I've done remote in the sense that the projects and crews were far away, but we were back in the office.
As others have said, it can be done. And a lot of it has to do with the crew members, whether you're comfortable with their work and you have trust in them. Developing procedures and having the crew adhere to them is key.
I'd be a bit leery stepping into a new position like that, where you're remote, and everyone else is used to their procedures, and they might be looking at you as just the stamp, and not necessarily the one who makes the rules.
@steven-metelsky I would like to see the statute that says that you must be accessible at the office in NJ. I've been licensed in NJ for 30 years and have never seen that statute or have ever heard of it before your post. The closest thing that I know of is that your license must be prominently displayed in your place of business (office), and mine is.
Even in all of my years practicing, nobody could simply walk into the office and have direct access to me. I have met with very few clients in my office over the last ten years that could simply wander in and I accommodated them only because they were major repeat clients. Even my phone calls get screened and answered with very few getting through to me because I have a trained staff, another LS working for me and very tight QA/QC controls. I have complete access to all field notes, points and any other information that I have in the office and if a client needs to speak to me, I am available by video conference or phone.
chris,
check out 13:40-9.1 and 13:40-9.2
(c) A licensee engaged in any of the following acts or practices shall be deemed not to have rendered the regular and effective supervision required if:
This is a snippet but the statutes dive a bit deeper into it. 9.1 has a clause about adequate notice for meetings etc as well. No one should be having direct access to you at will but you should be at the principal office and not working remotely from home
All office work is done in my home office since 2020. The field work is done by me in the field. With technology widely available it is easy. I very occasionally have to visit the office for research in paper files and the large format printer. We have also been doing in person monthly staff meetings which is very helpful.
If my boss calls I answer. Funny thing, with all the myriad new ways we have to communicate responsiveness has gotten much worse. That’s not the technology’s fault, though. That was happening before everyone shifted to their home offices. It’s not a WFH problem, it’s an inattentiveness issue. Remember before email the secretary would answer the phone and take a message? Of course lots of people ignored those little slips of paper.
chris,
check out 13:40-9.1 and 13:40-9.2
(c) A licensee engaged in any of the following acts or practices shall be deemed not to have rendered the regular and effective supervision required if:
1. The regular and continuous absence from principal office premises from which professional services are rendered; except for performance of field work or presence in a field office maintained exclusively for a specific project;This is a snippet but the statutes dive a bit deeper into it. 9.1 has a clause about adequate notice for meetings etc as well. No one should be having direct access to you at will but you should be at the principal office and not working remotely from home
Home office is an extension of the principle office through the technological pipeline, it’s not 1960 anymore.
@steven-metelsky that's great text but it, like everything else in NJ, has not evolved. I and many others like me in this state, am/are not absent from the office. Microsoft Teams is a great program that is on every computer in our office for live video chats, screen sharing, document sharing and other valuable applications. It is used daily to review work in progress, answer any questions and for me to render professional opinions.
I have another LS working under me to complement the survey staff and he is in the office but the bottom line is that if anybody needs to talk to me they can catch me on Teams for face-to-face video, which is no different than talking face to face in the office, or by phone.
My situation might be different than what you are envisioning as I am on an Executive level and do not participate in the daily calculation operations but focus more on billing, AR, proposal prep and other business matters. If I'm awake, there is nobody that cannot talk to me.
It's also important to not that NOBODY can seal a plan without my review. We don't sign and hard seal any plans now and only I can add my digital signature and seal to a plan, both are personally password protected.
Will I move back into the office? Probably as we have a five story office building that is under construction with the first two floors being ours and the others leased.
COVID completely changed the work environment and fostered the growth of "telecommuting". I and most others of us, did not have the pre COVID capability of transferring data in real time back and forth from the field but we had to adapt and did.
@dave-karoly see my comments addressing yours that were posted minutes ago.
my state law states I must be accessible at the office unless I’m in the field. I could not work remotely 100%
Oregon's law says that every office must have an LS working from it. It doesn't say that said LS must be physically present at that address x number of hours per week. It also doesn't expressly state that every LS working for that company must be in that office. Further, it allows for satellite offices for specific projects.
what does your comment even mean??????????
It means that he doesn't know about video conferencing.
@chris-bouffard Chris,
im happy for your professional situation. You asked for the statute. I answered with the sections pertaining to it.
im not attacking your interpretation of it. I’m just simply responding to your question.
Hello Chris,
My interpretation of Divine Bovine’s comment is simply what he stated, “less likely to do this”. Meaning that he, himself is less likely to do this. I don’t find that statement critical of others, but just expressing his own preference. I’m not attempting to speak for anyone else, but that is how I perceive the comment you are questioning.
