Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Should Employers Ban Smartphones?

An anonymous reader writes "Due to a concern that smartphones (and other electronic devices) could be infected with malware and used to spy on sensitive information, my employer has recently banned all personal electronic devices from their spaces. The concern comes from articles like this one. My question to slashdot readers: How reasonable is this concern? How can this sort of malware be prevented from showing up on our devices? Is there a way to educate employees about preventing this sort of thing rather than banning the devices altogether? This current reality is that people have started to rely on having their smartphones with them at all times for things such as receiving emergency calls from day cares and schools, making personal calls during normal working hours (i.e. to make doctor's appointments), accessing password managers, and scheduling calendar events."

48 of 510 comments (clear)

  1. No persuasion required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You have asked an audience that knows just how ingrained smartphones are to our everyday lives. The last half of your question is a "given."

    The burden of proof is on the employer to show that no other mitigating measure can address the risks. Summarily banning child protecting, emergency-aleviating technology, not to mention the tools with which we coordinate the rest of our lives, is truly bad form and will bite the employer more often than they know.

    If you are working with sensitive documents, these people will remove the camera from your iPhone for $20:
    http://www.iresq.com/iphone-camera-removal.html
    Want to do the whole office? A 79 cent roll of electrical tape will do the trick.

    The problems are solvable and worth solving. That management favors solutions that are simply a matter of writing policy, is in their nature, so don't sit in the dark and bitch, fix the bulb.

    1. Re:No persuasion required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The burden of proof is on the employer to show that no other mitigating measure can address the risks.

      My current employer has banned all personal cellphones and personal laptops for some time. It is really not that hard to get around, and the burden is not on them to prove anything. You are paid to work and presumably want your job. If not having your pacifier with you at all times makes you that uncomfortable, find a different job. Or you can give out your work number for emergencies or set your cell phone to automatically forward calls during business hours to your desk phone. If you need to make a personal call that you do not want to/cant make from your desk line, go out to your car during lunch and make it.

      That management favors solutions that are simply a matter of writing policy, is in their nature, so don't sit in the dark and bitch, fix the bulb.

      So if a concern is the microphone on the phone you have no problem filling that with epoxy?

    2. Re:No persuasion required by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you need to make a personal call that you do not want to/cant make from your desk line, go out to your car during lunch and make it.

      What do you recommend for people who use public transit instead of driving to work?

    3. Re:No persuasion required by Minwee · · Score: 5, Funny

      What do you recommend for people who use public transit instead of driving to work?

      Death

      I see that you work for the Muni.

    4. Re:No persuasion required by Monsieur+Canard · · Score: 4, Informative

      My company does a lot of DoD work. The policy is: no personally owned electronics may connect to company assets. Ever. We can have personal smartphones (but no notebooks or tablets) as long as they do not have a functional camera. For Android phones the only option is to remove the camera or JBWeld over the lens. For my new iPhone the local AT&T store enabled restrictions on the camera with a password only they know and gave me a letter as such. That's good enough for our security folks. It's not a perfect situation as disabling the camera kills things like having Siri dial phone numbers for me (as apparently that somehow involves Facetime) but it's better than any sort of destruction. Plus I was able to get the camera un-disabled (yeah, I know) when I went on vacation for a week and then have it re-disabled.

      --
      He took a duck to the face at 250 knots.
    5. Re:No persuasion required by PmanAce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Summarily banning child protecting, emergency-aleviating technology

      What happened to giving them your work place number like you know, your parents did? Children were just as safe before smart phones...

      not to mention the tools with which we coordinate the rest of our lives

      I don't agree with this at all. 10+ years ago we didn't use smart phones and we coordinated the rest of our lives just fine.

      The problems are solvable and worth solving. That management favors solutions that are simply a matter of writing policy, is in their nature, so don't sit in the dark and bitch, fix the bulb.

      I think management just wants you to do your job and not have you sit there browsing facebook on your phone, texting your friends or calling for appointments while you are getting paid.

      --
      Tired of my customary (Score:1)
    6. Re:No persuasion required by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Removing smart phones is the easiest and most secure way to handle these issues. The burden of proof is to prove that there exists ways that are just as secure. For example If you work in a DoD environment then you have to accept the possibility that you're not going to be able to bring your device in the building. It sucks sometimes sure but if the risk is information coming in or going out then this helps mitigate it a great deal.

