Pandemic access

IT can help fight pandemic, Thompson says BY Nancy Ferris Published on Aug. 22, 2006 Tommy Thompson, former secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, today urged American businesses to beef up their information systems in preparation for a potential influenza pandemic. (FCW)

Every time I read about some official or another warning of this disaster or another, I chuckle to myself. It is not that they are idiots or that they do not have a clue what they are talking about (even though in a vast majority of the cases they are and do not) but usually because, occasionally, they are making a very valid point that is almost 90 or 180 degrees in opposition to how the world really works, rather than the in a perfect world model that they seem to live in. Case in point, again, is the issue of remote access, in this case because of pandemic flu, but we could be talking about snowstorms, bad traffic or business continuity and still be discussing the same basic issues. And again, one more time, the same basic obstacles are presented.

Now, the case of a pandemic is purported to be different because of the amount of time that it is supposed to involve before things get back to normal (whatever normal is defined as). And the devastation is supposed to be more wide spread (as if we are not still talking about recovery from hurricane Katrina a year later). Planning numbers, put forth by those who know estimate that up to 40% of individuals (as compared to the 30% Thompson cited) could be out of action for anywhere from one week to months either because they are directly afflicted (sick) or are caring for a family member or group of family members that are sick. The argument, therefore goes that during their downtime caring for these people, they will hop on the family computer and dial-in and do work.

For a moment, let us suspend the reality that not every company and not every employee can do their job this way and focus on the issue at hand at home. If the individual is sick, they are most likely out of the picture for the duration of the illness and recovery period as directed by the medical community. Whether that is voluntary or mandatory is beside the point, but a mandatory sick period introduces some interesting wrinkles which I will get to in a moment. If, on the other hand, the employee is caring for some one, they are just as likely to be out of the picture because the needs of the stricken family member will (and should) take priority and we all know what happens when you get tired. You become more susceptible to the illness yourself. But let us suppose that you are a super person and do not have to worry about the getting sick part. Is your home machine compatible with the corporate system? Do you have access to all the phone lists and access codes that you will need to reach your mythical corporation? What do you do for support if you are not natively intelligent in computers? These are not new questions. In fact, if you are not already asking and getting answers to these sorts of questions now and practicing, then you are not likely to be in any condition to remotely access your systems.

And of course, this assumes you have remote capability to begin with. Remember that 40% of the population I mentioned earlier? This is not 40% of the population of California or the DC Metroplex. This is likely 40% of the population of the continent, if not the world. How much of this population has access to the bandwidth that is likely to be required. If you head is starting to hurt, then you are beginning to comprehend the nature of the issue. Factor in the following just to see what is being wrestled with:

- most companies only offer two weeks paid vacation. How many, unless forced, will stay home when they are sick? A better question - how many do now? Will Congress be forced to mandate "sick leave?" Who will pay for it? Most short term disability policies (assuming your company offers it and you took it) do not start until after you are out more than two weeks, which is nice, but how many have a full two weeks of vacation to start with? Better start saving now.

- most companies do not and cannot afford, 100% employee remote access. This includes, but is not limited to:

- bandwidth
- remote control hosts (at the corporate side)
- access security
- data security (something the Department of Veterans Affairs is wrestling with)
- training (how many cover even the most basic training requirements?)

- most individual systems are not configured to do any sort of remote access, whether because of OS issues or age of system or network connectivity.

- most companies do not see it as a serious problem and even if they did, where do they get the funds and the people to build the infrastructure to support it. Most consider internal IT a necessary evil, even at companies that deal in technology, so why would they spend more than they have to when the risk factors are not that high?

Personally, I think there are more business interruptions caused by fantasy football and school breaks than there will be caused by a pandemic flu. I also believe that the unless there is a mandatory you must stay home issued, people will come to work. They do now, with things that are more contagious. What makes a pandemic flu any different than the one you had last week? So go drink your orange juice and get back to work.