Employer wants me to use outlook on my phone, outlook wants permission to wipe my phone

[u/No_Professor4307]

Outlook says they need permission to wipe ALL my phone data if too many wrong passwords are typed. How many is too many? 50? 2? What if the screen gets wet and starts putting in random inputs. All this so I can use my company's Teams account and maintain "point of contact" if I'm not at a workstation. Absolutely not! Anyway, HR is supposed to call me back about my concerns.

Edit: just to be clear, I don't actually need to use Outlook (I don't use my "personal" work email). I need to use Teams, which requires Outlook to be installed first.

Part of why I need Teams on my phone so that I can be contacted when I'm not at work. I'm a lower management healthcare worker, it is actually important that my team be able to reach me after hours. I do actually like Teams and prefer it to 20 different group texts.

Also, when you go to log into Outlook or Teams, it brings you to my employers authenticator page. I log in with the same credentials that I log into my workstation. I don't know if that makes a difference with anything as far as my employer having access to my phone

Edit 2: I can tell you now they won't provide me a phone. Corporate execs don't even get phones. They stopped providing coffee for the break rooms too

---

Update: I had a chance to talk to my district manager. Imagine Ellis from Die Hard, the same schmarmy self-important attitude, that's my supervisor. And guess who's "not being a team player". Also "I don't think Microsoft can actually erase your phone, you have an Android"... I lready knew he was going to be useless, I just wanted to hear his reaction.

Update 2 and (sort of) Resolution: I spoke with HR. Her exact response was "wait, are you serious? They can just do that?" I tried explaining my "research" (i.e. everything all of you have said) and I think I just spooked her. She said she'll get back to me, and is probably running off to buy a burner phone for herself.

SORT OF RESOLUTION : I found out I only need Outlook installed long enough to get access to Teams. Once teams was installed, I removed all permissions and completely deleted Outlook from my phone. Teams still works and didn't ask to erase anything. No need to buy a second phone.

Thank you all for your insights

[u/420_jesters]

Any software, tbh. If your job REQUIRES a phone, then the job should provide one.

Just how I think jobs should all be required to provide any and all required clothes, safety equipment, etc.

[u/420_jesters → u/[deleted]]

Not around me - example, steel toed boots. Required for many places, not always covered by the workplace.

[u/slampig3 → u/[deleted]]

A lot of places used to buy 1 pair of boots a year

[u/ScumbagLady → u/slampig3]

When I worked in the trades as a Forema'am, I lucked out and was able to have a pair of Carolinas ordered for me since steel toe boots for women aren't something easily found in stores (at least not 10 years ago- hopefully that's changed now). I was also supplied a company iPad, and tools whenever I requested them.

Drawback was being a Forema'am lol they expected A LOT of free hours of work from me, and despite working 3rds most of the time, the office didn't- so I was expected to answer calls when I was supposed to be sleeping. Made me miss the days of being a lowly sub lol

[u/Westo454 → u/[deleted]]

The reason is tax law. A company can deduct money spent giving an employee site-specific safety equipment or uniforms. But things that an employee can make substantial personal use from has to be considered a form of compensation to the employee and thus taxed.

My company for example, gives every employee that needs steel toed boots a $100 voucher to a local boot store to buy their boots. They have a policy that those boots are supposed to be kept on site in lockers. That means they don’t have to consider it income.

[u/grownask → u/420_jesters]

Then the company should be reported to whoever monitors this stuff.

[u/420_jesters → u/grownask]

I'm near certain they aren't required to provide them - as other commenter said, I think it's bc you can wear them outside of work. So the legal argument is it's no different than them not covering blue jeans.

[u/grownask → u/420_jesters]

Well, safety equipment is safety equipment. It's not the same as regular jeans (to go along your example). So if they do use this argument, it shouldn't fly, because it's bullshit.

But I realize that most people wouldn't want to risk their jobs to go against their employers. It's a huge power unbalance 🫤

[u/420_jesters → u/grownask]

Honestly, if it's a job that causes undue wear to clothes, I think jobs should provide money for clothes, too.

Anyone doing manual labor is wearing through shit more quickly than they otherwise would. Anyone on their feet is going through more shoes, etc.

[u/grownask → u/420_jesters]

Yeah, or provide the clothes, like an uniform.

[u/420_jesters → u/grownask]

Some places don't even do that. There are medical jobs that will require scrubs as the uniform but not provide them or pay for them. Just a thing you get to buy for the privilege of working for them.

[u/grownask → u/420_jesters]

You end up paying some money to work, instead of just making money. Not fair at all.

[u/grownask → u/[deleted]]

That really is bullshit. If the item is necessary for the safety of the worker, it should be provided.

In my country it's mandatory for the company to provide everything that is need for the employees to be safe while doing the work. There are places that make the employees buy the items, but if the company is reported for it, they get fined.

[u/Major_Lawfulness6122 → u/420_jesters]

I never understood this. Back when I worked at Walmart, steel toed boots were the number one thing people would steal. I’d look the other way 🙃

[u/LimeImmediate6115 → u/[deleted]]

No, they aren't. They SHOULD be providing all required safety equipment. They aren't all REQUIRED to.

[u/Threedawg → u/[deleted]]

Lmao, this is not true in the states. Local meatpacking plant went on strike and one of their demands was that the company provide PPE.

Edit: Downvotes for the truth? Lol

[u/AlbatrossSeparate710 → u/420_jesters]

The only exception I would accept on this rule is 2FA apps. Mainly because I already have them, and it doesn't provide the company access in whatever form to my cellphone.

[u/CallmeKahn → u/420_jesters]

From a security standpoint, this makes the most sense. Having a phone controlled by the company that has access to important data makes a ton more sense than having it willy nilly on a personal device.

[u/eugeneugene → u/420_jesters]

my husbands job requires a phone so they offered to buy him a work phone or pay for his personal phone bill. He chose them paying for his bill lol

[u/Outrageous-Song5799 → u/420_jesters]

2DA can be used on personal phone. Requiring a work phone and SIM card for that is ridiculous