How do Galleon members organize teleworking?

Teleworking is the consensus

Unsurprisingly, teleworking was already widely adopted by Galleon members: 85% of them practiced it before lockdown, whether supervised for 42%, or on a case-by-case basis for 43%.

But contrary to what the survey announced in June“How are start-ups managing the end of lockdown? ”, in which 80% of respondents planned a total reopening of their business in September, teleworking now seems Register for the long term. The threat of a second wave of contaminations, the strong incentives of the government and the cumbersome barrier measures mean that 98% of the employees on the panel benefit from it at the start of the school year.

In terms of duration, we are far from the timid and very occasional working day that was a bit the norm for teleworking in France before lockdown (according to a DARES survey, only 3% of employees worked from home occasionally in 2016-2017): 68% of the employees of the respondents practice it at least 3 days a week. As for full remote, it concerns almost a quarter (23%) of employees.

A trend that is not only cyclical and that is long-term: 91% of respondents want to make remote working sustainable in the future, and rather on a long format: 2 or 3 days per week for 67%. Note: 10% remain in favor of full remote.

In terms of professions, it concerns a very large majority of jobs (88%). The 12% excluded from the scheme are logically employees whose professional practice is dependent on their presence in the workplace: office managers, field technicians, logistics or material handlers. The same goes for juniors, which explains their need for support and their lack of autonomy. On the other hand, more surprising: sales are also among the jobs that do not benefit from them.

Moreover, it should be noted that, according to Article L1222-9 of the Labor Code which regulates the system, the CEO can refuse remote work to an employee, but must be able to motivate him.

The influence of company size

However, not all companies adopt the same organization, and the size of the company has an impact on the adoption or not of teleworking: one can think that the larger the company is, the more mature the processes are and the employees are able to work remotely. Or maybe it's the cumbersome post-Covid regulations that are encouraging more mature businesses to limit the return to the office. The fact remains that among scale-ups (more than 120 employees), only 6% of employees are back in the office full-time. It should also be noted that 78% of scale-up employees work from home 3 days or more per week.

What framework?

In terms of organization, the key word seems to be autonomy. No restrictions on teleworking days for 3/4 of respondents.

Moreover, for 65% of the respondents it is the teams themselves who define their own rules. Figures that confirm the importance of trust in remote work.

However, the subject of Telework charter is coming back to the forefront, for questions of compliance with the law now that the system is becoming a majority way of working and is sustainable. Because, if in the event of exceptional circumstances (and COVID was one), teleworking can be applied without the agreement of employees, the Labor Code imposes a collective agreement or a charter drawn up by the employer (after consulting the CSE if there is one) for the implementation of teleworking. So while they were a quarter of respondents wrote a teleworking charter before lockdown, this figure rose to 44% of respondents in September, and 43% are working on the subject. Only 13% have no intention of formalizing things.

A particular case: the employee living in another city

Teleworking poses even other problems when the employee lives in a city or region other than the one where the company is located. An increasingly widespread configuration, and which must now be integrated into organizational patterns since it concerns no less than 65% of respondents, illustrating the fact that more and more employees are moving away from Paris or big cities.

Some respondents adapt their HR policy according to remoteness: more than a quarter offer their employees in the provinces a coworking space, and 31% adapt the remuneration of employees living in the provinces. On the other hand, no respondent put in place compensation mechanisms for those who come to the office vs those who live far away.

In the case of an employee living far from the company, a large majority of CEOs (62%) cover the transport costs for him or her to come to the office punctually, in full for a good third (33%) and half for 17%. For a minority (12%), this is negotiated on a case-by-case basis, depending on the circumstances of the trip.

Hosting costs are less widely covered: less than half of CEOs (43%) have them borne by the company, but 31% bear all of the costs.

Figures that demonstrate that, while teleworking is becoming commonplace, physical meetings remain unavoidable.

‍