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    7. Re:No persuasion required by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Burden of proof? WTF is that all about? We have problems with phones in our plant. They haven't been banned - yet. But we have problems with people's attention being distracted from their jobs. An issue that has never been addressed at our plant, is the possibility of "sensitive" and "secret" documents being recorded. Trade secrets are trade secrets, easily recorded and sold to whoever might be interested in them when everyone carries a phone with a camera.

      There is no "burden of proof" - if management becomes aware of risk, they can ban anything and everything that they deem to be a part of the risk.

      We also suffer from vandalism. So far, it has been confined to physical vandalism of equipment. Some day, some bright boy is going to figure out that he can plug in a WIFI, and use his smart phone to introduce anything he likes to the computerized equipment. The older equipment may not recognize a WIFI device, but the newer machines certainly do.

      Bad form, you say? This is the United States, in the year 2012. Management has dismissed half of the lessons ever learned about keeping personnel happy. They don't give a damn about happy employees. There are four or five applicants for every job that opens up. They don't NEED to keep more than some key personnel happy. Even junior management is subject to layoff at any time.

      Bad form and burden of proof, you say. Either you are a very lucky person, and have a really great job where management actually thinks about you and your needs - or you're stuck in the mid-1980's. Nowadays, management doesn't even measure their turnover rates among labor, skilled labor, and trades people. Moving up the chain of command, there is a little superficial "caring" shown to the engineers, and a little more "caring" for junior management.

      More, the states are backing up employers far more than they did in past decades. I think it was Michigan that just became a "right to work" state. The employer need prove nothing - the employer rules, and you obey. There is no civil right being infringed if the employer bans your electronic toys during work hours.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    8. Re:No persuasion required by Cigarra · · Score: 3

      "10+ years ago we didn't use smart phones and we coordinated the rest of our lives just fine."

      It's quite a different world ten years ago.

      --
      I don't have a sig.
    9. Re:No persuasion required by realityimpaired · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They pay you to work, not to sit at your desk playing farmville or tower defense on your cell phone.

      My office has noticed a genuine drop in the quality and quantity of work that gets done by folks who screw around with their cell phones when they're supposed to be working, and has banned them at your desks. Put it on stun, and put it in a drawer. On your own time (breaks/lunches), it's allowed to come out, but as a courtesy to other people who *are* supposed to be working, they ask that any phone calls/whatever you make be done in the hall, lunch room, or outside.

      How is that intrusive, or corporate feudalism?

      And for any emergencies, I have a company-provided e-mail which can be used, and I have a desk phone which people can call.

    10. Re:No persuasion required by schnell · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This whole question is based on a false premise that personal and corporate smartphones can't be managed. The answer is very simple:

      Are these work-mandated/provided smartphones that have access to the company e-mail/intranet system? If so, then the company needs to invest in Mobile Device Management (MDM) software like Good, MobileIron or even a BlackBerry BES and lock down which apps end users can install, what can be downloaded or forwarded, etc.

      Are these personal smartphones? Don't provide any access to the company e-mail/intranet or any other system on non-company devices so whatever malware you decided to install has no impact on the company.

      Whether personal smartphones are allowed in a business should not even be a question unless you work in an environment where employees taking pictures of documents, people or facilities is a security risk (the government has a lot of these environments), and generally in those cases you are not allowed electronic devices in those restricted facilities, period - work or personal.

      BTW the linked Washington Times article (quality news source, there) describes a proof of concept app but does not describe the platform(s), attack/delivery vectors or anything else about how you would actually hijack a phone in this way. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't get approved in Google Play, the iOS App Store, or any other reputable app source. So if your employers are afraid of that, then they need to up their med dosages.

      --
      "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
    11. Re:No persuasion required by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's quite a different world ten years ago.

      The technology may be different, but the mechanics of our daily lives haven't changed much since the wired telephone, refrigerators, and cars became ubiquitous.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    12. Re:No persuasion required by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You would be out of a job soon. Threaten me with violence and HR and the police will be hearing about it. I would also be calling my lawyer to prepare for that hostile workplace/unlawful termination suit.

    13. Re:No persuasion required by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is the tradeoff from expecting people to take care of business during personal time.

      It cuts both ways. You want me on call 24x7 for a week and available if you really need me other times, then I will be making personal calls on the clock.

