falcone@erlang.DEC (Joe Falcone, HLO2-3/N03, dtn 225-6059) (09/24/84)
CC: For those of you following the "work-at-home" legal debate which has surrounded some New England knitters, there is an interesting twist to that story which hits close to home. As part of the relentless effort by the International Ladies Garment Workers Union to maintain that law, the AFL-CIO has passed resolutions indicating their position on other "work-at-home" situations. In particular, they passed a resolution favoring the passage of a law regulating computer work at home similar to the law used against the New England knitters. Of course, it is unclear what the extent of such a law would be, but it would definitely effect all those solitary hackers putting out nifty utilities for PC's as a profitable hobby. In this case, hacker does = criminal; someone could be prosecuted for programming at home just like the knitters in New England. Both my father and mother are union members, and my father was once local president of an AFL-CIO affiliate union, so I want to make it crystal clear that I don't intend this to be an attack on the union movement. What I am afraid of is that there might be enough looney senators and representatives to pass a broader law covering more "work-at-home" categories such as the computer industry or other industries which make use of computers. Although such a law is unlikely, I've heard of two other changes to rules and regulations affecting working on computers at home. I. Quite a while ago, some of the local telephone companies were proposing changes to the tariffs which would consider any line used for data transmission (modems) a BUSINESS line and therefore subject to the business rate schedule. For most of us, this would result in rather stiff rate increases. After an initial flurry of messages on the net about this, I haven't heard a thing. Anyone following this? II. The other issue had to do with homeowner/renter insurance against theft. Some insurers are now refusing to cover terminals or computers under home insurance policies for similar reasons: they consider such things to be BUSINESS equipment, and therefore one needs to take out a separate business insurance policy. Although this is not a widespread practice (thank goodness), it may be only a matter of time before it becomes standard. Joe Falcone Eastern Research Laboratory decwrl! Digital Equipment Corporation decvax!deccra!jrf Hudson, Massachusetts tardis!