Using Employee-Owned Technology in the Workplace?

digitalvengeance asks: "As of Monday, my company is initiating a 'no cell phone' policy at all of our offices, including the IT department, where I work. I consider my cellular phone a necessity both in my personal and work lives. I have a number of servers and custom applications configured to notify me by text message, in the event of a problem. I am considering refusing to take work calls or text messages on my personal cell phone, and even quitting in protest of the new policy. How have other Slashdot readers dealt with policies regarding use of employee-owned technology at work? Any suggestions as to how I can get this policy overturned without looking like someone who wants to spend my working time on my cell rather than coding?"

Comments

First step

[American AC in Paris]

Any suggestions as to how I can get this policy overturned without looking like someone who wants to spend my working time on my cell rather than coding?

...have you explained the importance of your cell phone to your boss or HR person? Have you asked for an exception, as yours is pretty clearly an exceptional case?

If they stonewall and ignore your concerns, then by all means, raise a stink. In the interests of civility, job security, and conservation of energy, though, you may want to try the easy way first. Don't break out the elephant gun before you've tried the flyswatter...

Re:First step

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

Throw it back at 'em. Server's down? Who knew!

Re:First step

[Frailty]

I have to back Amaerican AC in Paris on this one. I use my own PDA at work, and the onsite techs were matter of fact in that they would install the software, but the company was not responsible for supporting the hardware, etc. No Problem. Example 2: Had a personal Cell phone and a company pager (pagers are lame outdated, and totally cost inefficient. Got rid of the Cellphone (very liberating really) everyone should try it for a short time. Probelm: No one liked paging me, and used my cell phone all the time. So I told the boss hey, you pay for the cell phone, and then you, the team, business partners, etc. can contact me whenever you want. He thought about 2 seconds and said; make it happen. Sometimes if you have a good business justification, it is smooth sailing, if you are just whining because you think they are interfering with your "personal freedom" you might want to look at your definition of "viable employment".

Re:First step

[KingOfBLASH]

...have you explained the importance of your cell phone to your boss or HR person? Have you asked for an exception, as yours is pretty clearly an exceptional case?...

With all due respect to the original poster, I am not sure this is clearly an exceptional case. The servers, presumably, e-mail their notifications to a personal cell phone number @ some cellular company. Correct?

Well, whereas if he requests a cell phone or pager or something else he can receive messages on from his boss, if he is ever run over by a bus or fired they can just pass the pager / phone / whatever onto another employee to take his place. If, on the other hand, they don't use a company owned device, someone who should not be getting access to information could presumably be getting access to information. (And assuming he's angry about being outsourced, he might do something the employer regrets).

Now this does not mean the OP is a bad person who would do said things, it's that the bosses want to keep a tight hold of their stuff for various reasons. My advice for the OP is to explain politely to your boss why you need something to replace your cell phone, and how it benefits the company if you're ever run over by a bus. And, if they say no, and you really don't like it, quietly polish your resume and look for work elsewhere. If you don't find it, you won't have quit in the heat of the moment, and if you find a better position, no harm in covering your bases.

Re:First step

[Otter]

...have you explained the importance of your cell phone to your boss or HR person? Have you asked for an exception, as yours is pretty clearly an exceptional case?

If I understand the story -- you're responsible for the servers and have configured them to alert you on your personal phone. That's great, but I guarantee your HR department barely knows you have computers, let alone about your cell phone alerts.

As the AC from Paris says, don't take this personally -- just ask whether you can keep your phone. Or better yet, whether the company will get you a pager or something so you don't generate resentment from coworkers who think you're above the rules. Certainly, don't just let the servers crash and stay down out of spite.

(Actually, it was smart of you to ask before doing anything. It's almost smart to stop, think, ask, and think some more before heading off to demand a showdown -- I've learned always to ask my wife first, and listen when she tells me to make a request instead of reaching for the flamethrower.)

Re:First step

[dasmegabyte]

Which is exactly what he should do -- ask for a pager. If it's really required that this guy get 24 hour notification (as opposed to something he did as a gee-whiz application or to feel empowered), they'll cough up the money no problem.

I'm certain his company doesn't want him using his personal devices to monitor company processes. If he left the company or the department, the monitoring infrastructure would go with him. And what's he gonna do, leave his cell phone behind with the intern who takes his place while he's on vacation?

I think it's quite nice to have my cell phone at work, but i wouldn't miss it for a second if I was asked not to have it. My old cell phone didn't even WORK inside the glorified Faraday cage I used to work in, and it didn't diminish my quality of life or the quality of my work. I even developed a WAP version of our site on that job -- did all the dev work on an OpenWave emulator, then checked out my handiwork from the patio on smoke breaks. Boss thought it was so cool, he offered to cover the airtime I spent on the project.

Re:First step

[jon3k]

Well, if they are in the office at 2:30 AM, then they should have some way of being notified in the office (email, look at a screen, etc.). If they are at home, then the "no cell phones in the office" rule doesn't apply.

