Slashdot Mirror


Most Companies Will Require You To Bring Your Own Mobile Device By 2017

Lucas123 writes "Half of all employers will require workers to supply their own mobile devices for work purposes by 2017, according to a new Gartner study. Enterprises that offer only corporately-owned smartphones or stipends to buy your own will soon become the exception to the rule in the next few years. As enterprise BYOD programs proliferate, 38% of companies expect to stop providing devices to workers by 2016 and let them use their own, according to a global survey of CIOs by Gartner. At the same time, security remains the top BYOD concern. 'What happens if you buy a device for an employee and they leave the job a month later? How are you going to settle up? Better to keep it simple. The employee owns the device, and the company helps to cover usage costs,' said David Willis, a distinguished analyst at Gartner."

381 comments

  1. So.... by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As enterprise BYOD programs proliferate, 38% of companies expect to stop providing devices to workers by 2016 and let them use their own

    Do they get to monitor communications or wipe my own device now if anything goes wrong?

    1. Re:So.... by admdrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah, there's software out there to do exactly that, that a lot of employers (I'm in the network security field) already require to be installed if you want to connect to work resources.

    2. Re:So.... by afidel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I see the future of BYOD being running another OS instance for the work apps, or possibly a separate easily switched profile with encrypted storage. One of the biggest hurdles right now with iOS and BYOD is that the end user can easily recover the wiped data from their last icloud backup. There are similar concerns with personal Dropbox accounts, how do you regain control of your corporate data once it's on an account that the user controls? There are solutions to the problem like windows rights management server (DRM for corporate documents) but they don't tend to play well with machines that aren't part of the central infrastructure, and are especially poor at support non-PC platforms.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    3. Re:So.... by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Agreed, although the Dropbox-related concern has already existed on regular work machines (assuming you're able to install software, which many people in technical roles are allowed to do).

    4. Re:So.... by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

      I have a separate hard drive on my personal computer to boot from when I work from home, and I would love to be able to seamlessly use my phone to connect to work as well. Given the choice between my employer's giving me a non-android device (Given that my current phone is android based) and my bringing my own device, I would much rather bring my own device.

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
    5. Re:So.... by ArhcAngel · · Score: 4, Informative

      I see the future of BYOD being running another OS instance for the work apps, or possibly a separate easily switched profile with encrypted storage.

      So...BlackBerry Balance then

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    6. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EEEWAT? Half of all people who buy what they read in computer magazines will still be wanking to pr0n in the restroom stall at work on their very own smart phone. This number already approaches 38% of all male employees.( the women are smart enough to do the boss or discreet enough to do a train in the mailroom)
      Employers of fragile companies need to watch their egos before their employees abandon ship for the competitor. Hard to hire a lawyer to file suits for breech of trade secrets, when you haven't got a pot to piss in.

              Just more garbage from a writer paid by the word to tickle your worry bone.

    7. Re:So.... by afidel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, and VMWare ready for Android devices, and the user profiles from Android 4.2 refined, and the encrypted partition and app space from Good, and a whole host of other existing solutions, but if BYOD is going to become pervasive it's going to need to be built in at the system level and be easy to manage (I have to give RIM credit, balance does a pretty good job of meeting all these needs, it's just a second tier platform at this point).

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    8. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perfect! I won't be using my devices for their communication then.

      I already don't. I don't sync my e-mail to my phone. People say it makes work easier, but why would I want being able to work to be any easier than it already is after hours?

      If I'm working, I'm generally in front of a PC or near one wherein I can read e-mail, I can receive texts if I desire and the people who need to know my number know it.

      There is no wiping and reloading required, or allowed due to this.

    9. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. My company's policy is you can totally use your own device; they're just going to install some remote-wipe software on it for you.

    10. Re:So.... by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      They can't. You can freeze the remote app if it is your own phone. You can even script to disconnect remote a wipe app from connecting. Remote wipe apps have been defeated so many times. You can use a firewall for mobile device and block that app from connecting. You can even uninstall a remote wipe app if you like if you search on-line. There is always an airplane mode too.

    11. Re:So.... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Do they get to monitor communications or wipe my own device now if anything goes wrong?

      If you're connected using Active Sync, your employer can already wipe your device, using an Active Sync wipe request.

      Manufacturers that license the ActiveSync protocol are required to implement this as specified, on their device, so the device must honor the wipe request.

      Don't associate your device with your org's Exchange server, if you don't want your employer to be able to wipe it.

    12. Re:So.... by PNutts · · Score: 2

      I expect to get the living hell modded out of me when I say the iPhone has been a secure platform for BYOD for awhile now (I don't remember if it's the 3GS or 4 where security was tightened up). Besides the Configurator, something as humble as ActiveSync can manage them. Same goes for many of the latest Android devices. The point is it's easy to natively get strong security on a mobile device. How good it meets your needs depends on your needs.

    13. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the company owns the device, and the employee leaves, the employee must return the device. Nice and simple.

      If the employee wants a device for personal use, that should be a separate device that the employee owns.

      I think that is simpler and better all around.

    14. Re:So.... by admdrew · · Score: 2

      Yeah, exactly. I'm on Android, and within the last year our standard connection to our work Exchange server required me to accept some basic management settings (remote wiping included) just to be able to pull my mail down, no extra software needed.

    15. Re:So.... by Dadoo · · Score: 1

      Do they get to monitor communications or wipe my own device now if anything goes wrong?

      I wouldn't worry about it. This will never happen at any company that has any concern about security. An employee can do what they want with their own computer, so it's a perfect vector for viruses, etc. If we give them a computer, we can say "this is to be used only for work." How can we allow them to bring their own devices, when we can't even allow them to plug in a USB key?

      At my office, we don't even allow wireless connections, internally. The access points are connected to a router that's completely outside the firewall, and they're only turned on when we know someone's using it.

      --
      Sit, Ubuntu, sit. Good dog.
    16. Re:So.... by admdrew · · Score: 1

      There is always an airplane mode too.

      Well, not always. You deal in such absolutes!

    17. Re:So.... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "I wouldn't worry about it. This will never happen at any company that has any concern about security."

      Besides that: if they want me to use my own hardware, they can damned well pay me for it.

      I'm not going to erase (or endanger!) my personal software and files for the purpose of someone else's company, and as far as I am concerned, equipment works the same as simply showing up. That is: if they want me to be there, they can pay me for the time I am there. If they want the use of my equipment, they can pay for the use of it. Or they can buy their own. They aren't going to get it both ways.

    18. Re:So.... by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      I see the future of BYOD being running another OS instance for the work apps, or possibly a separate easily switched profile with encrypted storage.

      It's easier to just sync/backup my Android phone to my personal laptop. Wipe whatever you want... my mail is copied via pop3 from gmail to my laptop (and backed up from there to the home server), and my phone is backed up similarly. Restoration is trivial at best.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    19. Re:So.... by ryanov · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If it's my device that I paid for, I *don't* want to connect to work resources. Fuck that. My device, my number, none of your business.

    20. Re:So.... by ryanov · · Score: 1

      I used to think this way, but I'm frequently away from my desk long enough for it to matter (or in meetings or in the server room or whatever). 30 mins may not seem like a long time to be away from one's desk, but if something goes wrong, I tend to want to know.

    21. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way too obvious there, kiddo. Go back to Digg and practice some more; you're not ready to troll here yet.

    22. Re:So.... by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm as big a fan of the iPhone as anyone, but the tools you mention don't work for BYOD. They're great for company owned and managed devices. But it's not "Your Own Device" if you're letting someone else control it with those profiles or activesync connections. If I've paid for hardware with my own money, it's mine... period, full stop. No one else gets admin, root, remote-wipe, find my iPhone, or whatever privileges but me.

      I'd allow a company-controlled encrypted partition or something. But *I* retain control of *my* device as a whole. Apple's tools don't yet allow such a solution.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    23. Re:So.... by Solandri · · Score: 5, Informative

      Samsung is already working on a solution to that. Basically, instead of your employer having full run of the phone, all the employer stuff is put into a sandboxed instance of the OS. Your personal phone runs into another sandboxed instance. Like having two virtual machines running simultaneously, you can flip between the two. Your employer has full control over one, and you have full control over the other.

      I'm a little skeptical of how well it'll work in practice (backups will probably be problematic). But if they can pull it off, it will eliminate the need to carry two phones just because your workplace wants full access and control.

    24. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the employee could not copy the data when they actually still have access to it. Stop being so damn paranoid. ONly give each person access to the data they actually need. Hire good persons, pay them well, trust them, don't be a dick and they will not disappear with your precious data.

    25. Re:So.... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Don't associate your device with your org's Exchange server, if you don't want your employer to be able to wipe it.

      My employer can attach my arse to their exchange server. Wipe that if you want motherfuckers

    26. Re:So.... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      BINGO! and that is why I carry TWO devices. Work stuff is done on Work provided equipment, personal stuff (like Slashdot posts) from personal equipment. I do little "lunchtime surfing" from work machines anymore.

      That's been the "best practice" the last 5 years or so... Lock the hell out of company owned machines. It was as much for LICENSING purposes as security. All the software houses sued employers for per worker access, so companies locked their stuff down. And it makes a great environment to manage.

      Most of this is driven by moving to Citrix where you just use "personal" devices to drive the super locked-down VM instance... You can barely take screen shots on the personal device. I'm not going to tolerate ANY MONITORING OR LOCKDOWN on MY personal device. Not to mention the flagrant attempt to grab UNPAID work hours by pushing everything to YOUR equipment do you can't get away.

    27. Re:So.... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      It's Citrix kids. My company already runs all their SAP instances, even for internal machines off Citrix VMs. It's trivial to allow an iPad to drive one remotely, and all the information stays on the VM if you lock it down tight enough.

      The problem is that mobile networks are nowhere near fast and reliable enough to run Citrix all the time for email and messaging.. So companies are still going to want THEIR DATA on YOUR device and cry about "losing it" just as fast.

    28. Re:So.... by oldlurker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I expect to get the living hell modded out of me when I say the iPhone has been a secure platform for BYOD for awhile now (I don't remember if it's the 3GS or 4 where security was tightened up). Besides the Configurator, something as humble as ActiveSync can manage them. Same goes for many of the latest Android devices. The point is it's easy to natively get strong security on a mobile device. How good it meets your needs depends on your needs.

      If you let company admin access to lock and wipe your device, control what apps you install and use - like fx very insecure data-syncing services like icloud/dropbox, etc. then it is not really your personal BYOD device anymore, it is a company device. If you don't have this, the device is not company secure (it doesn't help enforcing local device encryption and password policies to prevent access to company data if you are leaking same company data to highly insecure consumer cloud services or in other ways setting up and using your phone in an insecure way).

      As several others have said on the thread already, the answer for BYOD security is that the phone needs to be running a controlled separate/virtual environment for the company that is completely walled off from the personal part of your phone.

    29. Re:So.... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's exactly the point, and that's how it's being sold. From my companies boss, he wants to give everybody a stipend for "a device" load up Citrix and said lockdown for company days, then let them do whatever they want.

      So basically his version of BYOD is letting you use "any"device but the company is still going to tell YOU what to do with it. Extend that to the cheap-ass employers that will just expect you to bring your OWN PAID FOR device in and bastard IT people that wipe YOUR data whenever the boss says.

      It's a whole "bag of hurt" for legal reasons as well. Jailbreaking, personal medical or legal data, not to mention music or media (and porn) all being carried around the workplace all day. It's an HR nightmare! I have just enough ODD to put clopping fan service as a screensaver just to piss one of those chea ass bosses off.

    30. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like the employee could not copy the data when they actually still have access to it. Stop being so damn paranoid. ONly give each person access to the data they actually need. Hire good persons, pay them well, trust them, don't be a dick and they will not disappear with your precious data.

      There is a difference between the act of copying company data manually, and for convenience consistently potentially risk leaking it through clever but insecure sync and device setups, for one. And as for only getting access to what you need - many employees would need fx information about customers and users. That doesn't mean that your company hasn't got a responsibility to control how that customer and user information is handled.

    31. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So the summary would be it's not BYOD but actually GTYD (give them your device)?

    32. Re:So.... by peragrin · · Score: 1

      That is the whole trick, what is needed is a device with two sim, and two (profiles, partitions, etc)
      that will allow companies to select, limit, and control what is on their side, while you can have your home stuff on your own.

      combined inbox's work okay, but think about this, do you really want the inbox you use for personal stuff in the same pane as the inbox you use for work? I want those two things as far apart as possible both mentally and physically.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    33. Re:So.... by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      I'm as big a fan of the iPhone as anyone, but the tools you mention don't work for BYOD. They're great for company owned and managed devices. But it's not "Your Own Device" if you're letting someone else control it with those profiles or activesync connections. If I've paid for hardware with my own money, it's mine... period, full stop. No one else gets admin, root, remote-wipe, find my iPhone, or whatever privileges but me.

      Then you don't get access to their network with your device. I have a client that requires I allow remote wipe in exchange for Exchange Server access. For me, the ability to get emails anywhere anytime outweighs any concerns I have about giving them access.

      Another issue, however, is labor and other law. What happens if you require employees to allow access and then expect them to work after hours? Are they entitled to overtime? Are you liable if they have an accident while answering an email? What happens if proprietary or private data gets leaked before you wipe? Who gets fined? While I can see the advantges of having one phone and getting reimbursed for its use, a company needs to look past the cost savings and assess the risk, financial and otherwise, before making this leap. While they may have gigabytes of procedures they put the onus on the employee in an attempt to avoid liability, they generally are the deep pockets with the most to lose.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    34. Re:So.... by Rich0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm as big a fan of the iPhone as anyone, but the tools you mention don't work for BYOD.

      What you aren't getting is that "Bring Your Own Device" really just means "Pay For The Company's Device."

      The company treats it like they own it. They get admin access. They lock the user from setting preferences (like screen lock settings, etc). They wipe it if they decide they don't need you any longer. They specify what kind of device you can bring.

      Basically you're buying a device, then leasing it free of charge to the company for the duration of your employment. You get it back when you quit.

    35. Re:So.... by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      BINGO! and that is why I carry TWO devices. Work stuff is done on Work provided equipment, personal stuff (like Slashdot posts) from personal equipment. I do little "lunchtime surfing" from work machines anymore. That's been the "best practice" the last 5 years or so...

      Why would a company provide you with equipment when they can coerce you to buying it for them? That's basically the issue here. They'll tell you that you don't need to carry two phones - but what most don't realize is that the phone you're giving up isn't the extra company-provided one but rather the personal one. You're just still paying for it.

    36. Re:So.... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      No, but you WILL be on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week from now on.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    37. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there's software out there to do exactly that, that a lot of employers (I'm in the network security field) already require to be installed if you want to connect to work resources.

      Whether it can be done and whether it can be done legally are two different things. If I understand you correctly, your company is installing software on employee's phones that can monitor and access their communications. That would seem to violate a number of federal laws. Of course one can argue that the employee is not required to have the software installed, but without it they cannot access corporate resources, so it is up to them. That is fine until you do what the article is talking about by requiring them to provide their own mobile device to have their job. Basically, if they must provide their own mobile device to do their work AND you require them to install corporate spyware, I mean security software on their phone, then effectively you are back to square one where you are monitoring and accessing their communications. If you further go and wipe their phone, you have now destroyed their personal data, or should I say IP? If you wipe their phone after they have terminated employment, then not only have you been monitoring and accessing a private citizens communications, but now you have destroyed their personal data and IP.

      You cannot mandate that employees must provide their own devices and that you, as employer, have free reign to all of their personal data and communications. Well, you can, but plan on spending a lot of time in court.

    38. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have a separate hard drive on my personal computer to boot from when I work from home, and I would love to be able to seamlessly use my phone to connect to work as well. Given the choice between my employer's giving me a non-android device (Given that my current phone is android based) and my bringing my own device, I would much rather bring my own device.

      Would you have that same feeling if your employer insisted on being able to monitor your calls, texts, data and other uses of your personal phone plus have the capabilities to wipe it? That is what the OP is saying his company does.

    39. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      I expect to get the living hell modded out of me when I say the iPhone has been a secure platform for BYOD for awhile now (I don't remember if it's the 3GS or 4 where security was tightened up). Besides the Configurator, something as humble as ActiveSync can manage them. Same goes for many of the latest Android devices. The point is it's easy to natively get strong security on a mobile device. How good it meets your needs depends on your needs.

      Did Apple and all of the Android makers get rid of the cameras? As long as cell phones have built in cameras, if your concern is about corporate data falling into the wrong hands, your data is at risk. So called spy cameras were around long before cell phones and were quite effective in both corporate and government espionage. Basically, if your employee can see it, whether on the screen or in print, a smart phone can capture the data.

      I consulted for a certain government contractor that was very security conscious and provided cell phones. However on each of them the camera had been physically disabled.

    40. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, exactly. I'm on Android, and within the last year our standard connection to our work Exchange server required me to accept some basic management settings (remote wiping included) just to be able to pull my mail down, no extra software needed.

      You shouldn't have signed away your rights like that. Maybe you are comfortable giving your employer access to all the data on your phone, including photos, passwords and everything else. Most people probably would think the pictures you took in Vegas aren't any of your employer's business. Out of curiousity, if you change those basic management settings, does your email still work? If not, then something more than just settings was done to your phone, maybe software was installed remotely?

      Personally, if my employer feels I need access to email or to be reached 24/7, it is their responsibility to provide the means for that. They do not have the right to takeover my personal property or data just because I work there. Put differently, if there is a business reason for them needing me to receive emails/texts/calls outside of normal working hours, then they should provide a business solution. If I want to do it for my own convenience on my own device, well, then I would have to weigh the convenience against all the privacy issues involved.

    41. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2

      I'm as big a fan of the iPhone as anyone, but the tools you mention don't work for BYOD.

      What you aren't getting is that "Bring Your Own Device" really just means "Pay For The Company's Device."

      The company treats it like they own it. They get admin access. They lock the user from setting preferences (like screen lock settings, etc). They wipe it if they decide they don't need you any longer. They specify what kind of device you can bring.

      Basically you're buying a device, then leasing it free of charge to the company for the duration of your employment. You get it back when you quit.

      I already commented or I would mod you up, but that is exactly what is going on. If a company has a business reason that you need access to mail and other company resources 24/7 then they should provide the device. If there is no business reason for it, then why would anybody voluntarily want to do this and trade away their privacy to boot?

