January 17, 2012 at 11:46 pm
In theory, I suppose devices are fine, but licenses can be a problem. Visual Studio? MSDN? SQL Toolbelt? 😉
What about software developed using these resources? The usual stipulation is that software developed on your employers dime and using their equipment or licences belongs to them unless otherwise stipulated.
Then there are the situations where the device has malware which exposes the employers details. Wait for the rash of new security exposures due to lost smartphones with password caches etc.
All the arguments which apply to BYOD also apply in reverse to a corporate. The hardware is cheap. Tax write-offs are available in a number of jurisdictions.
The article you linked to points out that you provide your own shoes, which is a specious argument. When a particular class of protective footwear is required for you to complete your job then I think you have a right to expect that your employer will help you acquire them. As for a car, if I am required to use my car for company business then they get an expense claim.
I'd be far more interested in working with a virtualised desktop on what amounts to a specialised RDP connection. That way when my employer wants me to log in from home I can, and can access my work environment.
Accountants use Excel on their PCs to do their work. Are they expected to BYOD too? What about call-centre employees?
To the original author I would say that these days a company needs to consider what it is offering or the prospective employees won't even bother to say "Hello", let alone say "Buh-Bye". Getting the employee you want with the skills you want means offering the right package.
Edit for spelling
2nd Edit: If my employer said "You provide the hardware and I will provide a VM image for you to use while you are working." I would be far more inclined to discuss it.
January 18, 2012 at 12:30 am
While I'd like it, I can not see it working out in theory nor in practice.
You mention security and I believe that could be overcome but it would come at a price.
Security is also a two edged sword because some security programs and depending on settings takes up a lot of resources from the computer, I'd never use norton for instance on my home computer. Then there are also some companies that makes use of key loggers which I definably am against. That might even be illegal but it has still come out that some companies makes use of those sorts of programs.
While security can be overcome, the larger issue would be support. If the machine breaks down or you need an upgrade of ram or something like that, it can be hell with every employee having a different computer.
That is one part, the larger concern I have however is the lack of knowledge and understanding from the average employee.
January 18, 2012 at 1:47 am
"Getting the sack" used to refer to a tradesman being handed back his tools in a bag.
A tradesmans tools were often built up over their working lifespan starting with their apprenticeship. Often part of the apprenticeship was to build the tools that they would be using throughtout their lives. Once an apprentice graduated they would have a thorough understanding of their trade from the ground upwards.
I can see the time coming where we are expected to turn up to the job with certain basics but as stated earlier, hardware is relatively cheap, the software costs are what kills you.
I know if you run a business you can offset certain costs against tax. I'm not sure if this could be applied to individuals in organisations or whether this would require a shift in employment practises and law so we all become self-employed. This would mean that a large swathe of responsibilities would devolve from the enterprise down to the individual.
I can see dangers in it and quite a few employment law changes.
In the UK to get rid of a permanent employee the company must go through due process which is time-consuming and lengthy - unless they are being got rid of for gross misconduct. To get rid of a contractor is relatively straight forward.
If the business model moves to employees bringing their own tools to the businesss then this would force a big shift from expensive proprietary systems. Something like SQL Server with its cheap developer edition would survive but some of the high end stuff would require a radical overhaul to bring their products within the reach of the development community.
January 18, 2012 at 2:00 am
While I think about it, if I choose the environment in which I develop, I don't think the company can necessarily force me to use their dev tools or languages.
If the requirement is to produce a library that can support certain business functions, why should it not be developed using whatever technology I am most comfortable using? Providing it works in the run-time environment, everything else should be my choice.
And yes, development licenses for some software are expensive.
Try adding up Visual Studio, Altova XML Spy and Embarcadero ER-Studio to name 3 of the tools I routinely use.
January 18, 2012 at 2:07 am
On the subject of tax implications it may be that there can be some sort of offset against tax even if you are a direct employee rather than contractor.
My wife is a nurse here in the UK and she is allowed to offset a range of things against tax - RCN subscriptions, Journal Subscriptions, Laundry costs, Some clothing costs (like tights - throughback to the old style uniforms that are not worn nowadays). She is also doing some extra agency work and is allowed to claim back the mileage (apparantly, though we have not done this yet).
I am sure that there will be a similar way to offet technical costs that are essential to the job but not provided by the employer. The inland revenvue normally sets a limit for each type of thing rather than the actual costs, however it all helps.
There may even be rules whereby you can purchase through a salary sacrifice system - this is even better as you do not pay tax or NI on that part of your salary.
January 18, 2012 at 4:40 am
Tim - and doesnt that help to explain why our economy is currently sunk deeper than the ocean liner recently! Tights can be claimed back when from what you are saying your Mrs and the rest of the NHS women dont actually use them in their official uniform.
Classic UK public sector attitude. Rip off the country for your own gains.