    14. Re:No persuasion required by mycroft16 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "10+ years ago we didn't use smart phones and we coordinated the rest of our lives just fine." This argument is ridiculous. It assumes that nothing in the world has changed, which is obviously flawed. It's like saying that people didn't use cars in the 1830's and still got around just fine, so why should we be using them now? Progress and innovations are made to make things easier and more accessible. Rather than carry a 12 month calendar around everywhere you go, or a planner as a separate book, now you have your email, calendar, to dos, notes, voice recordings, phone, etc all in a single device that fits in your palm. No more need for a briefcase worth of crap. Just a single phone. Sure people got along find 10+ years ago, using the best that was available to them at the time. And so should we.

    15. Re:No persuasion required by Thorodin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nice, 1950's management style you got there. You do realize that threats reduce productivity to the minimum necessary to keep a job?

    16. Re:No persuasion required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That sounds like an awful company to work for. Fact is, employers demand longer and longer hours for less pay. People still need to do other shit in their lives despite those demands. So a complete ban on personal computers, personal internet use is just controlling and mean. Enlightened employers get higher productivity from their staff by just not being dicks. Not so hard to work out, is it?

    17. Re:No persuasion required by cellocgw · · Score: 4, Informative

      Your company may be in the minority (on the conservative end of the spectrum). I've worked for several different DoD contractors over the years, and once they got past the "OMG phones cameras run RUN" stage, they all figured out how to allow personal cellphones, even with cameras, into the main plant area. There are rules, carefully enforced, about maintaining airgaps (and no WiFi) between personal and corporate networks, etc. There's no reason, other than panic or deep-seated distrust of your entire staff, to ban personal devices in the workplace.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    18. Re:No persuasion required by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know this may come as a surprise to you and the rest of corporate America, but nobody gives a crap about your secret documents. Really, nobody cares at all. Sure, it's fun to play "secret agent man', but nobody is actually clamoring for them.

      Most of your double deep dark secret methods and techniques are actually SOP at any company in your field. REALLY! The rest are obvious but only applicable to the particular situation at your company.

      If you actually had worthwhile secret documents, someone would have already sold them in exchange for a nice retirement to a tropical paradise somewhere. There was a time when employee loyalty might have prevented that, but it went out the window the day after loyalty to employees did. If your employer REALLY had secrets that were worth anything, it would pay above average, offer generous vacation time and other perks and generally treat it's employees as if they held the future of the company in their hands. But that costs money, so it's out of the question.

    19. Re:No persuasion required by cayenne8 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't live in a city, do you? Work in the farther 'burbs?

      I live in New Orleans...I guess that qualifies as a city. I've pretty much always lived in a city....but the only people that ride the buses regularly are the bums and lowlifes that can't afford a car.

      I mean...why would I want to spend 2+ hours on a bus with some smelly hobos, changing busses a number of times to get to work, carrying my lunch, my backpack, and possibly my gym clothes (close to work), and my work laptop, when I can jump in my car and get there directly in about 10 min or less (I tend to drive VERY fast).

      Sure, some cities have mass transit that everyone can use and works, but most cities I've lived in, either you have to ride with the less than desirables....or it is so inconvenient to have to switch buses numerous times, etc, that it just isn't worth the effort for the perceived reward (saving some gas money?).

      During rainy season (which is a LONG time here in NOLA, along with the high heat and humidity), I'd not want to be changing busses and running around all the way to work....I'd definitely not very professional coming into work rained on and sweat soaked from my many bus trips to get here.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    20. Re:No persuasion required by lgw · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's an answer straight from the 80s, back when admins thought they should control everything on the network.

      In the modern world you want a remote destop (via a product from VMware, Citrix, etc). The users can bring any damn device they please, virus-infested nasty things that they are, but the only access they have to corporate services is a remote desktop connection to a VM in the datacenter.

      BYOD is the corporate future. The safe, modern solution is to send "pixels, not files" to those devices, so there's no data at risk.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    21. Re:No persuasion required by lgw · · Score: 3, Informative

      In places where desktops are locked down for software install, with choice of images as the only way to get software, trying to support devs usually isn't even on the radar. There's always some tool or utility specific to one dev's preferences that really will make him more productive.

      In places where desktops aren' locked down, any decent dev will have root anyhow, soon as he gets around to it. Although, giving Linux devs Windows dev machines would be a particularly evil way to delay the inevitable.

