Posting an update here for the sake of the Refine phase:
- PORT will be featured in several upcoming media publications, including a podcast and the editorial blog of a digital productivity company - As part of the $15k line item listed in my budget, I have begun talking to urban planners and economists about the potential to commission an independent study on the economic potential for downtown Indy to turn select commercial properties (office buildings & parking garages) into housing stock and retail. The idea of the study is to create a rough blueprint for any local employer or property owner to estimate the internal ROI of embracing PORT -- which again, can be executed almost fully in spirit as corporate policy or re-zoning. I have also applied for a few small (four-figure) grants to commission the study. - I have held talks with a major Pittsburgh employer about the potential of PORT, and those insights will aid in engaging major Indy employers. - I am in (very early) talks with a few climate reform organizations about piloting PORT in spirit, in order to produce a groundbreaking study on the economic and environmental impacts of planned mass telecommuting.
Thanks Jasmine Comer . Indeed, it would be a discrimination protection (i.e., a freedom) for any eligible employee who is seeking to telecommute for any reason. Entry level, management, anyone -- if they are covered under standard Title VII legislation, they'd be eligible. Most notably, that excludes businesses with fewer than 15 employees.
How this all relates to a pilot under the Challenge would be to push a major local employer (at least one, but as many as possible) to trial a corporate policy in the spirit of the legislation -- allowing anyone to telecommute any or all the time, as long as they meet the conditions set by PORT. In doing so, Indy would end up with one of the world's largest (and certainly the most holistic) studies in telecommuting impact.
This is not how PORT works. It's also worth keeping in mind these are not new conditions or procedures for discrimination protection -- they already exist under Title VII, and specifically the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Deciding whether an employee or their job qualifies for protection is a well-established practice at this point.
If your core job functions cannot be performed away from the work site, or if it requires undue burden on the employer (i.e. unreasonable alterations to current business operations) in order to be performed away from the work site, your job would not qualify for the protection.
In the two examples you provided, it seems highly unlikely that the employee could perform the core functions of their job away from the work site. As with ADA, the employee could certainly make a request to telecommute -- and subsequently file a complaint or lawsuit if the request was denied -- but the burden is on the employee to prove discrimination occurred.
Title VII rights are empowerments that civilians can exercise; they are not actively monitored by law enforcement for compliance.