Job seekers getting asked for Facebook passwords...

[1.8TRabbit]

Job seekers getting asked for Facebook passwords
"SEATTLE - When Justin Bassett interviewed for a new job, he expected the usual questions about experience and references. So he was astonished when the interviewer asked for something else: his Facebook username and password.

Bassett, a New York City statistician, had just finished answering a few character questions when the interviewer turned to her computer to search for his Facebook page. But she couldn't see his private profile. She turned back and asked him to hand over his login information.

Bassett refused and withdrew his application, saying he didn't want to work for a company that would seek such personal information. But as the job market steadily improves, other job candidates are confronting the same question from prospective employers, and some of them cannot afford to say no.

In their efforts to vet applicants, some companies and government agencies are going beyond merely glancing at a person's social networking profiles and instead asking to log in as the user to have a look around.

"It's akin to requiring someone's house keys," said Orin Kerr, a George Washington University law professor and former federal prosecutor who calls it "an egregious privacy violation."

Questions have been raised about the legality of the practice, which is also the focus of proposed legislation in Illinois and Maryland that would forbid public agencies from asking for access to social networks.

Since the rise of social networking, it has become common for managers to review publically available Facebook profiles, Twitter accounts and other sites to learn more about job candidates. But many users, especially on Facebook, have their profiles set to private, making them available only to selected people or certain networks.

Companies that don't ask for passwords have taken other steps — such as asking applicants to friend human resource managers or to log in to a company computer during an interview. Once employed, some workers have been required to sign non-disparagement agreements that ban them from talking negatively about an employer on social media.

Asking for a candidate's password is more prevalent among public agencies, especially those seeking to fill law enforcement positions such as police officers or 911 dispatchers.

Back in 2010, Robert Collins was returning to his job as a security guard at the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services after taking a leave following his mother's death. During a reinstatement interview, he was asked for his login and password, purportedly so the agency could check for any gang affiliations. He was stunned by the request but complied.

"I needed my job to feed my family. I had to," he recalled,

After the ACLU complained about the practice, the agency amended its policy, asking instead for job applicants to log in during interviews.

"To me, that's still invasive. I can appreciate the desire to learn more about the applicant, but it's still a violation of people's personal privacy," said Collins, whose case inspired Maryland's legislation.

Until last year, the city of Bozeman, Mont., had a long-standing policy of asking job applicants for passwords to their email addresses, social-networking websites and other online accounts.

And since 2006, the McLean County, Ill., sheriff's office has been one of several Illinois sheriff's departments that ask applicants to sign into social media sites to be screened.

Chief Deputy Rusty Thomas defended the practice, saying applicants have a right to refuse. But no one has ever done so. Thomas said that "speaks well of the people we have apply."

When asked what sort of material would jeopardize job prospects, Thomas said "it depends on the situation" but could include "inappropriate pictures or relationships with people who are underage, illegal behavior."

In Spotsylvania County, Va., the sheriff's department asks applicants to friend background investigators for jobs at the 911 dispatch center and for law enforcement positions.

"In the past, we've talked to friends and neighbors, but a lot of times we found that applicants interact more through social media sites than they do with real friends," said Capt. Mike Harvey. "Their virtual friends will know more about them than a person living 30 yards away from them."

Harvey said investigators look for any "derogatory" behavior that could damage the agency's reputation.

E. Chandlee Bryan, a career coach and co-author of the book "The Twitter Job Search Guide," said job seekers should always be aware of what's on their social media sites and assume someone is going to look at it.

Bryan said she is troubled by companies asking for logins, but she feels it's not a violation if an employer asks to see a Facebook profile through a friend request. And she's not troubled by non-disparagement agreements.

"I think that when you work for a company, they are essentially supporting you in exchange for your work. I think if you're dissatisfied, you should go to them and not on a social media site," she said.