    42. Re:So.... by gottabeme · · Score: 2

      And what's to stop you from running an app that tells the Exchange server you've accepted those settings and then ignore them?

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    43. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      I see the future of BYOD being running another OS instance for the work apps, or possibly a separate easily switched profile with encrypted storage.

      It's easier to just sync/backup my Android phone to my personal laptop. Wipe whatever you want... my mail is copied via pop3 from gmail to my laptop (and backed up from there to the home server), and my phone is backed up similarly. Restoration is trivial at best.

      Unless you think your company is too stupid to think that you might do this, what makes you think they haven't taken measures that included in your backups is the ability to wipe those same backups from where ever you have copied them? If you signed an agreement allowing your company to wipe the data, unless it specifically identified the device in question, they technically can wipe it and all copies of it. After all, you've given them permission (maybe not you, but people signing such agreements).

    44. Re:So.... by jrjarrett · · Score: 1

      Personally, if my employer feels I need access to email or to be reached 24/7, it is their responsibility to provide the means for that. They do not have the right to takeover my personal property or data just because I work there. Put differently, if there is a business reason for them needing me to receive emails/texts/calls outside of normal working hours, then they should provide a business solution. If I want to do it for my own convenience on my own device, well, then I would have to weigh the convenience against all the privacy issues involved.

      This. I just tried to argue this same point where I work; I work in an IT group that has a rotating 24x7 on call. We had employer-issued Blackberries, which both received SMS messages and could connect to email. Since we had had them for a while, the SMS alerts over time had evolved to "X has failed. Check your email for details." Then the company forced us to turn in our Blackberries and went to a BYOD. I tried, unsuccessfully, to argue your point. I get spotty coverage on my personal phone, and none in the building, so that would rule out my personal device. Plus I refuse to allow the company control of my device, stipend or no. The alternative was to accept a "penny phone" (a Samsung Chronos 2). I was very clear with my boss and boss' boss what that could mean for response to pages. So far, nothing has come up, but I also am kind of heistant to stray far from home when I am on call.

    45. Re:So.... by Kielistic · · Score: 1

      Expect new laws enacted to protect the corporation from these lawsuits.

    46. Re:So.... by Scragglykat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, if you use Android mail with Exchange 2010, you have to accept the policy agreement that they can now remote wipe your phone... hopefully that won't be used against you, and only if you lose your phone, but then again, I've seen it used a lot in cases where employees get fired, be it for a good reason or due to corporate politics, and they had their phones wiped the same day... there go your contacts, your email, your pictures, all of it. The software also allows them to remote lock your phone or disable features like the camera. Might be time to get a second device.

    47. Re:So.... by biffsocko5783 · · Score: 1

      I work for Goliath National Bank. We have the option of being assigned a Blackberry or BYOD. I choose BYOD I use a google voice number that I direct to my cell phone for work. When I leave the company I can change the google voice number or choose to keep it if I don't mind staying in touch with people I've networked with. As an employee of Goliath National Bank, I get a %20 discount on my cell phone bill every month, and they give me $25 a month towards my bill for selecting the BYOD option. In exchange, I have loaded an app called "Good for Enterprise" [http://www.good.com]. They have access to the data in that one app, but not to anything else on my phone. Through the app I can get my corporate email, calender, etc. So .. I think the BYOD option works well. I don't give up rights to my phone, and Goliath National Bank can log communications done through my corporate email account using their app.

    48. Re:So.... by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Unless you think your company is too stupid to think that you might do this, what makes you think they haven't taken measures that included in your backups is the ability to wipe those same backups from where ever you have copied them?

      What makes you think they have access to my personal laptop to do any such thing?

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    49. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2

      Personally, if my employer feels I need access to email or to be reached 24/7, it is their responsibility to provide the means for that. They do not have the right to takeover my personal property or data just because I work there. Put differently, if there is a business reason for them needing me to receive emails/texts/calls outside of normal working hours, then they should provide a business solution. If I want to do it for my own convenience on my own device, well, then I would have to weigh the convenience against all the privacy issues involved.

      This.

      I just tried to argue this same point where I work; I work in an IT group that has a rotating 24x7 on call. We had employer-issued Blackberries, which both received SMS messages and could connect to email.

      Since we had had them for a while, the SMS alerts over time had evolved to "X has failed. Check your email for details."

      Then the company forced us to turn in our Blackberries and went to a BYOD. I tried, unsuccessfully, to argue your point. I get spotty coverage on my personal phone, and none in the building, so that would rule out my personal device. Plus I refuse to allow the company control of my device, stipend or no.

        The alternative was to accept a "penny phone" (a Samsung Chronos 2). I was very clear with my boss and boss' boss what that could mean for response to pages. So far, nothing has come up, but I also am kind of heistant to stray far from home when I am on call.

      You are in a win-win situation. They can only monitor when the sms went out. If you aren't in range, you can't be held accountable for not receiving it. Since it is your phone and your personal property, they can't even ask to see the phone to check the logs. So, if a message comes in and you don't want to go, well, you never received it, did you? (Of course, it would be helpful if your concerns had been documented in writing)

    50. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Unless you think your company is too stupid to think that you might do this, what makes you think they haven't taken measures that included in your backups is the ability to wipe those same backups from where ever you have copied them?

      What makes you think they have access to my personal laptop to do any such thing?

      You said you backed up your phone to your personal laptop. If they have access to your phone, they have access to what was copied to your personal laptop because they could have installed anything on your phone that would have been copied over. Depending on how you backed up your phone, you could have a nice little trojan sitting there just waiting and listening and the next time you back up your phone if it doesn't have the proper response it automatically wipes the hard drive it is on.

      Basically, if your company has control of your phone and you sync your phone to your computer, your company can put whatever they want on your computer.

    51. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one else gets admin, root, remote-wipe, find my iPhone, or whatever privileges but me.

      ...and Apple, Verizon/AT&T.

    52. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok and who controls the boot loader and recovery console ?
      if i do they lost control of the data
      if they do they dont get access in the fisrt place

      stalemate

    53. Re:So.... by admdrew · · Score: 1

      That's interesting - do you know if/how this can be done?

    54. Re:So.... by admdrew · · Score: 1

      If I understand you correctly, your company is installing software on employee's phones that can monitor and access their communications. That would seem to violate a number of federal laws.

      While I certainly think this is BAD, it's probably not illegal, because permission is technically being given by the employee.

      Ultimately I don't think Gartner is correct in saying companies will *require* employees to BYOD, it's far more likely that they'll *allow* employees to use their own devices, as long as they agree to/install this type of software, which is what is currently being done.

    55. Re:So.... by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Out of curiousity, if you change those basic management settings, does your email still work?

      It appears to be built into the Android email client that supports Exchange, so it's not a setting that can be manually toggled. When I first add the account on my phone and punch in my connection settings, that security dialog pops up, and if I don't "agree", I'm just not able to pull email down.

    56. Re:So.... by admdrew · · Score: 2

      If they could remotely wipe that, I'd actually be interested.

    57. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For some people, the convenience of a single device outweighs possible privacy concerns. Not all of us are shooting our new gay porn magnum opus with our iPhone 5.

      If you are more worried about a pre-release leak, then you should tell your company that you don't want to submit your device to BYOD, and ask them to provide you with a company-sponsored one instead, and then enjoy carrying around the two devices.

      Different people can have different requirements, and be completely satisfied with different outcomes. It doesn't all have to be "hurr durr, these people are stupids because they don't have the same requirements I do."

    58. Re:So.... by Martin+Blank · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm right there with you. As one of the security people involved with implementing BYOD (though somewhat peripherally) at my last job, I opted to keep the Blackberry issued to me rather than attach my phone to the enterprise network even though I had admin access to the system. Many people thought I was nuts, but I draw a fairly clear line between work and personal life. Knowing what can be monitored, I opted to maintain that line.

      I think that might be one of the things people don't realize, even if they read what the company should be supplying. The mobile device security industry is changing rapidly with hooks going much deeper than they used to. One product that we looked at (but didn't implement) allowed not only monitoring of call logs but copied all text and MMS messages to or from the device up to the server for archiving, something I viewed as far too invasive for BYOD. Even if it was deleted immediately from the device, the software grabbed it and copied it up (or archived it for copying if data wasn't available). But with companies clambering over each other for features, I'm sure it wasn't long before others added it to their own lists.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    59. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly the point, and that's how it's being sold. From my companies boss, he wants to give everybody a stipend for "a device" load up Citrix and said lockdown for company days, then let them do whatever they want.

      So basically his version of BYOD is letting you use "any"device but the company is still going to tell YOU what to do with it. Extend that to the cheap-ass employers that will just expect you to bring your OWN PAID FOR device in and bastard IT people that wipe YOUR data whenever the boss says.

      It's a whole "bag of hurt" for legal reasons as well. Jailbreaking, personal medical or legal data, not to mention music or media (and porn) all being carried around the workplace all day. It's an HR nightmare! I have just enough ODD to put clopping fan service as a screensaver just to piss one of those chea ass bosses off.

      And with plenty of laptops, thumb drives, and cloud providers in use today on corporate networks, I fail to see how this is a "bag of hurt" legally. People can (and do) bring porn, pics, and music into work all the time.

      If you think that HR nightmare doesn't go on in the workplace today, or requires a cell phone to happen, then that is your problem to deal with.

    60. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If it's my device that I paid for, I *don't* want to connect to work resources. Fuck that. My device, my number, none of your business.

      Yup, agreed.

      And there are plenty of at-will employers that will respond with "You're fired. Fuck you. My company. My rules. None of your business as to why I fired you. Bye."

      One can be firm in a stance, but one might find themselves standing alone.

    61. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then buy a second phone; this is the modern equivalent of construction workers who bring in their own toolbox.

    62. Re:So.... by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      One product that we looked at (but didn't implement) allowed not only monitoring of call logs but copied all text and MMS messages to or from the device up to the server for archiving, something I viewed as far too invasive for BYOD. Even if it was deleted immediately from the device, the software grabbed it and copied it up (or archived it for copying if data wasn't available). But with companies clambering over each other for features, I'm sure it wasn't long before others added it to their own lists

      Companies will generally be interested in such a feature to protect themselves against e-Discovery requests, your personal information be damned. Just wait until someone has a BYOD and is accused of a crime personally, and the prosecution serves an e-Discovery for the employees information to their employer...

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    63. Re:So.... by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      Unless you think your company is too stupid to think that you might do this, what makes you think they haven't taken measures that included in your backups is the ability to wipe those same backups from where ever you have copied them?

      What makes you think they have access to my personal laptop to do any such thing?

      You said you backed up your phone to your personal laptop. If they have access to your phone, they have access to what was copied to your personal laptop because they could have installed anything on your phone that would have been copied over. Depending on how you backed up your phone, you could have a nice little trojan sitting there just waiting and listening and the next time you back up your phone if it doesn't have the proper response it automatically wipes the hard drive it is on.

      Basically, if your company has control of your phone and you sync your phone to your computer, your company can put whatever they want on your computer.

      Only works if they all run Windows, and the backup software from the phone to laptop to server runs the software taken from the phone, or the process of backuping up the phone (and subsequently the server) can trigger an exploit in the host OS to do so. In a heterogenous environment - e.g. ARM devices to x86 devices as is nearly all Android and all iOS devices - that would be very, very hard to do. In a homogenous environment - e.g. Windows Phone, Windows OS, - it would have some tricks, but it would be within reason of possibilty.

      Still, a company could have quite the legal risk if they did that...so it wouldn't be worth it to most companies for that reason alone. The company could, for instance, be in violation of the CFAA, among other things, for doing that. It would have similar consequences to the HP hacking scandal a few years back.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    64. Re:So.... by Sabah+Arif · · Score: 1

      My employer uses Exchange ActiveSync and will only wipe work-related information if the phone is stolen or if you are no longer employed there. Not sure why virtualizing a second instance of the OS would be more desirable to ActiveSync in most situations.

    65. Re:So.... by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 2

      Only works if they all run Windows, and the backup software from the phone to laptop to server runs the software taken from the phone, or the process of backuping up the phone (and subsequently the server) can trigger an exploit in the host OS to do so. In a heterogenous environment - e.g. ARM devices to x86 devices as is nearly all Android and all iOS devices - that would be very, very hard to do. In a homogenous environment - e.g. Windows Phone, Windows OS, - it would have some tricks, but it would be within reason of possibilty.

      Actually it could be much simpler than that. Supposed it wipes your phone, but leaves a bit of code on the phone so the next time you go to sync, it checks itself and if the flag was set to wipe the phone, it then wipes the synced files or hard drive instead. There is already a product that does exactly that on the market.

      Still, a company could have quite the legal risk if they did that...so it wouldn't be worth it to most companies for that reason alone. The company could, for instance, be in violation of the CFAA, among other things, for doing that. It would have similar consequences to the HP hacking scandal a few years back.

      They wouldn't have any legal risk if you signed an agreement that allowed them to do so. Could be in your employment papers, or employee manual or any number of other places that if you didn't read the whole thing carefully, you wouldn't realize what you were signing away.

    66. Re:So.... by cyn1c77 · · Score: 2

      If it's my device that I paid for, I *don't* want to connect to work resources. Fuck that. My device, my number, none of your business.

      Yup, agreed.

      And there are plenty of at-will employers that will respond with "You're fired. Fuck you. My company. My rules. None of your business as to why I fired you. Bye."

      One can be firm in a stance, but one might find themselves standing alone.

      Actually, they won't do that because it is a lawsuit waiting to happen. It's discrimination to only retain employees who have their own smartphone. If an employee doesn't have means to pay for a smartphone, the company needs to provide a basic one for them OR a stipend able to cover the entire cost of one for the functionality necessary for company work.

      This is very similar to only hiring employees with cars: You can't legally get away with that for most jobs; instead they can only expect employees to have reliable and on-time transportation.

      Think of the field-day that the ACLU will have with this issue.

    67. Re:So.... by RevSpaminator · · Score: 1

      Yes. You are their property and will be monitored at all times.

    68. Re:So.... by TemporalBeing · · Score: 1

      Only works if they all run Windows, and the backup software from the phone to laptop to server runs the software taken from the phone, or the process of backuping up the phone (and subsequently the server) can trigger an exploit in the host OS to do so. In a heterogenous environment - e.g. ARM devices to x86 devices as is nearly all Android and all iOS devices - that would be very, very hard to do. In a homogenous environment - e.g. Windows Phone, Windows OS, - it would have some tricks, but it would be within reason of possibilty.

      Actually it could be much simpler than that. Supposed it wipes your phone, but leaves a bit of code on the phone so the next time you go to sync, it checks itself and if the flag was set to wipe the phone, it then wipes the synced files or hard drive instead. There is already a product that does exactly that on the market.

      Then it wouldn't have been a wipe, and it'd be in violation of their own policy and the agreement.
      The wipes work by wiping out everything on the device except the base operating system. All data, settings, etc are wiped, the drive formatted. It's back to factory state.

      Still, a company could have quite the legal risk if they did that...so it wouldn't be worth it to most companies for that reason alone. The company could, for instance, be in violation of the CFAA, among other things, for doing that. It would have similar consequences to the HP hacking scandal a few years back.

      They wouldn't have any legal risk if you signed an agreement that allowed them to do so. Could be in your employment papers, or employee manual or any number of other places that if you didn't read the whole thing carefully, you wouldn't realize what you were signing away.

      An agreement only suffices for the activity that was agreed on, and can only operate within the bounds of the law. It would not allow them to insert software to take over your personal computers when you synchronize a BYOD device with your home computer or anything else. If an agreement is un-lawful, then it is void under the law.

      So yes, be careful what you sign; but whatever you sign still has to be within the boundaries of the law. If you sign something saying you will murder someone, then it is a non-lawful agreement (since murder is illegal) and thus you are not bound to it by the law.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    69. Re:So.... by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Uhm, if your allowing company data to be stored on iCloud, you have already failed at your job. Not being able to remote wipe it is simple a side effect of your previous failure.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    70. Re:So.... by afidel · · Score: 1

      Because if it's your device do you want to lose all your data because you left your employer?!?

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    71. Re:So.... by Sabah+Arif · · Score: 1

      If it's work email, then it's not your information. I would rather not have work emails from jobs I no longer have on my device.

    72. Re:So.... by afidel · · Score: 1

      Uh, an Activesync wipe doesn't just remove email, it wipes the device, same as a factory reset. That means all your apps, their data, any photos, videos, or music you have, etc.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    73. Re:So.... by Sabah+Arif · · Score: 1

      Yuck. You're right. My IT director lied to me. http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb124591.aspx

    74. Re:So.... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      This was the sort of creepy side of employment that I never got on with. Employers limiting use of company resources and monitoring those resources to comply with regulatory obligations is one thing. Employers treating employees as robots instead of humans, with no mechanism for private communication during office hours even if it's for something like calling your doctor during your lunch break, is something that I believe should only happen in cases of genuine need (and there are very few cases where it's impractical to provide even a dedicated private facility independent of company networks etc.). Employers treating employees as full-time robots, with the right to control or monitor what they do outside work in any capacity that doesn't interfere with the reasonable performance of their employment duties, is almost automatically a bridge too far.

      The thing I found most worrying about the trend was that a combination of big business control freakery and one-sided "monitor/audit everything" government regulation, even when done with apparently reasonable intentions, seems to be overtaking anything resembling personal privacy and work/life balance, as well as often imposing overheads that the businesses themselves have to cover. This is how we get employers, or even prospective employers, demanding access to things like people's social networks and personal devices in IMHO completely inappropriate ways.

      I don't see any solution to this short of legislation with actual teeth, and for those in places where the government culture is dominated by the interests of big business and/or personal privacy is not legally protected to any significant degree (the US being probably the most obvious example today, though it's hardly alone on either score), it's tough to see where that legislation is going to come from. And without it, it's hard to see how BYOD can ever be compatible with onerous regulatory frameworks in a way that doesn't screw the employee.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    75. Re:So.... by RevDisk · · Score: 1

      I'm the "company admin" guy, and I want my own walled off corporate section.