      My favorite story is of a group os devs where IT insisted that SMS (the old MS management client, not the mesaging tool) be running on every desktop so that they could inventory and push software to the devs at will. Of course, that started an arms race with the devs getting ever more clever with deleting the SMS client, until managment handed out dire threats to anyone caught deleting it. At which point, thanks to backchannels, an internal test version of SMS (that would respond successfully to any server requests with scripted answers) somehow made it out of MS and into the devs hands. IT never twigged to the substitution.

      I've been known to virtualize the image IT insisted I use, so that everything looked just fne to them via their tools, while I could get on with my job using the rest of the machine.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  2. No by Eightbitgnosis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Would you ban laptops at work for the same reason?

    1. Re:No by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Personal laptops where the user has keys to the kingdom? Yes, those are banned. Laptops I have locked down and set to our our policies, provided by the company? No, they are allowed. The same applies to smartphones. Any further questions?

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:No by jimbolauski · · Score: 4, Interesting

      We allow personal laptops and smart phones but we have two internal networks one that is for the unclean and one for verified systems. The unclean network only allows access to to the internet and a few of our internal systems, email, calendars, and contacts, only stuff that is exposed to the outside all ready. Plugging in an unverified computer into the clean network will usually cause our IT guy to come find the person. I got dinged for that after plugging in a Micro-Controler board that was not recognized by the network in about 5 minutes.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
  3. Ban of outside laptops by tepples · · Score: 5, Informative

    Would you ban laptops at work for the same reason?

    A lot of businesses do in fact ban laptops that aren't company-owned.

    1. Re:Ban of outside laptops by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A lot of businesses do in fact ban laptops that aren't company-owned.

      Exactly. You have a work phone number in exactly the same way that you have a work computer.

      I don't really think "but daycare and school" makes for a compelling argument.
      They have your work number on file, let them use it.

      All the other reasons listed are ones of convienence, not necessity.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:Ban of outside laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      All the other reasons listed are ones of convienence, not necessity.

      Almost certainly. That said, all employees expect a certain amount of convenience, which varies greatly by situation.

      I'm an IT guy. If a company I worked for started with the, "no smartphones at work" thing just because they wanted to make sure they were getting every last second of productivity out of you, whilst working you overtime for no additional pay (as this rule will almost certainly be, every time), I'd add it to a list of reasons to go elsewhere.

      As with most things, it's not necessarily one thing that makes you leave... it's a lot of things adding to employee dissatisfaction.

  4. I read something about... by alphatel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Anything that can breach security in a government setting is worth withholding indefinitely until a practical policy can be approved which reduces risk to near zero.
    For unrelated/unregulated industries, this approach is unreliable, impractical, unprofitable, and let's face it, just plain stupid.

    --
    When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
  5. Re:Suck it up. by nospam007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    " You get paid to work, not deal with personal matters."

    Amen brother!
    This view illustrates that people at work are busy organizing their private lives, making doctor's appointments, calling family, brokers, schools, daycare, tweeting nonsense and updating their online presence and other crap instead of doing their fucking job and they apparently feel entitled to it.

  6. depends where you work by alen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    if you work in a sensitive area then expect high security
    if you work for a US GOVERNMENT agency around classified information then you're probably following these rules already
    if you work in a start up with cool tech you might expect something like this

    if you work in your average workplace no one is going to care

  7. How reasonable is this concern? by spikenerd · · Score: 4, Informative

    How reasonable is this concern?

    Very reasonable, if your employer is a CA. Not at all reasonable if your employer sells hubcaps. Need more info.

    How can this sort of malware be prevented?

    Educate employees. (But your next question shows that you already know this.)

    Is there a way to educate employees...?

    Yes. Employees are not algorithms. That's why we employ them instead of just computers.

    This current reality is that people have started to rely on having their smartphones...

    Yes, if you want effective employees, you should allow them to use their brains, as well as extensions that make them more effective.

    Do you have any questions that lack obvious answers--perhaps something worth discussing in a forum?

  8. Re:Suck it up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As long as my job pays me for every minute they intrude into my personal life or past the 8 hours a day I owe them, sounds fine with me.