More companies are also using third-party applications to scour Facebook profiles, Bryan said. One app called BeKnown can sometimes access personal profiles, short of wall messages, if a job seeker allows it.

Sears is one of the companies using apps. An applicant has the option of logging into the Sears job site through Facebook by allowing a third-party application to draw information from the profile, such as friend lists.

Sears Holdings Inc. spokeswoman Kim Freely said using a Facebook profile to apply allows Sears to be updated on the applicant's work history.

The company assumes "that people keep their social profiles updated to the minute, which allows us to consider them for other jobs in the future or for ones that they may not realize are available currently," she said.

Giving out Facebook login information violates the social network's terms of service. But those terms have no real legal weight, and experts say the legality of asking for such information remains murky.

The Department of Justice regards it as a federal crime to enter a social networking site in violation of the terms of service, but during recent congressional testimony, the agency said such violations would not be prosecuted.

But Lori Andrews, law professor at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law specializing in Internet privacy, is concerned about the pressure placed on applicants, even if they voluntarily provide access to social sites.

"Volunteering is coercion if you need a job," Andrews said.

Neither Facebook nor Twitter responded to repeated requests for comment.

In New York, Bassett considered himself lucky that he was able to turn down the consulting gig at a lobbying firm.

"I think asking for account login credentials is regressive," he said. "If you need to put food on the table for your three kids, you can't afford to stand up for your belief."

Now, this information is being posted to have a healthy debate. Explain what you would do in your case and why.

Me personally, I would feel that this is infringement upon privacy and freedom. But then again, if you are being considered for a 6 figure position, your decision making becomes much more impaired.



ARTICLE HERE:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/46793226

[Knock Sensor]

Human resources really must be getting bored if they're looking up people's facebooks now.



Stick to myspace, tons of cool young people on there.

[1.8TRabbit]

Human resources really must be getting bored if they're looking up people's facebooks now.



Stick to myspace, tons of cool young people on there.

[SpiffyGTI]

That's absolutely ridiculous. If I were interviewing for a job and the interviewer asked me for those credentials, I'd laugh in his/her face and walk out.

Between the interview and references, you should be able to figure out if a candidate is an idiot or not. I highly doubt checking someone's facebook page would ever be favorable either. Could you imagine a company looking at someone's facebook page and being like "holy ****, we've got to hire this person!"?

[Haxes]

This behavior is rediculous. I had my HR leader bring me in the office and tell me if I didn't remove myself from a group that I would be fired. I reminded him that nothing I did on facebook violated any of the Company policies. Went a little further to make him feel like a dumb ufck, and get an apology for my privacy violation. I proceeded to go home, and make my profile private for everyone except those I trust. Be aware of who can see your information!

[GreenandChrome]

Facebook is a total time sink, and I rarely post anything. My wall is just posts from my friends. While I won't give anyone my login information, I wouldn't mind showing the interviewer my page while I'm interviewing. There's nothing on it.

The other thing about viewing a potential hire's FB page is to see how much they're on FB. Why hire someone who has 10,000 friends and updates 15 times a day and comments on every little thing?

[im easy]

Haven't had facebook for a year now, best decision I ever made.

[1.8TRabbit]

Haven't had facebook for a year now, best decision I ever made.

[kar_nut]

I don't have a FB page, so no problem there. I'd ask to see their FB page first. I don't want to find myself working for people with corrupt morals.

[GtIVR6-RJ]

Haven't had facebook for a year now, best decision I ever made.

Getting rid of FB was a great decision

[1.8TRabbit]

Facebook has spoken.

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...rds?source=rss

[Nourdmrolnmt]

So if my password happens to be, say... f*ckY0ua55h0!e and I willfully give it to them which demonstrates that my passwords are highly secure and satisfies their request, what happens?

[1.8TRabbit]

So if my password happens to be, say... f*ckY0ua55h0!e and I willfully give it to them which demonstrates that my passwords are highly secure and satisfies their request, what happens?