      We went BYOD, which has made everyone happier. Users never like whatever we choose (except for the blessed "I don't care" folks). Blackberries are the best, easiest to manage and most secure. And no one, including I, wants them. They were the only phones designed for security and enterprise environments. Android and iOS have corporate stuff bolted on afterwards, and it shows.

    76. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are companies toying with the idea of having BYOD be a condition of employment. There are corporate lawyers somewhere that haven't immediately dismissed the idea as illegal.

    77. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed - yet another shift of burden from companies who are ultimately not responsible for anything -
      It's going to be even more our job to manage their "stuff" within any career - which ultimately means
      more for them to profit on.

      So - unions are bad?
      If a union we're involved, it keeps the employer in check while protecting the worker - but is seems
      we get further and further from being a unionized country, but sooner or later we'll have to come back around to it. It's just going to happen

      health/dental insurance - no
      required devices, pc's, etc... - no
      pension/retirement - no
      employees at full time - no
      guaranteed vacation - no
      personal days/family - no
      wage increases for COL - no
      overtime (rare) - no

    78. Re:So.... by gottabeme · · Score: 1

      Not specifically, but I suppose all you need is any app that can download mail from an Exchange server. If the app can tell the server that a flag is set, or tell the server whatever the server wants to hear, then the app can download mail, period.

      --
      "Those who consume the bulk of goods are those who make them. We must never forget this secret of our prosperity."
    79. Re:So.... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      If it's stated up front, then I don't think there is much that could be done legally. It would be like a job such as a mechanic that states up front that you must provide you own tools. You would know exactly what you're getting into.

      If they try to require it after the fact, I'm not entirely sure that it would be a lawsuit waiting to happen, as "non-smartphone owners" wouldn't be a protected class such as religion, race, etc.

    80. Re:So.... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      The technology has apparently already been developed, they just need some work on the WiFi enabled version that has SSH support.

    81. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blackberry with the 10 version of their product segregates personal data from work data. My concern would be the discovery process in a legal proceeding. Your personal data is now mixed in with company data, which to me would be a privacy breach as attorneys would most likely be able to ask questions in regards to that data. It's at least a possibility.

    82. Re:So.... by NemosomeN · · Score: 1

      OP

      I was not replying to the "OP" I was replying to the parent post referencing "some companies already require this kind of software to be installed by employees". (Quoted from memory, not source)
      Also this isn't 4chan.
      /Or Fark.

      --
      I hate grammar Nazi's.
    83. Re:So.... by ryanov · · Score: 1

      "No." And honestly, it's not the same. The boss can't reach me 24x7 on my screwdriver.

    84. Re:So.... by ryanov · · Score: 1

      People who take this kind of shit from employers are a reason we're in this predicament. The employer can fire you at will in a place, but if he thinks the rest are going to walk out if he does pulls this, it's not going to happen. If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.

  2. and then your phone gets confiscated... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...when it gets tied up in legal proceedings. This brings its own set of complications.

  3. Do what they do to hourly workers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'What happens if you buy a device for an employee and they leave the job a month later? How are you going to settle up?

    Deduct it from their paycheck.

    That is what's done to hourly (especially to min wage workers) workers all the time. They deduct for background checks, uniforms, etc ....

    1. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You transfer the device to the employee's replacement?

      I have a cell phone that is probably 11 years old. I got it maybe six years ago-- it's owned by my employer. It works just fine for sms alerts and waking me at 3 am to fix something that's shutting down the night shift.

    2. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by jcr · · Score: 2

      You transfer the device to the employee's replacement?

      Congratulations, you have shown the modicum of common sense that appears to consistently elude the staff at Gartner.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    3. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by mysidia · · Score: 4, Informative

      That is what's done to hourly (especially to min wage workers) workers all the time. They deduct for background checks, uniforms, etc ....

      Not generally lawful

      An employer can lawfully withhold amounts from an employee’s wages only: (1) when required or empowered to do so by state or federal law, or (2) when a deduction is expressly authorized in writing by the employee to cover insurance premiums, benefit plan contributions or other deductions not amounting to a rebate on the employee’s wages, or (3) when a deduction to cover health, welfare, or pension contributions is expressly authorized by a wage or collective bargaining agreement.
      Some common payroll deductions often made by employers that are unlawful include: ...
      Gratuities. An employer cannot collect, take, or receive any gratuity or part thereof given or left for an employee, or deduct any amount from wages due an employee on account of a gratuity given or left for an employee.
      Bond. If an employer requires a bond of an applicant or employee, the employer must pay the cost of the bond.
      Uniforms. If an employer requires that an employee wear a uniform, the employer must pay the cost of the uniform.
      Business Expenses. An employee is entitled to be reimbursed by his or her employer for all expenses or losses incurred in the direct consequence of the discharge of the employee’s work duties. ....

      ....
      ...
      Q. If I break or damage company property or lose company money while performing my job, can my employer deduct the cost/loss from my wages?
      A. No, your employer cannot legally make such a deduction from your wages if, by reason of mistake or accident a cash shortage, breakage, or loss of company property/equipment occurs.
      ..
      Labor Code Section 224 clearly prohibits any deduction from an employee’s wages which is not either authorized by the employee in writing or permitted by law, and any employer who resorts to self-help does so at its own risk

    4. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by Sentrion · · Score: 2

      You presume that most companies give a crap about the law. Instead lawyers are hired and loopholes are discovered. You just quoted "...authorized by the employee in writing...". I guarantee that this provision is included within the employee handbook and a signature from the employee to agree to such provisions is almost always a condition of employment.

      I know first hand of people who have been required to procure their own uniform at their own cost. Sometimes the employers just don't give a flyin' flip about what the law says. There are still probably hundreds of employers who decide to put an hourly employee on salary and then convince the employee that now they have to work 80+ hours each week without overtime pay because now they are "salaried". Just because employers can be sued doesn't keep them from pulling all sorts of crap. When I was in college I applied for a job at a print shop and was told in an angry tone that he (the employer) only wanted female applicants - totally against the EOA, since there's no particular reason why gender is essential to do work at a print shop, unless he's taking picture of nude ladies (which certainly wasn't in the job description). I could have sued, but why would I? Unfortunately I just didn't have time for such hobbies as lawsuits, petitions or picketing. Neither do most other hourly workers struggling to make ends meet. Employers know this which is why my friends earning an hourly wage are often screwed over with uniform costs, bringing their own tools, etc., while at my job I can buy all sorts of gizmos, pay for the entire table of a business lunch, submit an expense report and even get paid for my extra mileage, even though I already earn more than enough to actually afford these things if reimbursement wasn't an option.

      There are thousands of laws that are supposedly meant to help common citizens, but then there are loopholes, exceptions, and bully strategies that the wealthy and powerful use to control, manipulate, and exploit the masses who think they can simply choose to settle for a simple life and raise a family. Some examples include:
      - contracts of adhesion, like statements on the back of ticket stubs that claim some waiver of liability, or EULAs and/or warranty documents that can only be read after a product has been purchase and the packaging removed.
      - binding arbitration clauses in consumer contracts where the right to a trial in US courts is taken away and replaced with an informal hearing by a private citizen, often with little or no legal training, let alone any of the qualifications expected from an actual judge. In recent years some arbitration firms have come under fire for having subsidiary collection agencies that would attempt to collect from consumers after the arbitration proceedings were complete. Once an arbitrator makes his decision, a judgment is submitted to actual "real" US courts for the purpose of empowering the winners of such suits to use all legally available remedies to collect on the judgment, including bank levies, liens, foreclosure, debtor examinations, etc. Appeals are not allowed, and it has been upheld that arbitrators are NOT required to follow any rules of civil procedure, follow legal precedence, or even make decisions based on actual state or federal laws. An arbitrator could literally decide that a defendant loses his case because he was wearing a yellow tie even if the defendant was clearly following the law and the rules of applicable contracts. There is no legal remedy to reverse such an abusive decision.
      - waiver of jury trial as a clause in a contract
      - waiver of participating in a class action lawsuit as a clause in a contract
      - SLAPP lawsuits: A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.
      - Unenforceable but intimidating contract clauses - very often a loan contract to purchase a car or hous

    5. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      You've forgotten that Garnter's business model is largely based on telling corporations how they can downsize their workforce and achieve the same revenue, thus increasing profits. Under such an arrangement they would end up with excess devices to be depreciated and/or sold. Easier to outsource the cost to the employee.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    6. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'll carry a second hand phone next next to me at all times.

    7. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why you should have a union, with union lawyers to fight for your lawfull rights.

    8. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by ExploHD · · Score: 1

      You presume that most companies give a crap about the law. Instead lawyers are hired and loopholes are discovered. You just quoted "...authorized by the employee in writing...". I guarantee that this provision is included within the employee handbook and a signature from the employee to agree to such provisions is almost always a condition of employment.

      Hobby Lobby requires you to sign a binding arbitration clause, for employment, before they will even accept your application.

    9. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by robsku · · Score: 1

      That's USA for you - and in your country even *workers* are against unions. Nice going.

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
    10. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by robsku · · Score: 1

      In Europe (Finland is what I know best since I live here) such contracts would be illegal - no way a contract could prevent you from lawsuit against the company.

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
    11. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      Uniforms. If an employer requires that an employee wear a uniform, the employer must pay the cost of the uniform.

      This is absolutely false. Essentially deducting the cost of uniforms can not cause the person to fall below minimum wage, that is the only requirement. They can choose to pay someone $10/hour and buy the uniforms for the employee or pay them 11$ and hour and require the employee to buy them themselves.

      Uniforms and Their Maintenance Under the Fair Labor Standards Act

      In response to many inquiries, the Wage and Hour Division has prepared the following statement which contains the answers to the most frequently asked questions about uniform procurement and maintenance under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

      (1) (Q) When is an employer required to furnish an employee with a uniform? (A) The FLSA does not require that employees wear uniforms. However, if the wearing of a uniform is required by some other law, the nature of a business, or by an employer, the cost of the uniform is considered to be a business expense of the employer. If the employer requires the employee to bear the cost, it may not reduce the employee's wage below the minimum wage or cut into overtime compensation required by the Act. For example, if an employee who is subject to the statutory minimum wage of $3.35 an hour is paid $3.50 an hour and works 45 hours in the workweek, $6.00 is the maximum amount the employer can legally deduct from the employee's wages and still satisfy the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Act ($3.50 - $3.35 = $.15; $.15 x 40 hours = $6.00). If the same employee works 30 hours in the workweek, $4.50 is the maximum amount the employer can legally deduct from the employee's wages ($.15 x 30 hours)...

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    12. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by ildon · · Score: 1

      I realize this is a hard concept for most people who live in California to grasp, but not everyone lives in California.

    13. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      It is not against the law for employers to require employees to buy their uniforms, no need to get worked up, unless deducting the cost of the uniforms causes the employee's wages to go below minimum wage it is perfectly legal to do so. It's basically just the employer saying I'll pay you $10/hour and supply you uniforms or $11 and hour and deduct $40 from your paycheck for the expenses.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    14. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      Which should be grounds for immediate dissolution of the company. The fact that they won't stand by their contracts in a court of law means that they don't really care about upholding their end of the bargain. Poison to a capitalist economy.

    15. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tl;dr, but your first assertion isn't usually handled the way you suggest.

      You can't be coerced into giving up your legal rights by contract. Contracts that attempt this are contracts of adhesion and can easily be nullified in court.

      Far more often, companies opt for a better (and legal!) alternative. Companies issue a uniform or other personal equipment, but since it leaves the work site, the employee must pay a deposit on it. Upon resignation/termination, the employee must return the company-issued items and the deposit will be refunded on the final paycheck (which can also be legally withheld until the company is made whole).

      This would work in a BYOD scenario as well (more like Choose-YOD), where the company owns the device, but the employee has some control over the selection process. The device is the employer's, and the employee must return it at the end of his employment in order to receive compensation for the initial purchase.

    16. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by robsku · · Score: 1

      *Yank hat on*
      That would be communism!!!
      *Yank hat off*

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
    17. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Y'know. Whenever I sign a contract, that is worth more than what it would cost to have a lawyer check it over for me...I have a lawyer check it over.

      It's a pretty low bar for employment contracts.

    18. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

      So does the US military not count as an employer or something? Even in boot camp, the uniform and shoes were deducted from our first paychecks. I guess when you make the laws you don't have to follow them!?!

      --

      -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
    19. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Hobby Lobby requires you to sign a binding arbitration clause, for employment, before they will even accept your application.

      Employment laws are not subject to binding arbitration, regardless of any "clause" to the contrary.

      You can have binding arbitration on privileges that can be restricted by contract, such as arbitration over violations by an employer over an agreement, that does not have the employer violating the law, you can't have binding arbitration on enforcement of the law -- once there is a breach of the law, the employee has a right to break the contract, and ignore the arbitration requirement.

    20. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      It's basically just the employer saying I'll pay you $10/hour and supply you uniforms or $11 and hour and deduct $40 from your paycheck for the expenses.

      It is perfectly OK for them to pay $10/hour instead of $11 and supply the uniforms.

      Although on the surface it might seem to be financially equivalent, and even to the employee's advantage, for tax purposes, and unemployment insurance purposes, to have the higher quoted wage. It is not legal for the employer to agree to pay you $11/hour, and offset $40 against your paycheck as a subtraction for uniforms -- they have to show $10/hour wage on that check.

      If the uniform is equipment to be used for your job; the employer is required to show the employer paying the expense, or reimbursing the employee for the expense: if the employee was required to pay out of pocket.

      In some states, they might be allowed to do it, with written consent of the employee.

    21. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Uniforms and Their Maintenance Under the Fair Labor Standards Act

      This is irrelevent. Normally the state law will be stricter, as it is in California. Although the federal law would allow the employer requiring employees to pay for their own uniforms in some cases, the state law would prohibit it, and the more restrictive one wins.

    22. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      So does the US military not count as an employer or something? Even in boot camp, the uniform and shoes were deducted from our first paychecks. I guess when you make the laws you don't have to follow them!?!

      The US military is exempt from most state employment laws.

      Actually... the US government is exempt from most state and federal employment laws, except the laws that specifically regulate them; if the approved government policy is to do a certain thing, they are probably allowed to do it.

    23. Re:Do what they do to hourly workers. by mysidia · · Score: 1

      You presume that most companies give a crap about the law. Instead lawyers are hired and loopholes are discovered. You just quoted "...authorized by the employee in writing...". I guarantee that this provision is included within the employee handbook and a signature from the employee to agree to such provisions is almost always a condition of employment.

      The written consent option, as you would see if you read more, is restricted to specific situations. Written consent cannot lawfully have an employee covering an expense of the business. It can cover expenses of the employee, that are not required by the business for employment.

      Companies do give a 'crap' about the law. Good companies obey the law; ones that are not so good might break some laws, and eventually get caught, and have repurcussions against them.

      I know first hand of people who have been required to procure their own uniform at their own cost.

      Then you may know a few people with a potential to sue their employer; after they are hired by someone else, and no longer rely on their former employer as a reference, to escape fears of potential retalliation and intimidation.

      Depending on the applicable laws, of course...

      In some states, the practice of making the employee pay for an expense of the business, may be perfectly legal.

      Although, this may also affect business' tax liability, by increasing it.

  4. Who owns the data on it? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    Can they remote wipe? Pull your GPS data? contacts? logs?

    --
    Good-bye
    1. Re:Who owns the data on it? by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Depending on the software they force employees to install: yes, not sure/maybe, yes, and yes.

    2. Re:Who owns the data on it? by PNutts · · Score: 1

      To answer the question in your subject, the company owns the company data and you own your data. Unfortunately, on most devices without a third party solution your personal data is wiped along with the company's. The capabilities of Mobile Device Management software are very intrusive.

    3. Re:Who owns the data on it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Then it's no longer BYOD, it's "Oh, what a nice phone you have. Now it's mine".

      If my employer deletes something from my phone, that's no different than if my employer smashes the windows in my car. Destruction of property.

      "But that included a couple of company files" is no more an excuse with a phone than smashing the windows to retrieve the company laptop inside my car.

  5. Commodore 64 by puddingebola · · Score: 1

    I've got my Commodore 64 right here and all I need is someway to connect to the Company network with my 1200 baud modem.

    1. Re:Commodore 64 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe you have enough money for a 1670 modem. Wow! Someday I'll be able to afford one too.

    2. Re:Commodore 64 by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      They said mobile device. I guess I will have to bust out the good old TRS-80 Model 100 and some AA batteries to meet these requirements. I wonder if my home phone or work phone (seems unlikely) still support pulse dialing?

      --
      Time to offend someone
    3. Re:Commodore 64 by robsku · · Score: 1

      You should have bought the Final Ethernet package instead of the modem.

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
  6. Just Say No to BYOD by MarioMax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At my company there is a lot of internal chatter about BYOD, along with the security concerns (especially in terms of IP).

    My stance: Just say no to BYOD. If my company deems it necessary for me to use a portable electronic device to perform my job, then either:
    a) They supply it, and it remains company property, or
    b) There is no option b

    1. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by vux984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Option b) is that it's my device and all that entails, I control it, not them. No different than my car, if I leave the company it's still mine. If something belonging to them is in the trunk, they can politely ask that it be returned, but they don't get a set of keys, or have permission to enter it.

      If they don't like these terms, well... then its back to your option "a)"

      BYOD is no different than using a personal car, or a breifcase, and having company documents in either.

    2. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by PNutts · · Score: 4, Insightful

      BYOD is no different than using a personal car, or a breifcase, and having company documents in either.

      It's very different. There are regulations about how different classifications of data can be moved around and stored. You can have things on your phone that you can't have in a briefcase in your car. And there is more opportunity for a phone to be lost or stolen.

    3. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by cybrhippy · · Score: 1

      Not really an IP issue... Whether their IP is on your device or theirs you still have "easy" access to it. Security is still the same for either for the most part.

      The only real issue is support. To do BYOD you either need to specify EXACTLY what people can or can't use or your employee's have to be smart enough to understand the difference between getting their mail via OWA/ActiveSync vs. IMAP, What features in M$ Word don't work in Libre Office, AD vs LDAP w/ Kerberos, etc.

      --
      Cybrhippy - "It all makes sense... Well, To me anyway." The Maxx
    4. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by admdrew · · Score: 1

      There are regulations about how different classifications of data can be moved around and stored.

      Employers that follow those regulations/classifications probably won't require (or even allow) BYOD, so I would agree with vux984 that they aren't really different from other methods of taking company data off-site.

    5. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by admdrew · · Score: 1

      To do BYOD you either need to specify EXACTLY what people can or can't use

      A lot of the mobile remote software allows for this sort of control.

    6. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by spire3661 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If regulatory issues are a concern, then it really shouldn't be BYOD.

      --
      Good-bye
    7. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by vux984 · · Score: 1

      There are regulations about how different classifications of data can be moved around and stored.

      When you say "classifications" you mean "Classified", etc? Ok, fair enough. I can't really imagine a situation where I'd be asked to carry those around in my own phone, though.

      You can have things on your phone that you can't have in a briefcase in your car.

      I'm hard pressed to imagine what I could have on my phone that couldn't be in a thumbdrive in my breifcase.

      And there is more opportunity for a phone to be lost or stolen.

      Seeing as I can remote wipe my own phone, and would if it were lost or stolen that seems moot. The unique security risk with a BYOD phone vs a corporate issued unit would be that when I leave the company I take data I shouldn't take.

    8. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Classified Data on personal devices is strictly prohibited by every DOD and Government agency there is (NISPOM, JFAN, etc...). PCI does not exclude it, however the requirements to have said data on a personal device are so complex that it really cannot be on a personal device and remain compliant.

      Further, any company that allows confidential or classified data on a personal device is looking for a lawsuit by someone, and prohibits it if they are smart.

      Lets be realistic here as well. How many people can function on a tiny ass phone and be productive workers? No programmers would be productive if they were forced to work on their iPhone, and even on a tablet productivity goes down a huge amount. Exec's and Sales that need to look at and not make Powerpoints and such? Okay, I'll give you that one. Not many others are effective on a Phone or Tablet.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    9. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by admdrew · · Score: 2

      any company that allows confidential or classified data on a personal device is looking for a lawsuit by someone, and prohibits it if they are smart.

      ...without compensating security controls, yes I'd agree. Even so, confidential data has many different classifications - most companies consider all work email to be confidential, but far fewer require VPN or physical network access to be able to retrieve that email. Other work resources, however, often *do* require additional security when attempting to access them.

      How many people can function on a tiny ass phone and be productive workers?

      I'm not sure I follow you here - this whole article is about replacing phones with phones, not primary work machines with phones.

    10. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by Sentrion · · Score: 2

      And unless the company dictates that I have to own and drive X vehicle with Y specifications, or carry P briefcase with Q specifications, they better be ready to accept that I may show up to work on a bicycle with work documents rolled up in an opening in the frame.

      What is much more likely is that in 2017 companies will develop a preference for independent contractors who show up (perhaps virtually from their living room in their PJs) to perform work on specific projects rather than full time staff that has to struggle to look busy between projects. It's very hard to take the "bring your own tools" approach without utilizing workers as independent contractors as compared to full time staff.

      Such an approach could be advantageous to ambitious workers who may work on two or three projects simultaneously, presuming, of course, no conflict of interest.

    11. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      why wouldn't you accept c) they supply a device and it becomes your property?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    12. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by ras · · Score: 2

      How about this for an option b:

      You make use of Android's "multiuser" feature. Work is one user, your personal life is the other. Android guarantees there is a 100% opaque firewall between the two users, so if work sends an "erase phone" command it erases their user, not the phone.

      This pretty much solves the privacy and control aspects. The remaining downside is work still expects you to pay for tools to do the job they ask of you. But hey, at least you only have to carry one device.

    13. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or what our company does - merely provides a subsidy to buy a device. Just like covering running costs. (Employee chooses, buys and owns the device. The subsidy is enough to buy an android - if want an iPhone or other high-end phone, you just pay the extra money.)

      This, however, requires an employer that is prepared to treat you (an employee) as valuable to the company instead of a disposable use-once commodity.

      As an aside, around here (New Zealand), the corporate agreement with our telecommunications provider is vastly better than what an individual could possibly get - pure BYOD and reimbursing employees on personal plans would be at least five times as expensive as using a corporate plan.

    14. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

      You can have things on your phone that you can't have in a briefcase in your car.

      You can have your *phone* in your briefcase in your car.

    15. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by VortexCortex · · Score: 0

      Work is one user, your personal life is the other. Android guarantees there is a 100% opaque firewall between the two users, so if work sends an "erase phone" command it erases their user, not the phone.

      I have bolded the section I take issue with, but have no time to tell you why. You'll have to work that out for yourself if you want to evolve mentally.

    16. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too much paperwork to ensure that it doesn't suddenly become their property that you are accused of stealing, after you leave the company.

    17. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by oldlurker · · Score: 1

      There are regulations about how different classifications of data can be moved around and stored.

      When you say "classifications" you mean "Classified", etc? Ok, fair enough. I can't really imagine a situation where I'd be asked to carry those around in my own phone, though.

      You can have things on your phone that you can't have in a briefcase in your car.

      I'm hard pressed to imagine what I could have on my phone that couldn't be in a thumbdrive in my breifcase.

      And there is more opportunity for a phone to be lost or stolen.

      Seeing as I can remote wipe my own phone, and would if it were lost or stolen that seems moot. The unique security risk with a BYOD phone vs a corporate issued unit would be that when I leave the company I take data I shouldn't take.

      "Classified" data are hardly suited for a normal BYOD scenario, but there are other types of data that can be regulated how the company need to handle, like customer and user data, information about sales/potential sales/deals, etc. You are right that if you copy company data to an USB drive that can be accessible for others, that is a security risk too, which is why device management that includes control over USB usage is growing rapidly. But another risk with the BYOD phone that a USB stick doesn't have, is how easily it can leak all the company information to highly insecure consumer cloud services (something an unmanaged PC can do as well of course).

    18. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by havana9 · · Score: 1

      Or what our company does - merely provides a subsidy to buy a device. Just like covering running costs. (Employee chooses, buys and owns the device. The subsidy is enough to buy an android - if want an iPhone or other high-end phone, you just pay the extra money.)

      The question I have is what the smartphone is used for. If it's to receive and make phone calls the employee could simply give a SIM and a basic phone. I've seen 20 euro GSM and 50 euro UMTS phones, with a lot o extra features like camera, fm radio, mp3 player, web browsing and so on.
      Even a low end Android phne costs under 100 euro, and makes possible to VPN or ssh easily in a remote system, and anyway some 'dumb' phones are capable of this. On the other hand if specific smart features of a phone have to be used for work-related operations, having to support a generice device is a IT support nightmare.

    19. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by sd4f · · Score: 1

      A subsidy seems ok, but having experienced the joys of unpaid overtime, i really want to keep all this stuff as separate as possible. So if they want me to be contactable, they should be providing that stuff, and more to the point, I shouldn't be doing work outside work hours.

    20. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Option C:

      Sure you can put your stuff on my phone - knock yourself out: http://www.amazon.co.uk/worlds-unlocked-mobile-phone-frills/dp/B004D3OFQK

      More seriously, if the company wants to call me out of hours on my personal phone, then that's okay, but it's a privilege. If you do it, expect to give me something in return. If you're calling me during the night, then maybe send me a text first so I have a chance to wake up and not wake up the entire house. If you fail to do this, then I reserve the right to leave my phone on silent (or in another room), or selectively ignore you next time.

      If I'm required to click about on the company intranet or reply to emails or whatever, then you'd better give me the tools to do that, otherwise I flat-out can't do it. You wouldn't ask me to write code without a screen, would you?

    21. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I follow you here - this whole article is about replacing phones with phones, not primary work machines with phones.

      The premise in the article may be about phones, but think bigger. Why would a company require me to bring a smart device to use as just a phone? Kind of silly really. Most people want the ability to bring in their own devices like tablets, Macbook Air, etc... The use of the device as a phone is such a small niche it's not worthy of much debate. The use of the device as a workstation is much more accurate to the claim "require you to bring in a smart device".

      To the first point, on a BYOD there are very few non-intrusive compensating controls. Load that iPhone with AV, Firewall software, force locking, etc.. and you can have confidential data on it. You also remove a huge reason why people use their own devices to begin with, making them slower with lots of tools that slow down work. When CEO Jerry finds out that you can not only wipe his iPad, but it's noticeably slower because of required add on software and he would probably just go back to doing things against policy/law.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    22. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by houghi · · Score: 1

      My idea exactly. If they want me to do my job, they need to provide the tools. If that is a phone, give me a phone. If that is a portable, give me a portable. If that is access to certain websites over port 80, open the firewall (for that website and port). If you don't. I am not going to go around it and use a proxy over port 22.

      If you don't do that, I will not be able to do my job and you will still pay me. Your money, not mine and no, they do not fire me over that. They might fire the idiot who blocks access, but not me.

      Even now when my company asks me for my phone number, I do not give it. If they want to phone me outside working hours, give me a phone. My phone is mine and you are not getting it. Never had any issue with that. This is the case for almost everybody I know.

      If you want to contact me outside office hours, you give me a phone.

      I do not see why I should provide the tools for the job I was hired to do, unless I am a consultant.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    23. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Why would a company require me to bring a smart device to use as just a phone?

      I don't know, and the 'requirement' is the biggest issue I have with this article. In my experience, this is really about *allowing* employees to bring in their own devices.

      Most people want the ability to bring in their own devices like tablets, Macbook Air, etc... The use of the device as a phone is such a small niche it's not worthy of much debate.

      In my experience, I disagree with this, since many (most?) people don't like carrying around two phones, while I very much enjoy having a work PC that I don't have to support directly myself.

    24. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by srmalloy · · Score: 1

      BYOD is no different than using a personal car, or a breifcase, and having company documents in either.

      Except that a company can't rip out the interior of your car while you're driving down the freeway; If you have a smartphone that integrates with Microsoft Exchange, for example, connecting to an Exchange server automatically provides the server administrators the capability and permission to remotely wipe your smartphone at any time.

    25. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have a word that describes when an employer also owns access to your personal property..."vassalage"

    26. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I think the subject of this article is just off kilter. Employees might no longer be provided with "devices" but I strongly doubt employees will be required to buy one, except for a tiny subset of employees who are currently required to own a phone for their jobs (ie, sales). Right now devices are essentially of little use anyway, little more than a portable reminder that you're late for a meeting, very slight advantages to assume that these luxury goods will become mandatory.

      Besides the news is from the Gartner Group and they're focused on influencing the market rather than doing actual informed predictions.

    27. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the sake of debate -- please list a single regulated anything I can have on my phone that I can't hit print, "one page" and put in my briefcase ?

      Got your printers locked down so I can't print it? Can I export it to excel and print it, take a picture and OCR it?

      I don't care if it's PHI, PCI/DSS, hipaa, ediscovery....

      Pick your domain and name something on my phone that couldn't possibly be in my briefcase.

      Keep in my mind my briefcase has several microSD cards.

    28. Re:Just Say No to BYOD by vux984 · · Score: 1

      But another risk with the BYOD phone that a USB stick doesn't have, is how easily it can leak all the company information to highly insecure consumer cloud services (something an unmanaged PC can do as well of course).

      Even managed PCs have this issue. People using their own drop and other personal cloud accounts with work laptops is an epidemic.

      If the data can't/shouldn't be leaked, then a terminal services remote access scenario seems to be the most reasonable balance of functionality and remote accessibility and security that can really be struck right now. Both on phones, and laptops. BYOD or otherwise.

      Full drive encyrption, and policy management get you some of the way there, but if you are working with typical sales reps and customer / client information the user is invariably the security weak spot.

  7. Yeah, right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They had better give me a stipend to buy my own machine, then, because I'm only going to use it for working with their company. In fact, it will never leave the office. No way in HELL are they going to be able to lay a claim on my personal equipment just because they want to lower their parts and labor costs.

    1. Re: Yeah, right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      BYOD is being driven by the employees asking for it, not management and certainly not most IT departments. People don't want to carry two phones, or they want to use their nice laptop and not the crappy one the company provides. Mostly though it has been driven by iPads. Execs with iPads to be precise.

    2. Re: Yeah, right. by scream+at+the+sky · · Score: 1

      Employees need to get over it, and understand that a second line is a blessing.

      I work as a Corporate Store Manager for Bell in Canada, and 90% of my peers carry a single device, and use the same device for work and personal. Bell supplies the line, and they bully vendors into supplying the hardware. Of the 40 or so managers in town, and several hundred sales reps, every single one of use that has been around for longer than 3 months (policy change) carries a Bell supplied line.

      I carry my Bell supplied line (BB z10), as well as a personal line (Galaxy Note 2) daily when I am at work, although I tend to leave the Note in my jacket pocket, in the stock room. None of my peers, none of my staff, and none of my superiors have my personal line number, outside of HR, in my employee file.

      Conversely, I leave the z10 in the same jacket pocket when I am home, or out and not working.

      Work / Life balance is far more important to me than a little bit of extra weight in a pocket.

      --
      I wish I was a neutron bomb, for once I could go off...
    3. Re: Yeah, right. by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly. My company doesn't "technically" allow BYOD (though I imagine that enough pressure from users with the magic "Vice President" in their title will eventually change that), but even so I could totally use my phone. I have a work-provided device which uses ActiveSync, and nobody would ever really know I set my own phone up to receive company mail if I didn't tell them.

      But fuck that. Using a separate device for work means that when I'm not on call or otherwise required to be available, I leave it at home and nobody can even attempt to reach me. My direct boss has my personal number for emergencies that might come up, but nobody else. I would never consider giving up the work/life separation that using two different devices affords. I work 40 hours a week, not 168.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
  8. wait what??! by ganjadude · · Score: 1

    'What happens if you buy a device for an employee and they leave the job a month later? How are you going to settle up? Better to keep it simple.

    ok so same situation, what happens when the same employee leaves in a month yet in this scenario, he has all your data on his personal phone, and you cant get it. Someone didnt fully think this through before opening their mouth.

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    1. Re:wait what??! by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Remote phone management software already exists and is already being used at places where employees can use their own devices; that software (among other things) allows for remote data wiping in the event the phone is lost or an employee is let go.

    2. Re:wait what??! by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      Oh I know, but I can think of situations where it would not matter, such as the employee leaving on his own without warning, the user turning off the cell signal etc. If the phone is a business phone the same is possible, but traceable by the owner (business)

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:wait what??! by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Yeah, totally, although that's not much different than someone just storing data from their work machine to a USB stick, and keeping that stick in their possession after leaving/getting fired. I assume ultimately those sorts of situations where companies are seriously worried about that data "theft" result in legal action, or something something similar.

    4. Re:wait what??! by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      true, I just assume that it is much easier to log a machine that the business owns vs one that it does not even with such remote wipe tools

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    5. Re:wait what??! by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Yeah. I haven't used any of these remote tools myself, and I'm really curious to see if there will be some sort of 'backlash' once they become more common and people do exactly what you describe.

    6. Re:wait what??! by PNutts · · Score: 1

      The remote tools only do what you've agreed to let them do in a BYOD agreement/policy, so someone who opted in doesn't have much room to complain.

    7. Re:wait what??! by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Well, we're referring to different things. ganjadude and I were talking about effectively "taking" company data, and how useful mobile management tools are at preventing that, so I was using "backlash" to refer to *companies* having issues with employees that leave.

      To your point - users may not have any legal or official room to complain, but that rarely stops people from actually complaining.

    8. Re:wait what??! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      IT security at most companies has their noses do brown they will flat out lie to get employees to sign that waiver. Most will just add it to the "company policy" and if your boss TELLS you to use your personal device, you will go it or get fired.. They only wipe your device if you get fired, so its not their problem and you deserved it.

    9. Re:wait what??! by robsku · · Score: 1

      Which can be used in a phone employer bought to employee too.

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
    10. Re:wait what??! by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Definitely, however that's less of an issue for employees that leave or are let go, because there's an expectation for them to return all company property. If they don't return the company phone, there's a little bigger of an issue that just data theft; they're stealing tangible company property.

  9. Subsidised phone is huge bargain for companies by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    A company paying $75 or so for monthly smartphone service pays for itself many times over in keeping employees tethered to the business and available for around-the-clock email and messaging. I expect companies will continue paying for service even for BYOD shops. If forcing employees to purchase a phone discourages them from using a phone for work then it will be a huge loss for companies.

    1. Re:Subsidised phone is huge bargain for companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps, but even so, what is an employee who is told to provide their own phone going to do, say no and quit? Now for a company with 1000 employees, that's nearly a million dollars a year in savings with the same net result. That's a sweet little bonus for the CIO and CEO right there, will pay for a years worth of golf at Shadow Creek in Vegas. Only a poorly run company *wouldn't* do this.

    2. Re:Subsidised phone is huge bargain for companies by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A company paying $75 or so for monthly smartphone service pays for itself many times over in keeping employees tethered to the business and available for around-the-clock email and messaging. I expect companies will continue paying for service even for BYOD shops. If forcing employees to purchase a phone discourages them from using a phone for work then it will be a huge loss for companies.

      This is how it works where I am (Fortune 500 technology company). The company pays all the service, including my personal calls and data use, and I pay for the phone. They negotiate shorter contract terms and lower up-front device costs. I get my choice of carriers and devices. They also negotiate discounted service pricing for my family.

      The company does not wipe my entire device when I disconnect it from their system and remove their MDM, they just delete their content and leave everything else alone. They do enforce screen lock timeouts and require a PIN or password. They will wipe my device in its entirety if it's stolen.

      This is a sane BYOD policy that balances the desire of the employees to have a choice in their electronic tether with their needs to secure their IP.

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

    3. Re:Subsidised phone is huge bargain for companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're still paying for work hardware; you're not too bright.

    4. Re:Subsidised phone is huge bargain for companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except:
      1) Why do YOU pay for a company phone?
      2) If you can truly BYOD, why would anyone want to support that?

      If it's not YOD, it's not BYOD.

    5. Re:Subsidised phone is huge bargain for companies by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 1

      You're still paying for work hardware; you're not too bright.

      They don't require me to use a smartphone, and it's not used for work unless I choose to do so. Which I do, because it makes my life easier. That has value to me. But go ahead and call me stupid if that makes you feel like a man.

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

    6. Re:Subsidised phone is huge bargain for companies by Anonymous+Psychopath · · Score: 1

      Except:
      1) Why do YOU pay for a company phone?
      2) If you can truly BYOD, why would anyone want to support that?

      If it's not YOD, it's not BYOD.

      1) It isn't a company phone. It's my phone. The company doesn't require me to have it. Sure, it makes my job easier, but I could do without if I wanted to. Which I don't. There are cases where I have chosen not to purchase a device. For example, an iPad would help me do demos of our products, but I don't want to buy one, and the company does not want to buy one for me. So I don't use one. Everyone's fine with that.

      2) Are you asking why would anyone want to have the flexibility to buy an iPhone, or a Nexus 4, or whatever other kind of device they prefer and then use that single device as their mobile platform? Have fun carrying two phones forever, I guess.

      --

      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

  10. Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Majestic+Fear · · Score: 1

    I support a large number of servers. I do not own a personal cellphone and so far the pricing schemes and poor service range for those with reasonable rates have not given me any reason to purchase one. So company if you decide not to provide one so I can support said equipment that is your choice, though not sure how you plan to get a hold of me after hours.

    1. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by admdrew · · Score: 1

      I didn't RTFA, but generally I'd assume that positions that require on-call access to an employee would provide a phone to those without their own phones, or who just refuse to use theirs for work. Our IT staff already has an on-call phone that's either given to the on-call person, or is forwarded to their personal cell phone if they don't want to lug two around.

    2. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Kittenman · · Score: 1

      It'll be in your contract/employee agreement. "The staff member is expected to make themselves available out-of-hours". Read it carefully.

      But I agree with your point - the worst I've seen is when I was expected to be available out of hours but not getting paid for it. How come, I asked the boss. The on-call allowance is factored into your salary, he said.

      Factor THIS, was my reply. Well, it should have been.

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
    3. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      company if you decide not to provide one so I can support said equipment that is your choice, though not sure how you plan to get a hold of me after hours.

      Don't worry, they'll get ahold of somebody else -- you will be freed of your obligation to provide after-hours support when you are fired.

    4. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, this happened to me once too. My boss was quite personally hurt when I handed in my letter of resignation AND rejected his counter offer to pay. My reasoning:
      1. Never accept counter offers - this means that your employer is not paying you what you're really worth, and means that you'll always have to threaten to leave to get paid a fair amount.
      2. Never accept counter offers - it's just a method for them to change the timing of when you leave to something more convenient to them.

      If more people had the guts to trust in their own abilities, we would all be better off.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    5. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How did it work out for you?

    6. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by admdrew · · Score: 2

      I've seen that same "never accept counter offers" reasoning before, and to some degree I agree with it, but that's assuming that the benefits of a job are entirely monetarily-based, which isn't a great way to look at employment. What if the employer giving you a counter offer is a smaller shop with less resources, but has a great work environment, your coworkers and boss are awesome, and the work you're doing is fun and interesting?

    7. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if your job is so great, you shouldn't be taking offers from other companies. Do you have a wife? Would she give you a "counter offer" when you told her about your vacation plans with some girl you met who says you are so great? Same idea. Best to either not do it or do it and keep moving.

    8. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but they now assume that you're only there for the check, and that you're mercenary for hire, waiting for a better offer - and so you are now on their list to get rid of when the time suits the. I wish it were otherwise, but it's not.

    9. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2

      I've seen option 2: "Never accept counter offers - it's just a method for them to change the timing of when you leave to something more convenient to them" at least a dozen times in 20 years.

      Unless the company really has been screwing you over or really dropped the ball- once you decide to go they feel betrayed (despite the fact they are planning to outsource your job in 18 months anyway). Sometimes even when they realize they were screwing you over, they STILL feel betrayed.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    10. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't matter. They know you're considering leaving. They'll start planning to get on without you. And next thing you know, they'll decide to part ways on their own terms, and you don't get to make a counter-offer of your own. And then you get to learn the joys of job hunting whilst unemployed.

    11. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if the employer giving you a counter offer is a smaller shop with less resources, but has a great work environment, your coworkers and boss are awesome, and the work you're doing is fun and interesting?

      If that is all true, why did you go to the trouble of finding a new job?

    12. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... guts to trust in their own abilities ...

      I trust my abilities as much as I should, that is not the problem. The problems are:

      1. The job environment is not compatible with my abilities. Most jobs involve teamwork so I can't ignore other people when it's convenient.

      2. The HR interviewer does not understand/care about my abilities. I need to jump through his hoops to get a paycheck, not just be job-enabled.

      3. There are 1,000 other job applicants with abilities equal or better than mine.

      4. Quitting this job means no income while I search for another, and a hole in my resume.

    13. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

      Do you have a wife?

      Dumb question to ask a /.er. If he had one, he ain't a /.er.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    14. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      My pervious boss upon recieving my letter of resignation asked what it would take to keep me. I gave him a number 50% higher than my current job was offering as there was a lot of things I didn't like about that job and I figured I would be willing to stay for that amount even though I knew it would never be accepted.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    15. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by ejasons · · Score: 1

      Ha ha ha, that joke just never gets old...

    16. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Companies are not omniscient either. They do not perform a continual never ending evaluation of every employee's compensation. It's a yearly thing most places. Plus no employer ever has the obligation or duty to always pay the highest price for your services, anymore than the seller at the market has an obligation to give you the best deal. If you get bananas at 75 cents a pound at one store but 65 cents a pound at a store a mile away, then what's the "true worth" of bananas? Generally there's a give and take, you decide upon an agreed upon amount of compensation for your work. If you quit the company then clearly this means that the agreement has come to an end and thus it is indeed a very appropriate time to decide upon a new amount of compensation.

      If you claim the company is lax in keeping your compensation at the maximum possible, then why are you not also lax by not pushing them to get paid more? After all, if you were perfectly happy to accept say $100,000 last year, then it is perfectly reasonable for the corporation to assume that adding a reasonable cost of living increase and a couple percent raise is good enough to keep you happy this year unless you object. Did you object during any of your prior performance reviews? Why should your boss not consider you to be capricious in this regard if you didn't?

      Also bear in mind that there are a lot of people involved in the mix of deciding how much you get paid. Your direct supervisor who knows best of all how much you are worth on the team has relatively small control over your exact compensation. The boss usually has a small range of values that can be handed out at raise time, and can not maximize it for too many employees without the higher ups becoming concerned.

      I'm reading between the lines here; you quit along with letter of resignation because you were sick of working there for some reason, it wasn't just due to negotiation of salary.

    17. Re:Don't bother getting ahold of me then by Cryacin · · Score: 1

      Quite well. I have worked for quite a few great companies and have been compensated well. When it comes time for pay review, they don't give me rubbish lines of one bucket is not connected to the other bucket, and we don't earn enough to pay you enough, even though you're generating direct value rubbish. Remember that you will always have an opportunity cost staying with an organisation. My point is, when it's time to leave, leave.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
  11. Bad News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two issues.

    Corps buy by the 'Container Ship Load'; good for Intel, M$ et al. but bad for employee ... One size fits all. Individuals buy on price point; Cheap Wins even if it is not quite functional.

    Security: Corps insist on Max Security, i.e. employee is guilty at time of signing on to employment, whereas Individuals see security as the Wild Wild West, and seek Max entertainment at Min security.

    Solution:
    Employees become company property ! as in No rights, no freedoms, to constitutional protections not even the UN Rights of Prisoners of War will apply to hapless employee.

    It's good to be da CEO.

  12. BYOD policy...so I quit BYOD'ing by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    >> there's software out there to (monitor communications or wipe my own device)

    My current employer has a BYOD policy and software for this. My solution: never use a personal device for work purposes, especially never company email. Instead, I use a company-resident mail forwarding application to read my company email and to send alerts to a personal email address if it finds something that looks interesting enough and I've been out of the office long enough (e.g., more than a day). If I do get such an alert, I might VPN in to read the full email, or usually I'll just text or call someone. (They can also text me.)

    1. Re:BYOD policy...so I quit BYOD'ing by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Yup, I'd agree, and if/when my employer implements such software I will likely disable work email on my phone.

    2. Re:BYOD policy...so I quit BYOD'ing by anarcobra · · Score: 2

      I just don't check work email when at home.
      You want to reach me after work?
      They have my phone number.
      If they really want me to check email they can give me a phone or whatever.

    3. Re:BYOD policy...so I quit BYOD'ing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't check works email from home either.

      And if they rang me at home with a work related question I'd laugh at them.

      If they want me to provide out of hours support they can provide the device and pay me for the privilege.

      I'm an employee, not an indentured serf.

    4. Re: BYOD policy...so I quit BYOD'ing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and youe will be the first one out the door when review time comes. those who dont complain gets the promotion and the raise.

    5. Re: BYOD policy...so I quit BYOD'ing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and youe will be the first one out the door when review time comes. those who dont complain gets the promotion and the raise.

      Not in California, at least. California Labor Code, section 2802 specifies that an employee is entitled to be reimbursed by his or her employer for all expenses or losses incurred in the direct consequence of the discharge of the employee’s work duties. If you're required to provide a mobile device, and pay for the service plan, as a condition of your employment, then that is a cost that the employer is required to reimburse.

  13. Concientious objector by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't want a smart phone. I choose not to use one - I only care to have a simple phone that does the bare minimum. If they want me to have a smart phone, they'd better provide it for me because I will not spend my own money for a device I choose not to have. Under Australian law (to which I am subject) I don't believe a company can force you to provide your own equipment.

    --
    Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
    altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    1. Re:Concientious objector by admdrew · · Score: 2

      Typically (in what I've seen in IT) they're not *forcing* people to bring their own devices, they're *allowing* them (or suggesting them) to do so. I highly doubt that a company that requires an employee to have a smart phone of some kind in their role would require them to use their own phone.

    2. Re:Concientious objector by Misagon · · Score: 1

      While your current company may not be able to force you, the situation changes if you are laid off.
      The next company you apply to could choose not to hire you because of your objection.

      I choose not to use a cell phone at all, because of various reasons, the most important being that radiation kills brain cells. I find that some prospective employers don't want to hire me because of my objection, even though the work entails sitting at the same desk all the time.

      --
      "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
    3. Re: Concientious objector by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, they're refusing to hire you because you reject logic and science in favor of fearmongering and confirmation bias.

    4. Re: Concientious objector by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to see the science that proves that cell phone frequencies are not dangerous in close proximity... ...Then I can finally get the people who claim you can't prove a negative to shut up.

      All I've seen on the subject is the cell phone companies saying that it doesn't, but to trust that, we would also have to trust the tobacco companies that say the same things about smoking.

    5. Re: Concientious objector by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Different AC). That sounds mostly like a reasonable stance if you say it like that (though still quite strongly worded considering you have even less proof than those claiming no danger), but the way it was said originally I would also be quite sceptical about working with someone like that.

    6. Re:Concientious objector by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't want indoor plumbing. I'd rather poop in a chamber pot and toss it out the window. I also don't like all this "cotton" stuff. I only wear animal hides.

    7. Re: Concientious objector by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to see the research that proves that reading AC posts does not result in cumulative brain damage.

  14. What happens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens is you keep the conpany paid device when the employee leaves... and give it to the next guy who takes the job. It is not that complicated.

    However, if you don't own the device, you need a court order to read it. And if you are expensing or stipending the subscription, you can not legally read the usage! If the employee does something stupid while on the job related to that phone, the company is still liable.

    So in summary, companies are exposing themselves to normal business liabilities, but don't have the cover they had before. Well done!

  15. Gartner? Really? by Ickyban · · Score: 2

    Is this the same Gartner who once said a web seminar that Apache and Linux would not have any significance in the web server market?

  16. Gartner Lol by multiben · · Score: 1

    You'd be better off looking at tea leaves than trusting anything that comes from that money hole.

    1. Re:Gartner Lol by TrollstonButtersbean · · Score: 0

      So if your phone gets stolen, then wat? Can they charge the TSA with corporate espionage?

  17. Who owns the phone number by rlh100 · · Score: 2

    Not much of an issue for devops folks but a big issue in sales and marketing.
    I wonder if companies allow a sales phone number be switch to a competitor when the sales person switches jobs. This is what happens when Jane changes jobs.

    Customer of company A calls Jane who has just gone to company B:
    Jane: "Hi Sam, I am glad you called. I now work for B and let me tell you how their product is much better for you..."

    There are other jobs like customer support that have similar problems. In this case you want your customers when they call the cell phone to reach someone who works for the company.

    The above problems also apply to IM handles.

    1. Re:Who owns the phone number by admdrew · · Score: 1

      I wonder if companies allow a sales phone number be switch to a competitor when the sales person switches jobs.

      If a company changes their procedures to allow employees to use their own phones instead of handing them out, they'll also change their procedures about phone numbers. My company simply uses internal numbers assigned to everyone (that they control), that we can forward to our personal phones if need be; this isn't an issue for companies already allowing BYOD.

    2. Re:Who owns the phone number by fatmatt_oz · · Score: 1

      I've called sales people where exactly this has happened. Always seemed crazy to me that a company that depends on sales would be so cheap / dumb to let it happen.

    3. Re:Who owns the phone number by TrollstonButtersbean · · Score: 0

      I've called sales people where exactly this has happened. Always seemed crazy to me that a company that depends on sales would be so cheap / dumb to let it happen.

      Sounds like you are embellishing corporate wisdom. Most corporations thrive solely on having a fixed-location on the ants to report the ant-hill in the morning, and little else.

    4. Re:Who owns the phone number by rlh100 · · Score: 1

      So when the sales person calls me from their cell phone and I make a contact from his call, what number do I store? His cellphone number or the internal number I am supposed to call?

    5. Re:Who owns the phone number by admdrew · · Score: 1

      A lot of modern corporate phone systems allow employees to dial through them, so the number that will show up on your phone *is* the internal number.

  18. Back in 2006 by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    I worked for a state office where the I.T. staff were all issued cell phones. They were issued because we had it set up to broadcast texts to us when something went wrong. A new administration comes in and the first thing they do is confiscate all cell phones.

    I casually mention to our advance guy that all the notifications for server issues go out to said cell phones. We had them back the next day.

    1. Re:Back in 2006 by TrollstonButtersbean · · Score: 0
      Here is a short list of how you have done it better next time: DON'T TELL THEM.

      A. It's funnier

      B. It's comedy gold.

      C. It's more fun than pulling legs off a spider (I can't say I encourage that behavior, btw).

  19. The old days... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Used to be you got a job, if you were good at it, the company would pay for your education to get even better.
    Used to be, you got educated by your company, you could take a sabbatical.
    Then things got a bit more competitive and those generous benefits went away.
    Then you got loaded with debt just to get a degree just to get a job.
    But if you needed it, your employer would pay for your basic infrastructure - phone, computer, network, printers.
    But soon you'll be expected to bring everything yourself and you'll consider yourself lucky just to have a paycheck.

    1. Re:The old days... by PNutts · · Score: 1

      Used to be you got a job, if you were good at it, the company would pay for your education to get even better.
      Used to be, you got educated by your company, you could take a sabbatical.

      The jobs you describe are still around. Hint: If there is a foosball table anywhere on company property you probably don't have one of these jobs. If you do it won't be for long.

    2. Re:The old days... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Used to be you got a job, if you were good at it, the company would pay for your education to get even better.
      Used to be, you got educated by your company, you could take a sabbatical.

      The jobs you describe are still around. Hint: If there is a foosball table anywhere on company property you probably don't have one of these jobs. If you do it won't be for long.

      At Ebay/PayPal in San Jose, we have foosball tables and also education and sabbaticals. It's actually a great place to work.

    3. Re:The old days... by LMariachi · · Score: 3, Funny

      I work for a foosball table manufacturer, you insensitive clod!

    4. Re:The old days... by ryanov · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unionize.

    5. Re:The old days... by TrollstonButtersbean · · Score: 0

      Your forgot the one part though: the hilarity that they are paying you to do what they tell you. Even though their "orders" are insane and you would spend a week writing up a list of why it won't work out. But you shut up and do it anyways. This does not mean you are not entitled to laugh. What else can you do?

  20. An interesting problem occurs with unlocked phones by chromaexcursion · · Score: 2

    All of the mentioned restrictions only work if the phone is locked.
    I refuse to sign a contract, or get a locked phone (at least that I pay for).
    I have a N1 (never locked), and will probably upgrade before long to a new, never locked, phone. You don't need to unlock if it was never locked in the first place.
    If my employer wants that control, they can pay for it.

    I've saved the cost of my current phone with lower monthly bills. A single payment up front saves money in the end.
    Freedom isn't free, but it doesn't have to cost a lot.

  21. Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

    Remote wipe? Try an airplane mode with wifi and Dropbox. If you own your device, you can image your device to your SD card.

    1. Re:Airplane Mode by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Typically the remote management software will work with any connection, so if your wifi hits the internet (mild pedantry - airplane mode disables wifi too, but obviously you could just disable mobile data), and is consequently able to call 'home' to your employer, it'll still be able to perform a remote wipe.

      That said, what you describe is functionally no different than simply backing up company documents from your work PC to an external drive, and then leaving with that information. Or, even lower tech, just taking physical documents with you when you leave.

    2. Re:Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      Actually, that is totally incorrect. Even simple app like Avast can block that device from connecting.

    3. Re:Airplane Mode by PNutts · · Score: 1

      Remote wipe? Try an airplane mode with wifi and Dropbox. If you own your device, you can image your device to your SD card.

      What's your point? I didn't buy a phone to keep it in Airplane Mode.

    4. Re:Airplane Mode by admdrew · · Score: 1

      can block that device from connecting.

      In that case:

      what you describe is functionally no different than simply backing up company documents from your work PC to an external drive, and then leaving with that information. Or, even lower tech, just taking physical documents with you when you leave.

    5. Re:Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      Most real companies have tools to monitor your external devices. Ask your IT guy. If a firm is a large enough, they probably a security policy to maintain your printer pool.

    6. Re:Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      You are not getting it. Block the app from deleting until the IT calls you to stop. During that time, you image your phone to SD and unblock the phone. Let the IT wipe, then re-image your phone back from your SD.

    7. Re:Airplane Mode by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Troll printer salesman.

    8. Re:Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      I guess you are very NEW to IT. You do know your printers are "NETWORKED" at work. You seem you got lot to learn. There are plenty of USB policy apps that enterprises buy.