Anyway, back to the case in point. There are pros and cons for both sides of the argument. Clearly a company has a duty of care. Therefore equipment used by its staff must be checked and able to carry out the task required of it. However I know that when I was presented with a laptop that took almost 8 minutes to become at British Gas, I made sure that it was the last time I ever used it.
January 18, 2012 at 4:56 am
Tim - almost LOL.
I think that I am now sufficiently shamed and we should really tell inland revenue about the tights....whether the tax system would be able to cope and exclude this is another matter. I am sure that we can cope without the extra 50p or so. It is a poor system on the Inland Revenue side actually as once it is applied to the tax code it is rolled forward to every future year automatically. The typical NHS worker does not fall into self assessment so would not think about checking each year. My wife has been a Nurse for nearly 20 years so it is not exactly high on her list of priorities. Helping save lives is (obviously though only when she has time after getting everything she can from the state).
Interestingly enough you have to claim this as an individual in the first instance - therefore all the NHS women (and Men) might not get the benefit that they are entitled to as the state does not actually tell them.
January 18, 2012 at 6:24 am
I have seven development PCs sitting here at my desk, including a "souped-up" one that cost over $5K. Add in a 21" monitor, a ScanSnap scanner, and a Cybex Avocent 8-port KVM switch and my hardware costs are pretty high. Each box also has a suite of software on it. I could never afford to provide all that. This is a US government organization, so I don't think the original buy-your-own-stuff concept would ever apply, but just saying...
January 18, 2012 at 6:31 am
If I were required to bring my own tools (laptop, RedGate toolbelt, SQL Dev Edition, et al), then it would also be necessary for the employer to recognize that it's my darn laptop and they aren't allowed access to it. No keyloggers, no Symantec Performance Killer Enterprise Edition (that may not be the actual marketing name of the product, but it sure should be), etc. Monitor network activity on their network? Of course! Monitor server activity on their servers? Definitely! Ask my computer for a certificate or some such that says it's got appropriate security running? By all means. Install anything on it, scan the hard drive, check for software they don't like, even the browser history? No way.
Personally, I don't have anything to hide. But on the principle of the thing, I'd say, "You want to require me to bring my own computer and pay for my own tools, then you need to recognize that they're mine, not yours".
But I do think that would move the business closer to an agglomeration of individual contractors doing related work, instead of an employer-employee relationship.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
January 18, 2012 at 7:26 am
Tims,
I'm sure the private-sector, despite what the Daily Mail brigade might say, is far more adept at ripping off the country than nurses, teachers, fire-fighters, etc.
But as a (private sector) employee, as opposed to a contractor or someone running my own business, I would expect my employer to provide me with any equipment required to do my job. I certainly wouldn't be happy if I were expected to buy a laptop or similar for work-purposes.
January 18, 2012 at 7:29 am
I find this editorial interesting in light of what I've done since June. June to December I worked on a contract where I had a desktop at the office, that, to put it nicely, was a piece of crap. My 4 year old laptop at home was a better machine, and I had one of the better machines in the office. In this case I would have loved to have been able to work with my laptop as I would have been more productive. In December I started a full-time telecommute position and I had to provide my own equipment (I probably could have negotiated a stipend for this, but I didn't think of it:() and I'm actually providing my own software right now (VS, Red Gate, SSMS, Office) because I had it already. They will provide the software I need to do my job, but right now I have what I need.
I have to agree with Gus' comments. I was required to have McAfee anti-performance installed which makes it about 3 times longer to boot. I wish I had actually benchmarked it so I'd have really #'s to complain with. I don't have an issue with requiring Anti-virus/anti-malware protection, but for goodness sake let me decide for my machine.
Anyway, I'd love to get a stipend to purchase my own equipment for work. I'd probably get a better machine at a better price.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
January 18, 2012 at 7:45 am
In the distant past, I've worked as an employee for small companies where it was expected that everyone would use their own laptop for work, much like a contractor. We were also expected to install all of the required software (sone of which was provided by the company), configure the networking, and generally act as tech support for our own PC.
However, in a corporate or government IT environment (100 - 10,000 employees) this is problematic, because help desk now has to support multiple operating systems. Also, it's more difficult to inforce security and software standards, or inventory what's on the laptop.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
January 18, 2012 at 7:46 am
Bring your own hardware - LOL - it's an absolute no no here. We even have port security so you can't move a pc or plug a laptop in without permission (apart from the IT office). And most cd drives and usb ports are locked down also so you can only plug in an approved secure memory stick.
With the advent of virtual machines and servers we have a growing number of users connecting via Wyse terminals and/or rds. That's surely the future for employers, with installation and updates being much more manageable I'm told.
January 18, 2012 at 7:56 am
There is no reason for an organization to provide employees with both a desktop PC at the office AND a laptop to work remotely. When I work remotely from home, I use my own laptop, but I VPN into my remote desktop PC at the office. Other than the VPN client, there is no corporate software, data, or emails on the laptop.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 52 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply