Thread: Job Seekers being asked for Facebook passwords

I know a lot of people who just change their name.. that way if they try and search for you, it won't come up...

Then you just tell them you don't use FB.

Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt

That cannot be legal...

Originally Posted by CivilWars

I agree it is BS, but allow me to play devil's advocate. I can add my employer to my profile, and as such be a "representative" of said company. If I then do stupid things and post it to Facebook my actions can (not read will) have a negative impact on my employer.

I understand your Devil's Advocate stance. Allow me to rebut.
How is this any different whether there was social networking or not? I someone works for a company, they potentially could be a douchebag and damage the company's reputation regardless of social networking or not. I am pretty sure that the Catholic priests molesting little boys did so long before there was any social networking. I also rather doubt that they advertised it among their friends (online or otherwise). This is a requirement that offers a company no real overwhelming benefits to the protection of their reputation as any fool with a business card or letterhead could screw the pooch just as easily.

tough guys

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Sure, anyone can do anything stupid whether they have FaceSpace or not. The difference is if you are advertising your stupidity on social networking sites odds are a lot more people will see it than if you don't. Also, it is just another glimpse into the character of a person. Do you object to your employer, or potential employer, requiring a criminal background check, or pre-employment drug screening? While a bit more invasive it is not much different. If I can see something you are semi-publicly publishing that could prevent me from hiring you, then you making a mistake in the future, then why not? As for your Catholic priests, if the Catholic church had information in advance that it was likely do you think they would have done something differently with the priest before the abuse happened?

Once again, if a potential employer asked I would likely tell them no. If that prevented me from getting the job so be it.

The point is that it offers the employer no measurable benefit (over existing interview techniques and background checks), imo, and opens the applicant up to potential fraud risks. I have no issue with an employer looking at the public facing side of social networks. None whatsoever. Background checks and drug-screening are equally acceptable. But I should not be compelled (no one should be compelled) to give up private account information without a warrant legally requiring the forfeiture of that information. It's overly invasive and needlessly risky.

If companies are hiring douchebags, it might be time to revise their hiring practices and remove some of the douchebags that are occupying chairs in their HR Departments.

As for the Catholic Church...given their method of dealing with the issue once it did become known, I don't place a lot of faith in the hope that they would have acted differently with prior knowledge (if something like that were even possible to know in advance - because I strongly doubt that the priests in question were molesting children and talking about it on social networks when they entered Seminary (or whatever it's called for the Catholic Church)).