    9. Re:Airplane Mode by admdrew · · Score: 1

      *Networked* printers? Like, that use paper? For what, exactly?

    10. Re:Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      Are you a college student and just bought a new computer? Some maintain copies of your files printed or they maintain the name of print jobs forever.

    11. Re:Airplane Mode by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Some maintain copies of your files printed or they maintain the name of print jobs forever.

      Who's using printers? Are your classes requiring you to turn in printed paper or something?

      There are plenty of USB policy apps that enterprises buy.

      Actually, mostly vaporware, given how USB works independent of all high level software.

    12. Re:Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      Ah, college student. When you exit a job, it is sometimes reviewed by your HR to avoid various legal matters. They have the right to go over your files. You sign those things during your employment agreement. Vaporware USB? Can you name some vaporwares according to your feeling and emotions? Thanks.

    13. Re:Airplane Mode by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Can you name some vaporwares according to your feeling and emotions?

      Why do you think they're vaporware!

      When you exit a job, it is sometimes reviewed by your HR to avoid various legal matters. They have the right to go over your files.

      Your employer made you print out your own files and hand them over to HR? Now you're just not making ANY sense.

    14. Re:Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      Your classes didn't thought you how printer drivers work? Right, bits... drivers can't maintain copies of each print outs... oh, right... So, you don't know where to search on-line for enterprise category apps? Yea, you will not find it in Tiger Direct or NewEgg.

    15. Re:Airplane Mode by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Your classes didn't thought you how printer drivers work?

      Self-aware printers require drivers?

      Yea, you will not find it in Tiger Direct or NewEgg.

      What are we voting on, again?

    16. Re:Airplane Mode by requiemnoise · · Score: 0

      Ah, you never worked at IT or CIS student. Never mind. Maybe, it is better for you to pretend IT departments work like a PC shop that builds gaming rigs. Self-aware? You do understand what drivers mean, right?

    17. Re:Airplane Mode by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Ah, you never worked at IT or CIS student.

      Idea nouns don't have payroll departments, so I never found them too lucrative.

      Self-aware? You do understand what drivers mean, right?

      Just because you don't know something doesn't mean you have to fish for explanations, you can use Wikipedia!

    18. Re:Airplane Mode by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      There are printer management systems which are typically used by government agencies, which can track the contents of what you print and will generate a unique watermark into each print job so that if a document is leaked they can identify the sources if they can get their hands on either a hardcopy or scan of the leaked document.

      Even photocopying can be picked up as these system typically require a user to log in to make a copy.

      Disclaimer - I used to work for a large copy/printer manufacturer.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    19. Re:Airplane Mode by deimtee · · Score: 1

      So you can print out emails to fax them to other people of course.

      --
      I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
  22. roaming costs? big plans can have good data rates by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    roaming costs? big plans can have good data rates your own not so much.

  23. Re:An interesting problem occurs with unlocked pho by admdrew · · Score: 3, Informative

    All of the mentioned restrictions only work if the phone is locked.

    The mobile management software that's out there (and used by some companies that allow BYOD) works just fine on unlocked/rooted phones.

  24. what a load of bullshit by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    And who exactly pulled that out of their ass? No personal devices at my work, period. Same everywhere that has an IT dept worth half a shit.

    1. Re:what a load of bullshit by admdrew · · Score: 2

      I don't know what your work does, but this is definitely starting to become common at many places. While I certainly don't want to relinquish admin control over my personal phone, I also like the the ability to remotely connect to work resources without needing to carry around two phones.

    2. Re:what a load of bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every company I have worked for since 2004 or so has allowed you to connect your phone to exchange. Some of them weren't exactly small companies (Fortune 500).

    3. Re:what a load of bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mine doesn't even let me bring it into the cubicle farm; all cellphones are checked in tiny lockers in the hallway.

  25. Re:An interesting problem occurs with unlocked pho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you realize none of that makes sense?

  26. Employment truth. by kurt555gs · · Score: 4, Funny

    I remember talking with a very successful businessman a long time ago. He asked me if I knew the diference between a job and a career? I said no. He said, it's simple, in a career you get screwed out of your overtime.

    --
    * Carthago Delenda Est *
    1. Re:Employment truth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the time of writing your comment was nearly directly over the quote-for-the-day, which reads:

      >>bureaucrat, n: A politician who has tenure.

      Just found that amusing.

  27. Re:roaming costs? big plans can have good data rat by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    roaming costs? big plans can have good data rates your own not so much.

    My previous company owned the phones and gave them out to individuals. Project Managers, who tended to stay at the office, got 1200 minutes, while technical staff, who tended to have to go out to client sites for two weeks at a stretch, got 500 minutes. I ended up going over a time or two, and was called in to explain myself. On those occasions, I discovered that the corporate plan that the company subscribed to cost about double what an individuals plan would cost with the same minutes. I guess AT&Ts motto is "Buy in bulk and !save".
    Anyway, at some point, the company decided to save money by having the employees BYOD and also PAY for said device. No raises were given in coincidence with this change in policy. The company did require that the employee had to have a phone and make the number available, especially when on the road, but did not pay for it in any way shape or form.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  28. They can by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    FUCK OFF AND DIE!!! If I need a cell phone for work, my employer will provide it. No device of mine will ever be used for work purposes. EVER! I paid for it, its my PRIVATE property. I (and ONLY I ) will decide where and how it gets used. Employers wanting employees to use their own devices for work is just another way to increase profits at the expense of employees!

    1. Re:They can by Sentrion · · Score: 1

      Shhhh! Ixnay on the Otslash-day. If the CEOs find out they can increase profits at the expense of employees then we are all screwed!

  29. If Your Employer Owns Your Cellphone, They Own You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Cellphones are one of the absolute most personal things ever created. Imagine if there's a legal dispute, and your company subpoena's your cellphone, or because you are using it for work, naturally asume they have the right to look at everything you've done. Oh, you're carefully protected friends list?, theirs. Your banking information?, theirs. Your pornography collection, (whether or not you've actually used it for such at work), theirs. Wife sends you a teasing pic during the day, which your forgot to delete, Manager looks at it, fired for sexual harassment.

    In an ideal world, they wouldn't have access to anything on your phone, but the way things are going, anything used for work is considered fair game.

    Also, yes, security, but that's nothing compared to the privacy implications.

  30. Usual nonsense by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1) Take a short and small trend.
    2) Do a linear extrapolation that shows a ridiculous result.
    3) ????
    4) Profit

    ObXKCD

    1. Re:Usual nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod this up. By the way, why does /. still hold back mod points like they were pieces of gold? Every other site lets you upvote/downvote on a regular basis...

    2. Re:Usual nonsense by admdrew · · Score: 1

      You gotta log in first, buddy ;)

    3. Re:Usual nonsense by ryanov · · Score: 1

      You must be new here.

  31. No. Enterprise security will... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...require that specific devices that are enterprise ready will be used in 2017. Unfortunately, the devices with the proper enterprise security will not be as cheap as personal devices so they will be provided by companies.

  32. Australian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tl;dr: author is australian and doesn't want a fancy phone.

    I don't want a smart phone. I choose not to use one - I only care to have a simple phone that does the bare minimum. If they want me to have a smart phone, they'd better provide it for me because I will not spend my own money for a device I choose not to have. Under Australian law (to which I am subject) I don't believe a company can force you to provide your own equipment.

  33. This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by Teddy+Beartuzzi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Should I be buying my own desk? My own chair? Hell, my cubicle walls are clearly my responsibility too, right? If a company thinks an employee needs something for their job, then they should provide it.

    1. Re:This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Should I be buying my own desk? My own chair? Hell, my cubicle walls are clearly my responsibility too, right?

      If a company thinks an employee needs something for their job, then they should provide it.

      So youre saying if you work for a bank and they expect you to wear a shirt and tie to work they should buy you a wardrobe? Black dress shoes they should buy those for you also?

      Oh wait, they already provide you with those items. Its called a pay check.

      If someone has a job where they have to spend 200 bucks on a tablet for work then I refuse to feel sorry for them because chances are they are making a hell of a lot more money than most people in this country that are lucky to be able to afford to keep the electricity turned on and their families fed and I guarantee you they don't have jobs that require an ipad.

      Buy the god damn thing, write it off on your taxes as an expense and be glad you have a high enough profile job you need a ipad or a smart phone.

      Oh and desk? Cubicle walls? Chair? Youre being stupid now. Bottom line is employees don't take care of devices given to them by their employers the majority of the time because it doesn't belong to them. Its all a matter of "We spent many years buying you laptops, phones and such at great expense to the company. You didn't take care of the stuff so now its your responsibility".

      If you don't like it then you can go find another job. No one is forcing you to work there. Don't want to be buy a 200 dollar google nexus 7? Go shovel shit or drive a garbage truck and youll never have to buy a device for your job.

    2. Re:This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is more that I refuse to carry two phones but would like to be able to see email via my phone. If work suddenly blocked access to exchange for BYOD I would simply stop checking email from home.

    3. Re:This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have obviously not yet had a job where you telework. Here where winter weather can be nasty, it's common practice to telework from home on bad weather days. And yes, I supply the desk, the chair, the heat, the lights, the toilet and in fact the real estate where my office is for that day. I can VPN into the company network, and if I have enough activity from home during a given month, I get reimbursed about half of my broadband costs. Calls? They're all rolled over to my work provided cell phone.

    4. Re:This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /facepalm

      BYOD is not about the company being cheap. Companies will often pay for BYOD phones and contracts as they appriciate the phone is a work expense.

      BYOD is about the company allowing its employees choose which device they wish to use for work.

      The alternative is a company wide mandated device which iOS/Android/BB users may not be familiar with which leads to people having two phones...

    5. Re:This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Should I be buying my own desk? My own chair? Hell, my cubicle walls are clearly my responsibility too, right?

      They're moving towards that. It's called "telecommuting."

    6. Re:This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's exactly the direction things are going. But hey we're all libertardians around here so we'll just smile and accept that the market has spoken, right?

    7. Re:This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by admdrew · · Score: 1

      Yeah I'm not sure why the article said "require", when really employers are starting to *allow* BYOD.

    8. Re:This BYOD stuff is just getting ridiculous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please remember to bring a company too!

  34. Cellphone and Clothes by kamaaina · · Score: 1

    I worked for a company that did not offer cell phones, even to IT folk. They said that they will call my personal cell phone if they needed me on the weekend. Their reasoning is that a cell phone is like clothes, everyone is going to wear them.

    It was weird because the company did provide a lot of other tools, personal protective gear, and even had segways on the factory floor so we did not have to walk so much.

    So I gave them my land line and cancelled my cell phone. Then one weekend I was out and about, and they could not get a hold of me. Monday I was told to go buy a phone.

    Yeah I have clothes (land line) but if the tool you need me to have is a mobile phone much like I need steel toed boots rather than running shoes when working in the shop.

    But I don't know if I can pull that today, I am so reliant on my phone. But I did notice when I look in OWA I can remotely delete any mobile device that I have checks email on OWA. We haven't fully implemented our MDM Mobileiron solution, but Exchange already can wipe phones. So I think I would just "give" my phone to my wife or kids, if any employer pulled this on my again and the can call my google voice number.

  35. Buy my own devices? by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 3

    Um no.

    I'm the employee, you are the employer.

    I come in ready to work, you supply the tools for me to work.

    The tools are yours, you can monitor, adjust, replace, revoke, and have Orwellian standards on them. That's because you employed me and provided them.

    Past that? fuck off.

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    1. Re:Buy my own devices? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't imagine this with carpenters... ah, well, I'll fix your house, if you buy me some tools to do it....

    2. Re:Buy my own devices? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have obviously never worked in a skilled construction trade or decent auto shop. Having worked for a large mechanical contractor, expectations and scope of work was set around you having a certain set of tools (mine were $20k). My tools, I supplied, they told me what to do with them. I even had to supply a laptop that they "configured". The compromise there was an 80 GB Windows XP partition.

      I'm out of that field now, but I enjoyed the arrangement. I take care of my stuff and the few contractors that supplied tools paid considerably less money and had morons that couldn't keep a budget working for them. The owner generally takes better care of their property.

    3. Re:Buy my own devices? by sd4f · · Score: 1

      But i think the critical thing is, the phone isn't necessarily what enables you to do your job, for most people, you also don't go about ringing up carpenters outside of their work hours to come in and do more work when it suits you (or rather, they sure as shit won't do it for nothing). I think at the heart of it, well for me, is this problem, that i don't want to be contactable outside of work hours. If they provide the phone, and make the agreement, then that's a bit different.

      My old man worked for a telco and he said that when mobile phones were creeping around to his department, but still weren't all that common, a lot of people looked with envy on someone who had their lunch interrupted with a phone call. I even had discussions with my boss, as i was complaining about dealing with landline phones, and he said that the gloss for phones wore off for him (he was a sucker on the status symbol of a mobile phone) was when he was at a urinal and someone pissed on him as they were fumbling around trying to get their phone and answer it.

    4. Re:Buy my own devices? by robsku · · Score: 1

      Your mixing up employer with customer.

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
  36. My company did this 6 years ago by p51d007 · · Score: 0

    Instead of supplying the device & paying the bill, they pay 1/2 of the phone bill (added to the paycheck), and let you use whatever device you want. The wi-fi in the office is on a different network, so to stay off the corporate network. Unless you opt for LTE and a huge data block, 1/2 of the average phone bill for using your device at work isn't that bad. Most would have a smartphone anyway, this just knocks the costs down a bit, and not have to carry 2 devices. One personal & one for work.

  37. Welcome to Corporate Greed by Nyder · · Score: 1

    I hope this doesn't surprise anyone. After all, Corporations are pretty much running everything now. And since Corporations are about making as much profit as possible for the shareholders, cutting out stuff like buying supplies for your employees, charging for paper sacks shouldn't be coming as a surprise at all.

    I remember working in nice restaurants that made you supply your own cook uniform, and it had to be clean every day. Now most restaurants supplied them for you, but I guess the corporation ran ones wouldn't bare the expense.

    When will it stop? Will we balk at bringing our own plates & utensils to restaurants? Maybe it's when you have to supply your own computer for a job?

     

    --
    Be seeing you...
    1. Re:Welcome to Corporate Greed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only an idiot opens a restaurant and does not incorporate. If you don't like the "corporation" find another. Employees vote with their feet and poor decisions routinely come at the cost of employee retention.

      We have a small company of 10 employees and I recently switched to BYOD. Rules are, your phone must work, be able to connect to our web apps, you must be able to connect to company email, able to join our VPN, and it must be charged and on your person all day. If battery runs dead, get off the clock and return when you have communications.

      An employee is responsible for company IP. All documents are watermarked with who retrieved it and access logged. We are not in an insanely regulated industry and work in less tyrannical state. If you leak something you shouldn't, you loose your job. Devices are not managed.

      Oh, and we already supply our own computers.

      The thing is, I'm a hard working, intelligent, capitalist, I prefer leasing my phone and laptop to my employeer for $150/month. It's better for taxes and I get to use devices I like. (I've also never lived pay check to pay check, even when working minimum wage. It's called a budget)

  38. Wipe your device? ABSOLUTELY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they get to...wipe my own device...

    Yes. My company made me install TouchDown on my phone to read email. One of the features that TouchDown offers is that my company's IT department has permission to issue a remote wipe of my Android phone.

  39. Gartner, the ruin of many a poor boy. by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2

    Gartner gives atrocious advice. I get it- it used to be good and then it was good because people did what it said.

    But for the last five or six years, it just throws things out there and sees if they stick on the wall.

    Former company I worked for followed Gartners advice. It was terrible. But, because it came from Gartner, no one could get fired for following it. Reminds me of IBM.

    --
    She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
  40. There is an option B by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    b) You don't get a job / you get immediately fired.

    enjoy! Luckily you can still collect unemployment insurance in California when you're fired for refusing to buy the company a smartphone.

    1. Re:There is an option B by robsku · · Score: 1

      A bit extremist view of situation?

      Of, but this was about USA... What a great country you have - I mean, instead of workers rights you have employers rights: AWESOME!

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
  41. Dear Editors by kwerle · · Score: 1

    I'm just stopping by to say:

    Jackasses.

  42. Sounds like a good idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Companies save a lot of money that way. Not to mention they aren't having to pay for service contracts for all those devices, no tech support contracts, if the employee is careless and damages it then its their problem because most people treat company equipment like crap because it doesn't belong to them, and the company doesn't spend the initial money to purchase the devices.

    All a company has to do is have a cloud service for its employees documents that requires password to access it and even if the device is stole all the companies data is secure because it isn't stored locally on the phone.

    Besides just about any company where you are using a ipad, smartphone, blackberry or whatever chances are you own a device already or can afford to do so. Its no different than an employer saying you have to wear a shirt and tie or a dress to work. Employees do have an obligation to meet reasonable expectations by their employer. So if you don't want to get a tablet for work, go work someplace else.

  43. Consequently... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most companies will suffer from massive data breaches due to personal mobile devices by 2018.

  44. Cheap bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is for mobile only. Still means that 38% of companies are run by cheap ass bastards.

  45. And thats the problem by nukem996 · · Score: 2

    I'm perfectly happy having corporate e-mail on a phone I pay for 100%, but I refuse to allow anyone to have control over my phone but me. My company encourages e-mail on our personal phones but require stock firmware, non-rooted, the ability to remote wipe, and the ability to change security settings on my phone. I'm fine if there is a requirement that I have remote wipe ability but I should be the only one in control of it. And telling me that I can't run alternitive firmware due to "security concerns" is ridiculous! Until I can get just get corporate e-mail on my device the way I want it I'll be happy with it and use it, until then they can pay for the phone if they want to control it.

  46. But the accountants can get bigger bonuses by crovira · · Score: 1

    I fully agree that your employer should be forced to buy phones for those employees that require it, but with off-shoring, out-sourcing or just plain "scarcity of financial resources" (read: "their ass is too cheap to pay when they can get the expense off of the books") you just know its going down that road despite the fact that you don't need an NBA to figure out that its a stupid idea.

    Accountants only have high-school, after all how much learning do you need to figure out addition and subtraction.

    PS: That's how our economy got in such a mess and why its not improving.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
    1. Re:But the accountants can get bigger bonuses by Mike+Frett · · Score: 1

      I agree, I don't own a Cell. The only way I would is if the company or someone bought it for me and payed all the fees associated with it. Because I have exactly zero use for a phone.