I work at the corporate office most of the time. We have 46 branch offices. How *exactly* should I look at my PC monitors while I'm 600 miles away?

Re:First step

[jon3k]

We send alerts to our IM accounts instead. Heck, you're probably sitting at your PC now...

Thats fantastic. So, do you chat on Instant Messenger while you sleep? On the way home from work? While your in a meeting?

I know if something goes down, my blackberry will vibrate, and I will immediatly make my way to a computer. Its all about minimizing downtime.

Re:First step

[Jo3sh]

Personally, I use a company-issued pager. When it goes off, I use a company-issued cell phone to call in and advise I'm on my way. If the original poster's company doesn't want him using his personal cell, that's fine and even understandable, but they should be made aware of the scope of the potential issue this creates, after which they should be amenable to either making an exception to the rule or providing equivalent hardware.

And with company-owned hardware and a company-provided service, they can have documentation of calls made on the cell, so they can immediately see if time and resources are being wasted.

A little touchy, aren't we?

[Matey-O]

Have them pay for an alpha pager and move your alerts there. Really, quitting over the use of a device you've become addicted to is not the smartest reason to terminate employment.

Re:A little touchy, aren't we?

[Shakrai]

I'm curious as to what type of issues you have had because I would hate to fall prey to the same problems.

The big one was I started working for an ISP that I had previously been a customer of. I used my existing e-mail address (tim@ a three letter domain name -- my whole e-mail address was 11 letters -- I loved it) for company related business instead of making a new one. I later quit working for them on fairly bad terms -- 18 months after being hired they wanted me to sign a non-compete/NDA agreement (I didn't have a problem with the NDA but I took serious exception to the "Can't work within 100 miles of us" clause) -- I refused -- they told me to sign it or go work elsewhere -- so I went to work for a customer of theirs for more money. After this happened they took over my old e-mail address (which predated my employment by years) and refused to release it to me. They forwarded me copies of personal e-mails (girlfriend, parents, bank statements, blah blah blah) after opening and reading them. I needed to get a restraining order to put a stop to this activity. It was not a fun situation. I very nearly sued them over it but decided it wasn't worthwhile because it would have alienated the relationship I had with my new employer (who still does business with them).

I suppose that was a unique scenario because it was something controlled by my employer. But I still think that it's best to keep things as separate as possible. If you need a cell phone so badly for work get them to pay for it. My current employer pays for my cell phone -- why should you pay for something required for work?

Just my $0.02.

If work wants to use your personal cell phone,

[Mike the Mac Geek]

then they should pay for it. Plain and simple. My office has no idea I have a cell phone number. They know I have a phone, but they are not gonna get the number unless I see part of the bill being paid by them.

Best Policy: Ignore the Man's Silly Rules

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems pretty obvious to me: ignore their silly rules, set your phone on vibrate and go about your business.

Quit over this? What, are they going to fire you if you check an occasional text message on your (silent) cell phone?

Some rules are made to be broken, not fought.

Obey the establishment, you insensitive clod!

[Schwartzboy]

No joke. I could post for pages and pages with antecdotal evidence, from my own experience and that of fellow geeks, that the quickest way to eliminate a policy or new set of particularly stupid regulations is to follow them to the letter. For instance:

POINTY-HAIRED BOSS: Why didn't you know that Server X, Application Y, and Cubicle Drone Z were all hosed and not responding to requests?
YOU: Well, sir, I get these notifications, see, and when I'm working in another part of the office or not sitting right at my desk, I know instantly if something goes wrong with anything that I'm responsible for and then I can fix it.
PHB: But...that doesn't explain why you didn't know about XYZ!!
YOU: Well, these alerts all come on my cell phone, you see, and since it's company policy that Cells Are Not Allowed...

The dumber it is, the more religiously you should follow it, and make darned sure that all of your buddies fall in line with the company's new direction as well. I'm assuming, of course, that you've already presented your case to a supervisor or HR person or something, and that you're not a Super Executive VP of Something. If you're at that level in the organization, just say "no" and have your department behave differently from everyone else...apparently this works in the real world if you're high enough on the food chain.

Re:Obey the establishment, you insensitive clod!

[4of12]

I'm assuming, of course, that you've already presented your case to a supervisor or HR person or something

And here is where many enraged geeks make a big mistake.

They become so upset at the Stupid Fscking Policy and explain in no uncertain terms just how stupid it is to

• people everywhere
• people in authority over them
• people in authority that made the policy

and this is compounding one mistake in policy by another mistake in proper feedback to human beings. Guess what, people are Unsympathetic if you refer to their decisions as shit.

If you want a better chance for the policy to change, you'll get more chance of success if you don't go apoplectic. Instead, take about 100 deep breaths, sleep 2 two nights, count to 10000 and think about a much larger problem such as nuclear annihilation and how small your problem really is.

Then, and only then, go into the office of someone who matters and explain calmly and respectfully how perhaps the new policy didn't fully take into account all of the benefits the company was getting as a result of the old policy and wasn't there someway an accomodation could be reached?

