the labor relations
directors together just last month to go over the requirements
of negotiating contracts and providing sample bargaining
language to the agencies.
Mr. Davis of Virginia. OK. Thank you very much.
Anything else anyone want to add?
Well, let me thank all of you. Before we close, I just want
to again thank everybody for attending the subcommittee hearing
today.
I want to particularly thank the witnesses, Congressman
Turner, who had to leave early, Representatives Moran and
Norton and on my side Mr. Wolf, who couldn't be here but has
been such a leader in this element, and, of course, Mrs. Capito
and Mrs. Morella, who were here, and thank them for
participating as well.
I want to also thank my staff for organizing this. I think
it has been very productive.
I would enter into the record the briefing memo distributed
to subcommittee members.
We will hold the record open for 2 weeks from today for
anyone who might want to forward a further thought on this or
supplement your remarks.
I thank you again, and these proceedings are closed.
[Whereupon, at 11:12 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] 82424.053
-