  47. Australian law doesn't mean that ... by crovira · · Score: 1

    ... they have to keep you either.

    You don't want to buy a smart phone for work?

    You don't want to work.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
    1. Re:Australian law doesn't mean that ... by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 2

      If they fired me just because I didn't provide my own phone it would be wrongful dismissal. So no.. they could not lay me off me on that basis. It helps that, as an academic, there is little about my job that would be improved with a smart phone. I feel I provide much better instruction talking to students face to face than through some app.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    2. Re:Australian law doesn't mean that ... by admdrew · · Score: 1

      If they fired me just because I didn't provide my own phone it would be wrongful dismissal.

      Unfortunately a good chunk of the tech industry is at-will employment, where you can get fired for any (or far more likely, *no*) reason.

  48. Federal Reserve by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    Every person in the money factory for the federal reserve gets to bring his own dollar printing device and takes it home in the evening. Splendid idea. What could possibly go wrong.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
  49. I'd really shocked this many companies.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm really shocked that more than 50% of USA? employers provide cell phones as a course of the job.

    Hell I'm shocked that more than about 2% provide phones to employees. As an employer (not in the US), I would never provide a phone to an employee. I cannot imagine a situation, unless they're a driver or a mobile employee who requires frequent re-provisioning throughout the day, where they would ever need a paid-for phone.

    I would never let any employee connect any device to my supposedly secure network, they can pay for their own data usage.

    If your employer buys the phone, they own it all data on it, but must pay for your use of it.

    1. Re:I'd really shocked this many companies.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      somone who is not chained to their desk like oh I dunno, an engineer who might be cross country at any given time

      your pathetic cubical job or in a truck is not the only two jobs in the universe, I rather find it convenient to ping a coworker weather they are in the plant, campus or country without out tracking them down first

    2. Re:I'd really shocked this many companies.. by ryanov · · Score: 1

      How do you reasonably maintain a 24x7 server environment without staffing three full shifts? Why would I call you back off hours if you aren't providing me with a phone? Phone, and compensating me for my off-hours work, has got to be cheaper than hiring 2 more people.

  50. security nightmare by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 3, Informative

    Gartner is so incredibly wrong here. You can't control a plethora of devices connecting to your office network. In reality, you'll have to assume that all devices that connect to you are inherently evil and users using them will be snooped on and their logon credentials will get sniffed. This means you first have to "weaponize" every application you run on your IT infrastructure and make it available as a web service. You'll have to issue two-factor authentication that uses a dynamic element such as a challenge/response hardware key generator. Only when you have everything like that in place, you can "safely" start using BYOD in a corporate environment. By then, there is no more need for people to actually be in the office to do their work, apart from meetings. For meetings, you can always call in or video conference from home. Effectively, the only way to pay for this is to quit renting office space and go completely virtual. Because you no longer rent office space, renting a separate server room will cost you dearly and you'll need your admins to have office space close to that room, so you're still running a brick company. Going to "the cloud" will be more or less mandatory for such a company, from an economic view point. I don't see a significant amount of companies do all this within the next four years. I do see a lot trying to save a few bucks on the abysmal hardware budgets they already have and fail horribly at productivity and security and reverse their decisions, spending much more in the process and not gaining anything.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:security nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why your network its all offsite now

      welcome to 3 years ago, now put down the blackberry, and reconsider why your 12 person cooperation is 90% it staff running exchange

    2. Re:security nightmare by William+Ruther · · Score: 1

      Hahahaha flying Car

  51. How do you settle up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't turn in your company owned equipment you don't get your last check and you get sued. Its really not that hard.

    1. Re:How do you settle up? by robsku · · Score: 1

      Might have been badly mistaken but I thought it was about company paid cell phones that you get to legally keep - otherwise most... no, not most, but much the discussion here has been for nothing.

      --
      In capitalist USA corporations control the government.
  52. 20 Extra Hours Per Week by Scot+Seese · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Awesome, so as an employee *I* have to pay for my $700 smartphone -AND- the expectation will exist that I will be monitoring emails nights and weekends?

    What a bargain for your employer, by chipping in $50-100/mo to pay for a fraction of your service plan, they get up to 20 hours per week of additional work out of you, according to this study:
    http://www.techvibes.com/blog/byod-trend-is-making-employees-work-an-extra-20-hours-per-week-report-suggests-2012-08-22

    This, on top of inflation-adjusted real wages that have not increased since 1973:
    http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2013/04/16/the-best-indicator-of-u-s-health-is-wage-growth-or-lack-thereof/

    Slashdot headline next summer: "BYO Desk all the rage among newer workers"

    --
    THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
    1. Re:20 Extra Hours Per Week by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > Awesome, so as an employee *I* have to pay for my $700 smartphone -AND- the expectation will exist that I will be monitoring emails nights and weekends?

      I was thinking that too. So one possible answer is, I won't bring my own device, thanks. I'll be available via email during office hours, or if I happen to be in front of my computer at home.

      About two years ago at my current company, they went to a really obnoxious lock-down application on company phones, and rolled it out badly. (New pin every few days, three missed pins locks the phone, didn't play well with email/calendar sync.) Got so bad I very nearly gave back the phone and did without. That would have been interesting -- can they *make* me have a company phone? I'm happy to carry a pager when on-call. But make the phone too fussy and I'll learn to live without it. It's not, like, an addiction.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    2. Re:20 Extra Hours Per Week by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      I see this as the other way around, in that it's taking the workplace around with you.

      I look forward to being able to SSH into work on my BYOD tablet and update TPS report covers from the pub, and the company paying for it.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:20 Extra Hours Per Week by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      by chipping in $50-100/mo to pay for a fraction of your service plan, they get up to 20 hours per week of additional work out of you

      Do you really think they'll be giving you $50-100 per month?

      If they're anything like my employer they only way they would give you anything is if you get charged by the megabyte for going over your limit, and then only for data consumed in the course of business. Never mind that you blew through half your plan with business data and then incurred a ton of costs for personal browsing once you were over quota - that doesn't count, and that business use was "free." That's what happens at my employer if you have to dial into an important call at the start of the month and run out of minutes for personal use at the end of the month - they'd just say that you shouldn't have made so many personal calls on your own phone/plan.

      I'll do BYOD when it is my choice of phone, my choice of OS, my choice of software, and I'm the only admin on the phone. Yes, I understand all the reasons why this isn't acceptable to employers, which is why I don't insist on them supporting my phone. However, I certainly won't give them access to it under other conditions.

  53. It's pretty simple... by Cosgrach · · Score: 1

    If you want to contact me regarding work business or if I am 'on call', you will provide me a device. Otherwise sit and spin motherfucker.

    --
    Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
  54. SIM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And whose SIM is in that device? That's the question.

  55. Easy answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No.

    Next question?

  56. usage cost by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    > The employee owns the device, and the company helps to cover usage costs [...]

    Let's hope companies find a reasonable way to do so. I worked for a company that would cover cellular expenses, but only if you submitted an expense report once a month. Procedure was to fill out an online application, print out the result, then fax the form with your physical receipt, then staple them together and walk them to a basket in a different part of the building. (So that both the company and the outsourced accounts payable had copies.) It was so annoying and time consuming that most people just ate the cost.

    In another company, I was required to carry a company cell but was forbidden to make or receive personal calls, rigidly enforced, so had to carry and manage charging for two cells, one company, one personal. Then, they decided that pagers were more reliable, so I had to carry that plus the other two devices for the weeks I was on call. You know that alpha geek thing? Where you swagger around bristling with devices? It's not as cool as it sounds.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  57. Hardly a major concern by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    . 'What happens if you buy a device for an employee and they leave the job a month later?

    This is hardly going to be the most pressing concern. Nobody will take a job for a month just for a free piece of tech. For the company, the cost of salary and overheads for that employee is going to be a bigger concern - few employees start of profitable; there's a ramp up time.

    If it's a real problem then ask the employee to return the device.

  58. These Are Some Dumbass Companies then by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

    Just sayin'

  59. Problems, problems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is an upfront cost. As a work tool, it's tax deductible, but I have to buy it on the first day of the job. The boss can demand any device at any cost.

    Changing jobs frequently means I will have a bundle of barely-used devices. Only the one used in my current job can be claimed as a work expense.

    There are laws enforcing the security of business data, which portable devices do not address. It is compounded by malevolent agents (thieves, corporate spies, police, DHS) pirating business-owned data just because it is portable. This can be handled by various means: Encryption, VPN-based workflow, remote self-destruct. There is also the concern of data retained by 'formatted' flash memory.

    The PIM capacity of modern devices require that some procedure be used by employees to keep personal information and work-related factoids separate.

  60. Reject by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

    As far as possible, Do NOT work for companies that do this.

    In fact try to *not* have a mobile at all... (Its possible). Try to keep your work to daytime, non-weekend hours only.

    1. Re:Reject by Nbrevu · · Score: 1

      I wish I could mod you up. Your last sentence is so absolutely essential to a healthy work-life balance that I'm surprised so many people don't follow it.

    2. Re:Reject by neminem · · Score: 1

      Sometimes you don't have a choice. Except, granted, the choice to give your boss the finger and quit, which is great if you don't mind starving to death on the street because you can't afford food or rent... everyone else, if they accept a job that appears on the surface to be entirely sane, and then 3 weeks after they accept it their boss hands them a phone and says "you are responsible for jumping every time this phone tells you to, even in the middle of the night on a Saturday, and no of course you won't be compensated for it", you pretty much just have to ask "how high?" if you want your job to still exist.

      I'm so glad I don't have a job like that. I know very second-hand how that works, though. (She's looking for a new job, now. It's gotten increasingly bad. :p)

  61. BYOD? Great! by gostu · · Score: 1

    Here's my Nokia 3210. Of course it's good enough, I paid a lot for it back in 1999. What? You never said it HAS to be a smartphone...

  62. No IBMers here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, how the mighty have fallen. I have been doing BYOD with Android at IBM for over two years. I did BYOD Blackberry for years, but they make it easy. Android took some time to get right. The way I see it, I don't like any surprises when I walk in each morning, especially Mondays. With BYOD, I get to keep up with late-breaking developments at work, I get some of the best malware protection out there for free (Junos Pulse) and IBM can only wipe data they've placed on my phone. It's not a full VM, but an erasable data container not unlike a TrueCrypt volume.

    I feel bad for the rest of you, while your companies are still trying to figure it out.

  63. LOL Not my company by stevegee58 · · Score: 1

    Not my company, or any defense contractor for that matter.
    It's such a wide open security hole I can't believe anyone would allow it.

    1. Re:LOL Not my company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      False. I work for a defense contractor and I can sync with our Exchange server remotely from my personal Android phone, I can get on the internal WLAN using my personal Android phone, etc.

      I can even access my (unclassified) AKO mail from my personal Android phone (for now). Basically, the first half of your post is full of shit.

      The second half I can't argue against :)

      Posting AC because tinfoil hat.

  64. Awful idea by Nbrevu · · Score: 1

    I don't like smartphones and I like to erect a metaphorical concrete wall between my job and my life. So obviously I hope this idea doesn't get far, and in fact I cannot see how could any employee like it.

    I'd go as far as not to let my employer know my phone number, so they can't call me: after all, if it's worktime, I'm at the office, so no phone call needed. Do you want to call me on a weekend because something happened to the server? I won't even try to charge a million, I just won't do it.

  65. What "problem" is this trying to "solve"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see 0 benefit of this for employees.

  66. Not going to happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too many security concerns,
    An employee walking off the job with all the corporations data on his personal computer/tablet , smart phone.

    you would have to invest in some massive cloud for employees. Add a DLP solution.
    And what about all the porn on the devices?

  67. Gartner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gartner is always making studies to generate a bunch of buzz about the future. They're mostly loads of crap. It's never what will be big next year but what will be big long enough away that nobody then will remember how wrong Gartner was. Plus the studies are sold to clients so they are rigged to have an outcome the clients want to hear cuz that's how Gartner makes money. The only difference between this and all the claims made in the 60s and 70s about the great future where we'd have flying cars and a moonbase is that it Gartner are paid Yes Men.

  68. Simple by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

    What happens if you buy a device for an employee and they leave the job a month later?

    The device is property of the company. It can go to someone who can use it. If no such employee exists the device can go to the issuer (or the employee who handles that stuff), who shall issue it to the next employee who asks for a device of that type.
    I have been in a couple of different companies, and it always worked that way. Only once I have gotten a new computer when I started. And that was because they were expanding and there was no old computer available. Every other time it I got old equipment: a PC that was used by my predecessor, a phone that was used by someone who went on his pension. And that's fine.

    I wouldn't want BYOD unless there is a good solution for erasing the company secrets on the device without erasing my own stuff. I would demand extra pay for BYOD because it means I have to buy stuff for it, and replace it once it breaks.

    --
    Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  69. Re:roaming costs? big plans can have good data rat by sd4f · · Score: 1

    My telco explicitly states that my phone plan isn't to be used for commercial stuff. I'd hate to be in the company you described, sounds like they have an attitude of screw everyone, including employees.

  70. Re:An interesting problem occurs with unlocked pho by msk · · Score: 1

    Perhaps, but my employer requires that the phone be locked. And my employer supplies phones. If they want me to be reachable after regular work hours, that's how it has to be.

  71. Re:An interesting problem occurs with unlocked pho by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assuming you're talking about the Carrier Lock then this is a seperate issue.

    Carrier Locks only control which SIM cards the phone will accept i.e. SIMs from the vendor.

    Carrier Locks in no way effect how the phone functions or behaves otherwise.

  72. Re:roaming costs? big plans can have good data rat by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

    They tried that with me I told them to provide me with a phone if they wanted to contact me outside of work hours. I am not paying for any device or service needed to do my job. In the 5 years I have had a work cell phone I have been called twice on it outside regular work hours, both times when I was on call and being paid for being on call. I did have one boss who was upset that I would be unreachable when on vacation and wanted me to take a laptop and celluar card but couldn't grasp that where I was going there wan no cell signal and to get one required a 30 minute drive. He asked how he could find me and I pointed at a map and said get a team of trained blood hounds and some trackers and I will be somewhere in this area as I pointed to the arrow head region of Minnesota.

    --
    Time to offend someone
  73. This of course will fail by gelfling · · Score: 1

    The only thing more consistent than their cheapness is corporations' anal retentive micro management. They will require you to supply your own devices (from an approved list of course) and then they will proceed to burden it with so much management, security, asset and tracking software as to render it useless. Which will then drive up the hardware requirements even more until they require you to own massively overpowered devices and enormous cost. Employees will balk - first in one's and two's then in waves and the whole thing blows up in everyone's face.

    Our sysadmins use 4 core latest and greatest 8GB laptops. Minimum. And with that, they're barely serviceable.

  74. what about the contacts? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about the employees that take the contacts and go start their own company to compete with you? The data has to be worth more than the device.

  75. Gartner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought everybody stopped listening to their magic quadrant circlejerk pseudo-research years ago?

  76. Linear interpolation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey guys, I heard that any time you see a trend in anything anywhere, you can graph it to a curve to predict the future with 100% accuracy and make idiotic statements about the future like "most companies will require you to bring your own mobile device by 2017."

  77. Re:If Your Employer Owns Your Cellphone, They Own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny you should mention this. I work for a company that just fired some guy for this exact same reason. Apparently the guy and the rest of his team were part of an investigation by the legal department regarding some patent infringement claims and one of the things they do is search everyone's data to make sure there's nothing there that will get them in deep shit, so they can fire the person and claim that the issue is resolved. Anyway, one of the things they do is to basically copy/pasta your work phone data right then. The case ended up being closed. So a good week later, the guy's manager finds out that they have the power to spy on people. Said manager is a well known outspoken and devout Christian. Called the guy into his office, said he wouldn't keep paying adulterers, showed him the picture, and told him to GTFO. Now the guy is suing for discrimination. Said manager put in his file that he fired him because he 'acted immorally' by having a woman send him pictures of her naked body. Legal is basically trying to pay him off because they know he's right, but management is trying to circle the wagons because half of them are devout outspoken Christians too.

  78. Two types of IT by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 1

    I see IT people from the early 2000s demanding to install as much controlling software on people's own devices as possible. People from before 2000 even more. But I see IT people from say after 2010 on just saying, "I don't want to install crap on their devices, they either work or they don't. If they don't do their work they get fired. I'm not their parent."

    I have a friend who was recently hired in a consulting role. He was there to oversee bringing a company's IT system in to the 21st century. Needless to say he brought his own laptop. The first encounter was the head of IT sending in a drone in with a Novell CD that must be installed before he could connect to the Internet or anything. Needless to say not only did he not install Novell but Novell was gone within a week. The best part was that upper management had been repeatedly told that there was nothing that could do what Novell did. The reality was that there were things they had long wanted to do where Novell was getting in the way. Not to mention the huge amount of money freed up by not paying the per user costs for Novell. The setup that my friend implemented was basically IT as an ISP. His built in thinking was that people will screw up over and over so instead of trying to make it impossible he moved to a more ISP like model of helping people to do the best they could. He found it bizzare to treat senior management as idiots. They might not know much about computers but they aren't dumb. So he just gave them the tools to make sure the company data wasn't flying out the window. Things like encrypted HDs on any laptops that left the building. People suddenly felt comfortable asking IT for advise instead of going to war with them.

    Another thing he shut down was IT monitoring people's web activity and then selectively creating reports.

    The old IT guy even stated that the day after my friend left he would be re-installing Novell on every machine.

    Old IT thinking, new IT thinking.

  79. I don't think it is as much about being cheap by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    More about shirking responsibility. If the company provides the device and wants employees to have work data on it, they are responsible. They need to secure it and make sure that data is dealt with properly. If a breach happens, it is on them. Well that's complex and expensive. So, instead just have employees bring in their own devices. Then you aren't responsible. If something happens you say "Oh well that was an employee owned device and they weren't following our security policies (which are so impossibly complex and draconian nobody can follow them) we aren't to blame!"

  80. So you are not going to participate in by crovira · · Score: 1

    the exciting revenue possibilities of distance learning? (And distance billing?)