Steps 3-5

[Libertarian_Geek]

I agree. I see so many posts saying something to the effect of: "Stop bringing it, they'll see how important it is when servers go down because nobody got the pages". Wow, what's happened to our work force? Here are a few ideas that might actually look like you give a shit. It sounds like we're stuck in a "Clerks" version of IT!
1.> Have a little frigging back-bone, people. state the issue to your boss in an e-mail. Document it. Be sure to be detailed on the risks.
2.> Contact HR explain the above.
3.> If the above doesn't work (as American AC in Paris has also suggested the 1st two). Contact internal customers who have jobs running on the impacted systems. Explain the situation and the risks.
4.> Be willing to help develop either a more defined policy (i.e. no private calls, no digital cameras) or accept an alternative (alpha-pager).
5.> At the first issue of an outage because no-one got notified, bring this up. Don't wait for all hell to break loose.
Following these steps with the right tone, enthusiasm, and tact, you'll at worst look like you actually care about your job and the company you work for. Unless maybe, you prefer to live on welfare, unemployment, and bitch about how the internet stock bubble saturated the job market with IT guys. Be a "stand-up geek" and do the right thing.

Re:either put up with it or find a new job...

[Some Dumbass...]

You do as they say w/o too many questions. If you don't like the working conditions you find another place that is more towards your liking.

India? :)

Seriously, though, the whole "like it or lump it" attitude always bugs me. How in the world do employers manage to brainwash people into thinking that they're gods? Who says that I have to do what my employer says? If their policy is really that bad and the situation is really that serious, go over their heads, make some sort of formal complaint and encourage others to do the same, talk to your union (if you have one), illustrate the consequences of that bad decision (as an earlier poster suggested, "The server's down, who knew?"), and/or threaten to quit (as a next-to-last resort). There are alternatives to quitting if you're clever enough to use them and if the situation justifies using them.

If all that doesn't work, _then_ you quit, but even then only if it's worth it. Remember the perks of your job, the friends you've made at work who you won't see as much anymore, the extra effort which you'll have to put into finding a new job and making a new routine for yourself, and so on.

Re:Government and Hospitals

[Stomple]

Actually, the concern on the interference isn't on the pacemaker that is implanted. The reason why ICU and cardiac telemetry floors in hospitals have cell phone bans is that external EKG cardiac monitors placed on the patients have small transmitters that broadcast the information to monitoring stations in a central part of the ward. Patient's would never be in danger of dying if someone used a cell phone in the units but they might interfere with the wireless monitoring causing faulty transmission of these signals.

I think the real risk of the interference is low, but it would actually be funny if it looked like everyone on the floor flatlined at once, as someone walks by talking on their cell phone.

From the other side

[araven]

I had an incident where one employee left a cell phone at their desk, it rang (one of those really annoying music rings) on and off for nearly an hour. Another employee (next cube over) turned it off. The first employee went ballistic about that. That was fun. Once in a while I'll have an employee who just spends wayyy too much time talking on their cell phone. Lovely to deal with that as well.

The reason companies never wanted people making personal calls at work was not the cost of the (mostly local) calls, but the cost of their NONPRODUCTIVE EMPLOYEES. When employees have cell phones (as most do now), they feel much more justified in sitting around on the phone since the "cost" is theirs. People who know not to spend hours on personal calls on their desk phones seem to have no compunction about doing the same thing on their cell phones.

So what's the solution? In my experience, the RATIONAL answer is to speak to each person when you feel that they've crossed a line, and make a decision suited to the problem. In my experience, the rational answer will get you reamed. Employees who care so little about their responsibilities to their work and to their co-workers tend also to have no compunction about arguing "disparate treatment" (as though cell-phone users are a protected minority). We are forced to make inane blanket policies that hurt the decent employees who probably ARE contributing their personal cell minutes to the company, in order to stop the bad behavior of a few. I've been told by HR that I cannot tell ONE employee to "leave the cell phone in your car" I must make the rule for EVERY employee in the department (not that I have, I'd rather lose the productivity of the lamer employees than disgruntle the better ones).

Anyway, there are two sides to every story.

~

Nobody knows

[fm6]

This is obviously from the same source as the ban on web surfing you see in some companies. They don't trust the employees not to use company time and resources for personal purposes. So they ban things that can be used for personal purposes. And of course, in the process they stymie employees attempts to make themselves more productive.

I don't see what you can possibly do in this situation, short of quitting. If they don't trust their own employees, then they're not going to be receptive to employee feedback. If you dissent politely, they'll smile and ignore you. If you dissent rudely, you'll just reinforce their patronizing attitude.

And playing work-to-rule games ("I didn't know the server was down because my cell was switched off, as per policy") isn't going to help either. It's just another way of communicating something the bosses don't want to hear, except that it also makes them look stupid. Which is not likely to make them receptive.

Sometimes management falls into the mode of treating employees like spoiled children -- people who can't be communicated with, only bullied into a semblance of correct behavior. If you can figure out a way to change that attitude, you've really got something (like a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize!). If you can't, there's not a lot you can do.