Privacy in the Mobile Workplace - AirWatch

The draft is thorough in description, so long as VMWare and Apple are the only companies on earth. It might make more sense to begin by describing the BYOD situation more generally, explaining why "mobile device management" became so important, and why the tug of war over MDM and employee privacy presents so many multivalent problems. (In verticals like health care and finance, where the employer can still largely determine what employees' devices are; and in verticals where the device is required to exist, but the employer cannot effectively determine what it is, even though business is done over it.) Some analysis of the business incentives of the various relevant players (the employer, the handset manufacturer, the platform companies, and the telecomms) would also help, if there were room for it, which will be tricky.

On the normative side, the question is "what does 'should' mean?" This is a society of at-will employment, and at the federal level there are no prospects of any regulatory, let alone legislative, efforts on behalf of workers in this or any other context for the immediate future. Unions no longer matter. So what relevance has "should"? And who could possibly have either the legislative authority or the constitutional right to tell companies or individual programmers what to put in their software?