    As an academic, you do realize that your department can be restructured, your job can be re-evaluated, and the face-to-face Socratic teaching model you seem so fond of is going the way of the Tasmanian tiger.*

    What you "feel" is not as important as what you "know."

    Your teaching method of letting learning happen by "rubbing up against a problem" is extremely expensive in terms of time and resources.

    In a country as vast and as spottily populated as Australia, where even the doctors sometimes have to fly to their next patient, telepresence is so much more efficient.

    --
    MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
    1. Re:So you are not going to participate in by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

      In a country as vast and as spottily populated as Australia

      I teach engineering - specifically practical project based courses in robotics. If students can't be in the lab, it's not really clear how they could be effectively instructed. If doing tech support over the phone is hard, consider the difficulties of effectively debugging a student's circuit when the students themselves don't understand what they've done (or why it's faulty).

      The pedagogical aspects of instruction can (and certainily should) be abstracted into online resources, but some aspects of instruction in practical disciplines cannot be effectively remote-taught. At least, so I think - I'm staking my future career on it. :)

      Actually, Australia is incredibly densely populated in a few select bits - 90% of Australia's population is urbanised. The flying doctor service was for those few too far to drive from a local hospital or clinic; these days it's increasingly eccentric to live that deep in the bush.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    2. Re:So you are not going to participate in by crovira · · Score: 1

      it's not really clear how they could be effectively instructed

      That's actually a failure of your imagination, not the students'.

      Your attitude would have kept me hauling boxes at Standard Brands, instead of traveling on both sides of the pond doing object-oriented programming and writing articles.

      these days it's increasingly eccentric to live that deep in the bush.

      And how do you force where your student's parents might have had circumstances force them to live.

      Genius has bugger all to do with geography.

      You have very little to teach me, and it doesnt sound like you're anything but a negative example.

      I'm sorry, for you.

      --
      MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
    3. Re:So you are not going to participate in by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

      That's a depressing attitude to take. Let me give you a similar example: nursing. As part of a nursing degree you are required to take practical educational modules such as how to find a vein and deliver an injection, how to properly insert an IV drip, how to administer blood and so on. These are skills that require immediate hands-on training; while there are some conceptual aspects that can be delivered via video ("tap the fixture to remove bubbles from the flow so that they do not enter the bloodstream"), other critical components require you to see and feel a patient under guidance. Short of some ridiculously advanced haptics, you can't deliver that instruction without being colocated with the student. I'm sorry, but it's not imagination failure: it's reality. I /can/ imagine the haptics, but that won't be primetime for a long time, if ever. So, do we castigate nurses for failing to adequately deliver remote education? No. We simply fly students out to the university when it comes time to do their practical educational components.

      Likewise, when we instruct students on debugging, soldering, group work and critical discussions it is expected that they present at the university to undertake it. It is remarkably easy to show a student one on one what proper soldering looks like, how it feels and what the quality of the joint is afterwards - it's a tactile thing like finding a vein. Interactive skills like group discussions are greatly diminished over remote media, which is why many many business people and technical staff travel to do their jobs even in our increasingly technical age.

      It is my expectation that, by the time a university student is committed to undertaking a four year degree, they will be sufficiently independent of their parents so as to be able to travel to a location proximal to their school. This is very very routine, and easily 70 percent of my class are from out of state. You're absolutely right - genius is not geographically determined (cf. Ramanujan) - and those students who excell at school are typically eligible for remote student scholarships to pay for their moving expenses to study at our university. The university really loves giving them out - it lets them talk about how they're helping the best and the brightest have new opportunities they might otherwise be denied through their remoteness.

      Pitying me just because I recognise that one way of teaching absolutely sucks and one way of teaching is somewhat better (and then choose to advocate for the better way) is somewhat disengenuous. I would be doing my students a disservice if I told them "Sure! We can teach you all you need to know just fine over the phone." They would be unprepared for their profession. If you would like to see something of my approach to teaching, I will put my money where my mouth is and show you my teaching materials. I currently teach a fourth-year project course in mechatronics. My class site is here and is publically accessible. You can see my project design, lectures and feedback to students. I urge you to tell me how to do my job better - I really am committed to improving my teaching and providing the best training possibile to my students.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
    4. Re:So you are not going to participate in by Kell+Bengal · · Score: 1

      Typo - the correct link is http://robotics.itee.uq.edu.au/~metr3800/.

      --
      Scientists point out problems, engineers fix them
      altslashdot.org: The future of slashdot.
  81. FLSA by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

    I wonder if all of these companies that are going to require BYOD or even those that provide a phone now have figured in, reported and paid for the overtime that is required under the FLSA for non-exempt employees. It seems to me that saying an employee must have a phone to check company email or answer calls outside normal work hours would be considered, well, work and therefore the employee, unless exempt, needs to be compensated for that time.

    I think if I were a large company, I would strongly rethink who gets a company phone or is required to provide their own device. While you cannot stop an non-exempt employee from checking their mail (thus working) and you must pay them for it. You can take action if it isn't pre-approved overtime. However, if the employer is providing the phone or requiring the employee to purchase their own, by definition, they are acknowledging that working outside the normal 40 hour work week is required and have given tacit approval.

    I wonder how much unpaid overtime is actually accruing and if BYOD becomes widespread, will that force the issue?

  82. Unlikely by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

    I seriously doubt any of the major businesses that develop anything are going to require you to bring your own device as then you could legitimately claim that any side work you are doing can not be their property. Or similarly, you could claim any work you're doing "extra" under the auspices of their business could also legally be used for your own endeavors. Gartner has this completely wrong.

    Some might allow it but very few of the "big names" are going to require it. In any industry.

    Hell, every employer I have had in the last 15 years has specifically said "you can't do our work on your personal devices" with the exception of phone conversations.

    --
    "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
  83. I'm fine with that. by alanbdee5808 · · Score: 2

    I've been using my own devices for work since 2005. When I worked in a motorcycle shop the mechanics brought in their own tools. So why now that I'm a programmer should it be odd that I bring in my own PC and tablet? What I would like to see companies do allocate a specified amount each year toward equipment.

    As for security, Novell just released a Dropbox like application with enterprise security in mind. It's called Filr.

  84. My first thought after reading this headline was.. by home-electro.com · · Score: 1

    Gartner.

    And I'm not a psychic. Who else could come with a study as ridiculous as this and conclusion so pointless? Why is this on a slashdot?

  85. Capitalsim... by czernabog · · Score: 1

    ... is beautiful and ingenious.

  86. BYOD by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

    We have that.

    It sucks. I call it "Bring Your Own Dollars".

    Among my colleagues, we estimate it costs us 75-200 USD each, per billing cycle. I can see why the company wanted to transfer that to us.

    Why didn't they also transfer to us their collective negotiating and buying power? What a boon to the carrier!

    This blow would have been lessened, had the company ALSO rolled out a universally accessible, SIP-based VOIP service. Alas, two years have gone, and no softphone.

    Still, it could be worse. Having VOIP is not worth working in a pit like CIsco.

    --
    "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
    Never been known to fail..."
    1. Re:BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you please post another host file spam message? I've been missing them lately.

    2. Re:BYOD by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      I think you been sniffing the pickle juice from APK's anus.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    3. Re:BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you reply to an unrelated post? Are you really that stupid?

    4. Re:BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is APK and how do you know that he keeps pickle juice there? Did you put it there?

    5. Re:BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fail it, Paul. Your skill is not enough.

  87. Sneaky bastards by PPH · · Score: 1

    Back a few jobs ago, I was given a 'company owned device' (a pager) to take home when I was on call. But I was compensated for that duty. Otherwise, when I left the company premises, I was effectively incommunicado. Later on, I worked for another outfit that thought employees were supposed to be reachable 24/7, at the bosses whim. We had company pagers to carry when we were in the factory, but we left them in our desks after working hours. They wanted our phone numbers, so I gave them the land line number. Chat with my answering machine all you want.

    I see the requirement to purchase your own mobile device as a back door way to ensuring that you will be reachable 24/7. Without compensation.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Sneaky bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saw this coming long ago. A lot of things are stupid or evil but it doesn't stop them from becoming popular. MBAs are destroying the world; the only good side is their quick rise in China will insure we are not crushed.

      The MBAs are all about cost externalization to the extreme and for the short term gains for themselves. I remember some magazine article telling business to encourage personal email use at work because it blurs the line allowing them to get business time at home. The boss read it and we had instant policy change - not that IT was ever exempt, we were like firemen... always expected to come running but when it came to pay taxes... (how we fund firemen) there is no gratitude.

      Education is being pushed outside the company - now you dump employees or force them to spend their money and time educating themselves outside work. The schools are being pressured more than ever to provide job training and it is getting increasingly specific. MBAs hate IT because it is a cost they can't figure out how to get rid of so they resent that whole department...you are lucky if you are forgotten in the basement rather than a constant reminder. Better to be the janitor they don't see or think about and when they do - frame it like the janitor: a janitor is needed if you want a clean building, IT is needed if you want modern technology.

      Realistically the MBAs will delay on making staff provide computers until some idiot prints in BusinessWeek or Wired how safe it is. Court cases will be needed to be resolved as well. Once they feel at ease with gaining access to your personal property (on which their data resides) you will see them all JUMP to this - with "cloud" services it will make them feel safe-- that fluffy cloud somehow completely disarms the realistic apprehension of putting everything on the internet and centralized (even a couple servers is still centralized.) Possibly this could be sold as the solution for IT costs-- it is the employee's device, it is THEIR problem ! Externalize most IT costs to the employee - Geek Squad makes a fortune and employee pay effectively goes down (paying for IT) then you put many services into generic "cloud" providers and IT is completely gone. Nevermind that the business data is likely the most important asset (no employees are not, think like an MBA) because afterall, they learn how to run a business on the brink of disaster in full DEBT because capital can't be "wasted" for financial security. Its like the BANKERS who are really more like drug dealers for MBAs took over the education system so all the students come out addicted...

      end rant. think about it, read something. you'll see I'm right.

  88. LMAO ..p4wn3d , all your bases are belong to us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they are not even able to control "their" devices from me doing anything i want with it , and they expect to control "my" device ? LOL , expect IT crews going straight to the nuthouse after 45 minutes of hitting my tripwire

  89. Are they liable for contract costs? by Ioldanach · · Score: 1

    If a company requires an employee to get a device at their own cost, how long before we see someone sue their company for the cost of contract termination fees when they lose their job before their cellphone contract is up?

  90. Sadly appropriate Dilbert by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once again, Dilbert's Pointy-Haired Boss was ahead of the curve.

    http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2001-10-11/

  91. Gartner Advice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am responsible for IT (Networking, Software Development, Web Server and Phone provisioning groups report to me) at a fairly large national company.
    In over 20 yaers of IT I have always looked at Gartners advice as a good start on what not to do. Has not steered me wrong yet :)

  92. Re:If Your Employer Owns Your Cellphone, They Own by jason777 · · Score: 1

    Simple solution here. Buy a second phone for work, and only use it for that. You real phone has all your personal stuff.

  93. SO COPLIMUHCATED by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    good thing you got that distinguished analyst to make sense of this horribly confusing situation.

  94. Thank you Katanna Eclipse X! by modi123 · · Score: 1

    I was starting to think this 'smart phone fad' was taking traction! If this is the work place of the future then I have a right idea to keep the ol' flip phone functioning. Bwahahaha..

  95. This is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When the employees leave, just what will the employer do? If the phone belongs to the employee, and the employer has never paid anything for it, it and all the contents belong to the employee. I cannot imagine the employer saying anything but asking them to delete corporate info, and having someone sitting with them (just as they do when you go through your desk) as they do it.

    Wipe the device? With all *YOUR* private info? I think not, and I think any court would think not.

    Then you've got to worry about what the employee has on their phone - if it gets pwned, who's responsible for corporate info, identifying what happened, or cleaning it?

    Then there are those of us whose idea of a "mobile device" is a netbook or laptop, and maybe a cellphone - y;'know this thing you make phone calls on and do this thing called "talking to another human being"? I certainly wouldn't buy a "mobile device" for the benefit of my employer. For that matter, if they're requiring *that*, I want at least a 10% increase in salary for being what's known as "on call". And, while I'm at it, I'd like to be paid, in quarter-hour increments, for each work-related call.

    Still want me buying it....? Then let's go to what *kind* of "mobile device" - not liking monopolies, I wouldn't buy from Apple, and I'd stay as far away as I could from a M$-based phone. So now, who at work's going to deal with all of this....?

                      mark

  96. Missing the benefits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cheer up. This is really the first step to regarding IT as a respectable 'Trade'. Professionals across the universe are free to make their job as easy or as hard as the tools they know and bring. if you think 'ordinary' trades like carpenters dont have secrets or skeletons to hide, you are in a dream world.

    Secondly, the un-reimbursed job expense is deductible. So dont get all freaked out about the privacy thing and reject the idea wholesale. Upgrade your freakin' smart device, put the old one into work-service after you WIPE IT CLEAN YOUR SELF. Or keep the old one and write off the expense of the NEW CLEAN ONE.

    Hello??

  97. It's articles like this... by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    That let me know that about half the articles here are plants by various device retailers pushing their latest... whatever.

    Security on BYOD is basically non-existent.

    So if security doesn't matter at all then by all means go with that option. If it does... Then you have to do something else.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  98. Ridiculous - at least in Medical IT by Geraden · · Score: 1

    "'What happens if you buy a device for an employee and they leave the job a month later? How are you going to settle up? "

    This is ridiculous. If the company buys a device for the employee, the employee is obligated to return it at the end of their employment. Period. Any other answer is simply a manager/administrator that doesn't want to pay for the hardware OR for the resources necessary to manage the hardware. I work in the Medical IT field, and BYOD is a very hot topic these days. My answer is always this: employee-owned devices should have NO access to the internal corporate network.

    Just as employee-owned computers/laptops/etc shouldn't be allowed on the network, neither should employee-owned mobile devices. They're just too big a vector for incoming threats.

  99. Contracting by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

    Such an approach could be advantageous to ambitious workers who may work on two or three projects simultaneously, presuming, of course, no conflict of interest.

    Unless the company in question is a consultancy itself, there should not be a conflict of interest. Nor is there any justification for restrictive covenants. To my mind, that is nothing more than a power play, and as a contractor I am in an equal bargaining position.

    You seemingly don't understand the purpose of employees vs contractors. You get to spread a number of costs out among your employees. Contract negotiation is a pain in the butt, among other things. Also, when I am setting my rates, I pass on any expenses due to down time, or employee training, or materials, directly on to the customer, with markup. There's no free lunch.

    Finally, while it is theoretically possible to schedule your time to be able to take on multiple contracts at once, there is a lot of overhead in task-switching. You're not an employee any more, you're a business entity, so that means that you also need to be HR, an accountant, a lawyer, and a salesman, or employ people to do these things for you. It is possible to wear all of those hats and juggle three or more contracts, but it is far from easy.

    --
    Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
  100. Re:roaming costs? big plans can have good data rat by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    They tried that with me I told them to provide me with a phone if they wanted to contact me outside of work hours. I am not paying for any device or service needed to do my job. In the 5 years I have had a work cell phone I have been called twice on it outside regular work hours, both times when I was on call and being paid for being on call. I did have one boss who was upset that I would be unreachable when on vacation and wanted me to take a laptop and celluar card but couldn't grasp that where I was going there wan no cell signal and to get one required a 30 minute drive. He asked how he could find me and I pointed at a map and said get a team of trained blood hounds and some trackers and I will be somewhere in this area as I pointed to the arrow head region of Minnesota.

    and what you went out side of the usa that will be nice to tell the boss I can use a data card a the price of $15-$20 a MEG.

  101. Worklife balance restorer by derfla8 · · Score: 1

    This is also a fantastic opportunity for people to restore their worklife balance. Why should you connect your personal device for corporate benefit of permanently tethering you to work? This whole BYOD thing was made up by and industry trying to sell their solutions to an imaginary problem. CxOs have been suckered into thinking this is a huge money saver. It is not. When you consider the total sum of the risks or losses in productivity it does not make sense as a holistic consideration. For industries like professional services organizations, the cost of the device is negligible compared with the risk you're signing up for. And if your concern is what happens when you buy an employee a phone and they leave a month later...this is a pretty expensive solution. In all circumstances I have been in, when an employer purchases a device that is the property of the company. What's Gartner smoking?

    Does anyone call Gartner on their predictions and whether they are wrong? Revisit their VDI prediction: http://blog.simonbramfitt.com/2009/04/gartner-predicts-657-billion-in-vdi-revenue-and-49-million-users-in-2013/ Does anyone see 40% running off VDI in 2013? Nope.

  102. Re:If Your Employer Owns Your Cellphone, They Own by vsync64 · · Score: 1

    This is an old lesson, learned long ago. Check out jwz's story of the "bad attitude" mailing list, though I'm sure there are older instances with more serious consequences.

    --
    TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
  103. Good Concept by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    I have one big problem with this and that is that a company's infrastructure wont always support the device I bring. Right now where I work you get to use an iPhone, Blackberry or Android, if your use an Android, in my case the S3, then you can't connect to the main Wifi system in the workplace. This is an issue because it forces me to use mobile data or the open Wifi, which leaves me open to security issues. So well I support bring your own device, I only support it if the workplace can make sure everything works with all the major bands.

  104. Re:If Your Employer Owns Your Cellphone, They Own by toddestan · · Score: 1

    Why should you have to buy that second phone for work? They should be providing it to you, not the other way around. That's what this whole discussion is about.

  105. You've been proven wrong again, apk. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040317&cid=40946043
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040729&cid=40949719
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040697&cid=40949343
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040597&cid=40948659
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3037687&cid=40947927
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040425&cid=40946755
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040317&cid=40946043
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038791&cid=40942439
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3024445&cid=40942207
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038597&cid=40942031
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3038601&cid=40942085
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040803&cid=40950045
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040867&cid=40950563
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3040921&cid=40950839
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041035&cid=40951899
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041081&cid=40952169
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041091&cid=40952383
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041123&cid=40952991
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3041313&cid=40954201
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042199&cid=40956625
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029723&cid=40897177
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3029589&cid=40894889
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3027333&cid=40886171
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042451&cid=40959497
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042547&cid=40960279
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042669&cid=40962027
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042765&cid=40965091
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3042765&cid=40965087
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3043535&cid=40967049