We are considering a programme which will permit (and encourage) people to use their own IT kit - laptops - tablets - phones at work, for work. I'm looking into the implications in terms of inspection, testing, maintenance and would welcome views and experiences from people who have already implemented a scheme like this or who have considered and rejected it. I'd especially welcome comments about the attitude of insurers. This is for a large business. Thank you.

We certainly won't get a big No as long as its voluntary. A lot of people actively want this, they are already integrating home and work, people on freelance/FTC want to use their own kit rather than having to adapt to company kit on their first day every few weeks/months .

What's your plan for those who won't, or can't, or for those who simply change their mind? Do you provide some nice shiny kit for them, but let others pay for themselves? Or do you try to coerce them into signing up to your scheme, on route to an employment tribunal. And whichever way you try this, keep an eye out for the big bad tax man since when it hits your employee's purse it will surely hit yours so much harder. Regrettably, whatever way you do this you're going to be between a rock and a hard place.

An increasingly acute problem in the academic sector is the number of iPods tablets, smartphones and laptops that users expect to connect to a network, either by cable or wirelessly. I am told that capacity is not a problem, but many of these have inadequate or no virus security protection and create a pool of infection for the transmission of rogue code, from peripheral to peripheral and via the myriad of USB memory storage devices, that is increasingly difficult to manage. If that brings down your network, or screws a PCL on your key systems - there are several examples of Stuxnet bringing US power stations to a halt in ?2010, and the various cyber warfare events in Iraq that once seeded had been propagated via USB memory sticks - you're in the deep stuff, so a heavy hand is required regarding security provision. Which standard and who pays is another problem to consider.

JohnMurray - The need for testing power supply/charger units is surely debatable. Do any forum users know of cases where people have been electrocuted or otherwise harmed by such units? I've posed this question at least once before on this forum and don't recall anyone responding. Even so, the absence of replies doesn't mean that there haven't been any incidents. However, I've not seen or heard of such incidents from other sources, so suspect that such units do not pose a significant risk. Also, the use of such units is very widespread on trains nowadays. Train operating companies provide 240 volt sockets in railway carriages specifically for passengers to power their laptops and other devices. Similar provision exists in various reference and research libraries where users are not required to subject their equipment for testing or provide proof of it. Though this topic is about employees using their own equipment at work, are they significantly at more risk electrically from the power/charger units of their equipment than railway passengers and library users? I think not. As others have already suggested there are significant risks to organisations from computer viruses. These need to be considered by employers and tackled appropriately. However, I hope no employer misuses "health and safety" as a (spurious) reason against employees using their own equipment rather than cite the need to prevent/control the business continuity risks posed by computer viruses.

Thanks for comments so far. I'm only interested in the safety aspects of this. Others more qualified than I will be covering off the info sec and data protection issues. The Safety question I wil lhave to answer comes down to "who is going to be responsible for inspection, testing and maintenance?". If someone brings their kit into the office do we subject it to the same regime that I would if it belonged to the company or do I do something different? I would really like to hear from anyone who has implemented this type of programme - or whose company is thinking of doing it. I was interested in Grahams comment - I too doubt that anyone has ever had a serious electrical injury from a laptop or phone. But power supplies in many of our buildings are from floor boxes and power cables frequently get trapped and partially cut. If I've seen one strand of bare copper in a power supply cable I've seen a dozen (I have two on my desk right now). One day someone is going to run their hands along a power cable and find that bare copper by touch. If that copper belongs to the company - then we are fully responsible for it - but what happens if it belongs to a member of staff? How about: 1. I specify what type of equipment is "In scope" - eg laptops, mobile phones, "tablet computers", and their power supplies. And also that it is for "personal use" equipment not to share for teh purposes of work. 2. I specify that anyone bringing their own equipment in to work is responsible for user inspection (and tell them how to do it) 3. I specify that any equipment in the office is subject to inspection/testing - and if found to be dangerously faulty - the owner will be required to remove it. The company will have to pick up the tab for formal inspectino and test - and run the risk that people will bring in every bit of electrical equipment for a bit of free safety inspection. I will never be able to create a reliable register of equipment - so I'm going to have very knowledge about when a piece of equipment next needs inspection or test. I'm accepting a degree of risk - since If I test a third parties piece of equipment and someone then gets hurt by that kit (including possibly the owner of it) then I will probably bear a degree of liability - but that's one for the insurance boys to worry about. any further thoughts?

From a safety perspective I don't see any issue. Advise on ongoing user checks of leads and plugs etc, bolstered by a PATest every 2-4 years...leaning to the latter. Easy peasy.