The return to ‘normality’ is the Holy Grail of the pandemic, even though COVID-19 has forced us to adapt to the new reality in ways that we may never have considered feasible just a year ago.

One such adaptation is working from home. This comes without the hassle of spending more than an hour a day commuting to and from the workplace.

Telecommuting is not some new discovery. Millennials drove the idea of working from home a few years ago but it never really gained much momentum. Today, however, an increasing number of employers are no longer writing off teleworking as an ‘annoying’ millennial trait.

In its first quarterly review for the year, the Central Bank of Malta published a study which found evidence that Malta significantly underutilised its teleworking potential until the pandemic forced employers to adapt. The study finds that between 15 and 25 per cent of local jobs can be done from home when the pandemic is over.

These findings are not surprising. Similar studies in developed countries have even more substantial evidence that telecommuting could be a major trend in the future of work.

The main driver of the rapid increase in teleworking was the need to ensure employees were not exposed to unnecessary health risks. However, some employers have discovered new economic advantages from letting their employees work from their home office or dining room table.

Some promoters of the practice are convinced that workers are more productive when working at home. Employees, for example, are freed from certain distractions such as chit-chat and gossip. They may use the time they would normally spend on busy roads to do productive work as well as being willing to work beyond nine-to-five. They are more likely to steer clear of health problems and, even if they get unwell, they are more liable to log into work anyway.

Some international studies have concluded that, on the whole, workers have adjusted to the different personal mental and physical well-being needs of working from home.

Another advantage from the perspective of employers is that telecommuting helps to reduce operating costs. Some businesses are already considering shedding expansive – and expensive – office space by allowing employees to work from home at least some of the time.

For Malta, the savings that can be made on operating costs is a two-edged sword. While reducing the cost of maintaining a central physical workplace, teleworking allows foreign investors who set up shop in Malta to deploy a workforce who live abroad.

This threat to local employment is not the only drawback to teleworking. Many would agree that online communications can lead to misunderstandings and bad feelings among employees. The human interaction that in-person collaboration often creates can never be replicated in teleconferencing sessions. Some companies like Yahoo and Bank of America have rescinded telecommuting privileges in the recent past, claiming the practice was detrimental to corporate teamwork.

Some workers also long to return to their workplace, not only to restore ‘human’ contact with their colleagues but because going into the office relieves them of household tensions. It is a sad fact that telecommuting, which would be expected to improve work-family balance, often does no such thing. Some behavioural psychologists are sceptical about how telecommuting will evolve in the coming years. They draw attention to a concept called ‘recency bias’ – we recall the recent past with most immediacy and believe that this will define the future.

It is safe to assume that telecommuting will become more feasible and commonplace beyond the pandemic but it will not lead to a radical change in the way most people work.