Depends, if you are apart of any protected groups, or feel at any time that you are being discriminated against, you have potential legal suits.

[gsrroger]

f*ckY0ua55h0!e

Oh man, if I ever leave my job, I'm changing all of my passwords to that before I hand my accounts over My boss is totally cool, he'd love it.

[sg207ptg]

I see interview as a two-way process - I want to know about the company and its people as much as they want to know about me. I once had a job offer over the phone. I actually had to call the hiring supervisor and asked for a meeting before I can give HR an answer...

For someone asking me for my FB password, I probably would ask them to show theirs first, then I'll show them mine. And if they are dumb enough to do that, I would then walk out and say nah, I change my mind.

[1.8TRabbit]

For someone asking me for my FB password, I probably would ask them to show theirs first, then I'll show them mine. And if they are dumb enough to do that, I would then walk out and say nah, I change my mind.

My process exactly. Except, I would either say that, or, "Sure, I'd be happy to show you my personal and protected information as long as your company is willing to testify your invasion of my privacy at the expense of a career choice."

[SpiffyGTI]

I read an article the other day saying Facebook is pissed at this sort of thing going on and is threatening possible suits over employers who do this because it violates their ToS.

[Diamond Dave]

I'm not a super active FB'er, but I'm really pleased with how they've responded to this issue; even before they made it against the rules to give out your log-in information.

That's absolutely ridiculous. If I were interviewing for a job and the interviewer asked me for those credentials, I'd laugh in his/her face and walk out.

Agreed. I don't understand what the issue is or why some people can't do the same.

This behavior is rediculous. I had my HR leader bring me in the office and tell me if I didn't remove myself from a group that I would be fired. I reminded him that nothing I did on facebook violated any of the Company policies.

I've always enjoyed remember the look on their face when you say "can you please email that request to me? My Labor law attorney is very interested in that sort of privacy violation from a company that promotes a strong work/life balance." In fact, any time you bring up "lawyer" and they have an "Oh Sh!t" moment is good for a laugh.

[Espresso]

I blocked my account haven't been on since January feels great.

[SpiffyGTI]

Evidently 2 senators are having people look into whether this is a legal practice or not.

[1.8TRabbit]

I read an article the other day saying Facebook is pissed at this sort of thing going on and is threatening possible suits over employers who do this because it violates their ToS.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily...155304274.html

[Vision33r]

My opinion is that, unless you work in a competing company with FB such as Twitter or Google+ you aren't obligated to inform your employer that you have or you don't.

It's like asking someone if they are a member of the AA or you have a gym membership.

[Numbersix]

Facebook is very adamantly against it. I agree it's a terrible idea for employers to do this.

However...I also routinely advise job seekers to NOT post things that might be construed as inappropriate/inflamatory/etc on the web. Once there, it's in ink, not pencil (so to speak)--Google cache never forgets.

I was at an employment law update where a discussion topic was use of social media in evaluating candidates during a hiring process. The issue is not limited to recruiters or hiring managers, though; members of the new hires' team also get in on the action--sometimes with messy results.

Case in point: A firm that did not employ social media research in their hiring process hired a new employee. Before the employee started, one of the members of their new team Googled the new hire's name. Google had some cached results from an internet forum over a decade old that was focused around white supremacy. At least one member of the new hire's team was a minority, so this caused a major uproar. When asked, the new employee stated he had NO idea that information was still out there as he'd done his best to remove any association with the group many years prior.

[tbvvw]

I am going to play devil's advocate here...(and I hired 19 people in the last 15 months, all pretty good positions, ave salary over $125K).

If you were the hiring manager and the potential candidate looks/acts the part and has a very solid resume that shows he's been gainfully employed in the last xx months/years and you were able to see he spent spent significant time daily (during biz hours) on FB, what would your impression be? Forget the content, just the time spent. I don't do FB and even if I did I cannot access FB or any social media or any yahoo/gmail at work, however, I see a lot of folks with their personal laptops in their cubes with the FB page open all day long. As it's been said, it's a total time sink. I don't know anyone who goes into FB and stays 1 minute. (same "could" be said for this site)

So...would you hire someone that's got a history of surfing FB at work all day long?