This thread is a Great discussion by the way, I am enjoying it a lot. This is what ‘Surveyor Connect’ is all about!
A lot of those statutes read like they are intended to give ammunition for slapping down "out-of-town" surveyors back before the digital age.
Many of our offices are either in rural areas, or in very large cities, and many of our projects are located far enough away from our offices to make it inefficient to drive in every single day - inefficient enough that if we did so it would gobble up a large chunk of revenue, and probably most of our earnings.
In the more populated areas, I'd say about half of staff live an hour or more away from our physical offices due to cost of living. We have our crews periodically get back to the office for face-to-face meetings, and whenever we have equipment coming in to get picked up I'll get into the office and talk with the crews if at all possible.
I sometimes have weeks-long stints where I am going full-tilt on a few projects, or preparing for training, and don't make it into the office. Or the crews are out and about at projects that are in the opposite direction from the office relative to their homes, and there will be no one at the office if I do go in. I'd be curious at what point that becomes "failure to properly supervise", considering how constantly in contact we all are.
A lot of those statutes read like they are intended to give ammunition for slapping down "out-of-town" surveyors back before the digital age.
I believe that Oregon's statute is intended to prevent a single surveyor from operating multiple offices - particularly multiple offices with unlicensed staff preparing materials unsupervised.
CV Nevada did a nice job of explaining in my absence.
In a standard office environment, asking and answering questions from fellow workers is very simple. Face to face, in-person coummunication. Rounding up a couple of others at the same time for input amounts to nothing more than saying "Hey, Bob, join us for a minute." Synergy occurs.
Yes, you may be able to assemble in similar fachion via technology, but, it is not nearly the same. The dynamics change. I've been in a few hundred Zoom meetings where some people never speak up, even when addressed directly, while others seem to always participate actively. I don't fully understand why this happens, but, it happens. Young and old, inexperienced to very experienced, the lack of full participation simply results in a poorer result. YMMV.
Work culture adapts over time. Bureaucracy adapts much more slowly. Statutes are written by bureaucrats.
@holy-cow These statutes are not written how we would write them today, but as has been pointed out, they don't necessarily prohibit remote work, even as written.
@steven-metelsky I never thought that you were, good discussion though.
A lot of those statutes read like they are intended to give ammunition for slapping down "out-of-town" surveyors back before the digital age.
I believe that Oregon's statute is intended to prevent a single surveyor from operating multiple offices - particularly multiple offices with unlicensed staff preparing materials unsupervised.
Last time I looked for this (I think it was in the OARs), I couldn't find it. Is this still on the books?
Your comments are good about participation...but if people aren't involved/participating, that is a different problem than the remote working in my opinion.
The fact is, if people will engage using today's technology, remote working can work just as well as in office working. There will be exceptions to this - ie. old codgers who don't like the interwebs thingy - so work arounds may be necessary.
My issue is this: If I can make it work, why shouldn't I take advantage of the technology? I started with theodolite and chain, then on to EDM, total station, GPS, LIDAR... I could easily make the argument that not using technology is the wrong way to go. So, if I do remote office set-up, do I run afoul of the code and my state board? Is it really wrong to challenge a bad (antiquated to say the least) law? Do I get to pick and choose which sections of the code I follow?
I know that this part of the code is meant to prevent plan stamping. Also, to protect the public and advance the professional standing of our profession. Good things indeed. But what if it this code stymies the profession by not allowing for this technological advancement?
Personally, I would like this part of our state's code to be re-written to address this modern technology (you know, the interwebs thingy).
Thanks everyone for the excellent discussion! Definitely some really good things to consider here.
@scott-bordenet your question of "Is remote work allowed by your state?" is a really good point! I looked up the codes in my own state (Arkansas). They don't specifically mention anything about office location; however, they do stress that the professional surveyor must be in "responsible charge", defined as "direct control of, supervision of, and legal responsibility for the surveying work performed".
As others have mentioned, this is up to interpretation. I would argue that a professional surveyor working remotely can be in direct control of and in direct supervision of the surveying work performed by field crews. Of course, there is no guarantee that the State Board or others would agree.
To be able to effectively support and defend my position, I would definitely want to put certain processes and procedures in place. For example, I would have the field crews reporting directly to me rather than to some intermediary person or middleman. I would make a log of all phone calls, video calls, emails, and text message conversations between myself and the field crews. I would have easy access to the field crews' data, including their raw data files, and field books; and I would review these daily, or as often as possible. I would also put some additional QA/QC processes and procedures in place.