  9. It Depends... by IonOtter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you're working on material or systems that are classified, or something akin to the iPhone 6, then yeah. Letting *any* communications device into the work area is a very bad idea. You are being targeted. Probably very specifically, too.

    If you're not working on anything of that nature, then probably not. Who cares if anyone sees the inside of your office? Or hears you talking sports scores? It's creepy as Hell, and you should probably be more worried about the fact that someone is mucking around inside your phone, listening to you.

    The exception to this, is when you walk by some moron's desk, and they have their smartphone plugged into the USB port of the computer, MOUNTED AS A HARD DRIVE.

    A computer which is inside the company firewall.

    Sometimes, you just have to assume the lowest common denominator, because convenience in listening to an MP3 collection will always trump common sense.

    --
    [End Of Line]
  10. Back a few decades ago .... by PPH · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... when I worked for Boeing, this was their company policy. No cameras, radios, or recording devices were allowed on company property. Although this was necessary in areas where classified DoD work was being done, they just applied this policy to all facilities. As cell phones and PDAs with cameras andd recording capabilities became commonplace, they pretty much gave up on enforcing the 'no devices allowed' rule (probably still in force in actual secure areas).

    I would consider them (Boeing) and others in their line of business to have about the most conservative position on such technology. Seeing as how they have pretty much given up on such rules, I don't see how any other employers expect to get away with them.

    Also, if employees are going to steal proprietary data (for which I'm sure there is a company policy prohibiting said activity), sneaking a camera, USB drive or whatever onto the property in violation of rules is not going to be a deterrent.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  11. Good luck by ironicsky · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If, after 20+ years of personal computers we still can't stop people from accidentally downloading malware, good luck preventing it on smart phones and other portable devices. The problem is, and always will be, the ignorance of the user.

  12. Re:what about people in the feild who use them for by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Informative

    People in the field would have a device provided by the company, because the employee would be billing back all related expenditure (data and voice) to the company anyway. That device would be locked down by the IT dept; Both Android and iPhone support device policies and central management now, and BlackBerry was designed for this use.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  13. Not just malware that is an issue by oobayly · · Score: 5, Informative

    We were have some pretty bizarre network problems in our office one day - some machines were able to connect to our db server whilst some couldn't, and other could intermittently. Long story short*, somebody's smartphone (Android in this case) was responding to ARP requests (requesting the MAC of the server) even though it was showing its IP address as being assigned by DHCP. I reckon its previous IP on the user's home network was the same as our server, and for some reason kept answering to them.

    *Once I realised that packets didn't seem to be making it to the server (pings were intermittent), it dawned upon me to check the ARP tables on the clients. Looking up the manufacturer of the MAC address didn't immediately help as I didn't recognise the name, though I assumed it was a phone. At that stage I wasted time looking through all the phones looking for an IP address conflict (bad assumption). Finally looked up the DHCP leases for the offending MAC, found it's current IP (no hostname was provided by the client), found the offending phone, and very nearly shoved it the arse of the owner.

  14. Re:Suck it up. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Surprisingly smartphones have not been around forever and little Johnny & Sally still managed to make it thru daycare okay.

    You make it sound as if the advent of smartphones was the only thing that changed since the fifties. Guess what, people are now required to be "time flexible", and I guess the society changed in many other ways that make it desirable to be reachable.

    If there's an EMERGENCY, outsiders can call your employer's main number and ask for you. You get paid to work, not deal with personal matters.

    And that switch to the desk phone makes that call somehow...impersonal?

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  15. MobileIron by hagrin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We are actually in the midst of going through something similar at my company (a very open, not secretive environmental firm). We recognized through employee surveillance and traffic logs that cell phones were a huge security risk at our firm and the decision was made to control as much as we could while still maintaining our "Mom & Pop" company feel.

    We switched all of our cell phones from one carrier to ATT and we purchased the MobileIron software (VPS and Sentry) to control all the aspects of the company phones that enter our buildings. In addition, for the people who chose the monthly subsidy as opposed to a company phone, we prevent them from getting WiFi access from within our offices as best we can (MAC whitelisting isn't foolproof but helps with 99% of our users). We don't allow the non-company provided phones to work if they are plugged into workstations via USB cable. With MobileIron I can control basically every aspect of their smartphones including camera control, data usage, app installs, etc.