[Señor Peligro]

Per Facebook -

Section 4: Registration and Account Security

8. You will not share your password, (or in the case of developers, your secret key), let anyone else access your account, or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your account.

I'd simply ask them how comfortable they'd be hiring somebody that they have proof of violating an agreement.

[Diamond Dave]

It's funny how employers latch on to the dumbest things and then convince themselves that it's necessary to do.

note: I've never researched a person on FB because I think it's stupid, it only provides opportunities to make subjective assumptions, and for the most part, most information doesn't relate to how a person will be ON THE JOB.


Ultimately, a person's online persona may or may not the same as they are in real life. Not to make this political, but look at the Trayvon Martin report on his Twitter handle. While everyone is painting him as an sweet young kid, his Twitter handle: "no_limit-*****" and Tweets may give a person pause to consider otherwise. A classic case of how you act is how you are perceived.

So...would you hire someone that's got a history of surfing FB at work all day long?

I'm not sure what program they are using to analyze "surfing all day long at work", but I spent 2yrs as a search consultant and I'd frequently have (aside from a dozen or so Linkedin pages) Vortex and other pages up. Whether I'd be doing something on those pages or not was really just a matter what I was doing at the moment. For instance, working across all US time zones, my work activity and down time activity would look quite different since I'd be on calls or doing research at "lunch" time.

Again, I think using FB or something to determine a person's work ethic or quality of work is the most unreliable, subjective method. If a person is a high performer, their references or work product will speak to that. I could give a f**k if they spent 1hr or 20hrs online.

[Numbersix]

I am going to play devil's advocate here...(and I hired 19 people in the last 15 months, all pretty good positions, ave salary over $125K).

If you were the hiring manager and the potential candidate looks/acts the part and has a very solid resume that shows he's been gainfully employed in the last xx months/years and you were able to see he spent spent significant time daily (during biz hours) on FB, what would your impression be? Forget the content, just the time spent.

So...would you hire someone that's got a history of surfing FB at work all day long?

First off, I wouldn't look.

Secondly, who's to say that isn't part of their job? Or that it isn't a cultural norm at their current company?

Also, many companies are realizing that Gen Y was born multitasking and can easily/seamlessly deliver great work product while simultaneously darting in and out of various 'distractions' (texting, Facebook, Twitter, Gmail, etc).

As someone who managed a leadership development program that hired recent college grads for a financial services company, I assure you that I've had similar discussions with a number of 'old guard' managers that went like this:

Me: "I understand you disciplined {employee} because you walked by their desk and saw them checking Facebook. Is that correct?"

Mgr: "Yes. That's inappropriate for the workplace."

Me: "What kind of work product has {employee} produced for you?" (Knowing that in their last rotational assignment they recieved a top rating)

Mgr: "WELL...their work product is fine. Outstanding, in fact. But it's the PRINCIPLE..."

[tbvvw]

Also, many companies are realizing that Gen Y was born multitasking and can easily/seamlessly deliver great work product while simultaneously darting in and out of various 'distractions' (texting, Facebook, Twitter, Gmail, etc).

I agree with that, however, I also feel that much of Gen Y feels entitled to be able to multi-task their personal life all day while collecting a paycheck. And I agree that there are high performers that can get their day jobs done just fine while handling a multitude of "distractions". Unfortunately I have hired (and fired) folks who felt the "distractions" were an important part of their day, maybe even more important than their actual job. And we cannot even access "texting, Facebook, Twitter, Gmail, etc" in my corp of 275K+ employees.

Every single person I know that spends their daytime on FB, etc at work...is bored to death of their job. Maybe they need a change.