Half of all mass-transit commuters in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver spend approximately 240 hours per year sitting on trains and buses, according to a new survey from Intel of Canada and Decima Research. Intel suggests that mobile technology such as notebook computers could turn this downtime into productive time.

The company then argues that working on the way to and from the office would also help reduce the productivity gap evident between workers in Canada and the U.S.

From the Intel study release: Converting just 40 minutes of that average daily one-hour commute into productive work would eliminate the gap in additional hours worked by the average American, which is currently 164 more hours per year and still under the 40 hours a week average.

Now, we here at Backbone believe Canadian productivity is an important topic, so much so that it is the front page story of the July issue. We also believe technology—and especially mobile tech—can increase productivity. I personally buy into this: I own and use a notebook and I always have either a Palm Treo or an HP iPaq hw6955 with me. That means I have access to my work documents, e-mail and the Internet at all times, and that is extremely useful.

We also have no specific quibble with Intel Canada head Doug Cooper’s assertion that mobile tech can free up other time during the day: “Taking that downtime commuting on mass transit and converting it to productive time potentially reduces the need to stay later at the office, provides flexibility for employees and increases productivity for the employer.”

But here’s the problem: we regularly see studies, like this one, which encourage us to squash any bits of downtime in our days like cockroaches seen skittering across the kitchen floor. But is a day with no free time really good for us?

Here’s the study I would like to see: a comprehensive examination of how many hours per week the average knowledge worker can invest in the job before short-term fatigue and long-term burnout decrease work quality and overall productivity. If we take a standard seven-hour office day, add in working during commutes, working before leaving home in the morning and working before going to bed, how many accumulated hours can we pump out before our work quality suffers?

Tired and burned out workers are not truly productive, no matter how much technology they carry.

I am not suggesting that Intel and other vendors are trying to chain us to our keyboards; they’re not. I am suggesting we need a more holistic approach to the total work day, especially as technology makes it increasingly possible to work everywhere.

I also suggest we need to cling with grim determination to some small portion of our mindless daily downtime. The occasional mental break is as important as returning two or three e-mails.

Peter Wolchak