    Now, we don't have this fully running in production yet so I can't comment on the pitfalls I'm sure to face, but the short answer is workplaces don't necessarily need to ban smartphones as that could actually cripple some business processes; however, they are definitely a security threat that need to be managed just like other corporate and employee owned devices.

  16. What a good little slave you are by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My god, this attitude is amazing, what primitive part of the world did you grow up in? Most normal employers realize that work and private live are not so easily seperated and simply allow the two to intertwine. If I ask someone to stay late because of deadlines, can I then deny them time to make calls during office hours to arrange private things? Hell, this must be an American thing. Do you also object to people using the company printer?

    Of course, normal people realize there is a line, you can print out a form, your CV is a bit touchy and you do NOT print out a thousand copies of your novel but come on!

    If your tried that master slave attitude in Europe, you would find yourself soon with no employees left.

    Unless there is a VERY real need for security, everyone carries a mobile phone with them in Europe. The idea you shouldn't answer a personal call during office hours is just so 19th century. Come on, join us in the future, we got cookies!

    Ten to one this gti_guy doesn't have a job, lives in a trailer on government assistance and whines about all those leeches living of the state.

    People good enough at their job to have one know they are valuable and companies are willing to keep them happy.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:What a good little slave you are by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, it's certainly not an "American" thing. It's a bunch of indignant unmarried, childless aspies who've never actually faced the problem spouting off about their "issues" with policies like this. And I'm pretty sure there's no national boundaries for that.

      Most employers have a "reasonable personal use" policy. If you're spending hours on the phone gossipping with your neighbors, then yeah, you'll probably be talked to. Have to take a short break to call the doctor's office to schedule a checkup? Call your wife to ask her to pick up the kids because you're going to be stuck at the office a little later than expected? Call the plumber to come fix that frozen pipe? Arrange with UPS to pick up the package at their delivery center since you won't be home to receive it? Get a call from daycare to let you know that little Johnny just had an allergic reaction?

      These are all typical things you might need to do during the day, and these are all typical things that corporate "acceptable use policy" will deem "acceptable use," except for certain very specific cases - i.e., DoD contracting, very very secret "trade secret" work, etc. Most companies won't allow you to connect personal devices to the corporate network, but more and more of them are setting up secondary "internet only" networks for phones, tablets, personal laptops, and the like. This concern about "they could hijack your phone and take pictures of your facility and map the interior!" is silly for anybody who doesn't work in a top secret facility.

      Here's an easy rule of thumb test: if you can bring your kid into your office and let them sit around there with you... you don't need to restrict cell phone use.

  17. Re:If you make more than minimum wage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No, it most certainly is not. Salary negotiated by both parties is indeed enough compensation because you were involved in its negotiation. The number of hours per week you owe to your employer is part of your employment contract. Beyond that contract is not covered and therefore NOT COVERED. I am happy to go above and beyond for a company I enjoy working for, but my rights are my rights.

  18. Occam wanna sell you a razor by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 3, Funny

    If you need to make a personal call that you do not want to/cant make from your desk line, go out to your car during lunch and make it.

    What do you recommend for people who use public transit instead of driving to work?

    Go outside and make the call? I mean, how many people are out there working in submarines, underground silos or a bunker in the middle of the Mojave Desert for whom the simplest, most general case solution is not applicable?

    1. Re:Occam wanna sell you a razor by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 4, Funny

      You can get a mobile phone signal on a Submarine? I didn't even know they'd licensed the ULF Range :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    2. Re:Occam wanna sell you a razor by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That will be fun when one is stolen or misplaced. I am sure the company will love replacing them.

  19. Re:Suck it up. by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Am I too old or something? We always ran our personal lives from work, but it used to be a lot more invasive. You couldn't take care of many things online, so you had to leave work during working hours to take care of it. Any time you needed customer service, you had to use the telephone at work. You'd have errands to run, so you would either come in late, take an extended lunch, or leave early. Expecting a call? You had to hover near your desk so that you wouldn't miss it.

    I won't defend tweeting, updating Facebook, and the like - but I think that most employers recognize that letting people take care of some personal stuff while at work ultimately improves productivity.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  20. Re:Suck it up. by HereIAmJH · · Score: 3, Funny

    You usually have to repeat yourself several times before finally loudly yelling "Hemorrhoids!"

    Yeah, and my doctor keeps telling me he can't do anything about my boss.

    --
    Another day, another update to a Google android app.