1984: It's Not Just For Governments

[Glocktogo]

Read this article today:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/job-seekers-getting-asked-facebook-passwords-071251682.html

SEATTLE (AP) — 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."

McFarland reported from Springfield, Ill.

So, would you give password and logon information for your private accounts and emails to a prospective employer? A current employer if they suddenly demanded it?

I have no mixed emotions on this one. You are not getting my private information. It's private for a reason. My passwords are not for sharing. My password for an unimportant thing may be the same for something critical, such as financial account access. I may have privileged information on a social site's private account that prospective employers are prohibited by law from asking about, such as age, marital status, sexual orientation, etc. I have a Facebook account, but have no friends and subscribe to nothing. I don't post on Facebook and I probably haven't logged on in over a year. However, it wouldn't be hard for a prospective employer to learn quite a bit about me if they snooped on my private page. 50% of the people "I may know" are holding guns in their profile pic!

I have no problem with an employer requiring current employees to sign a non-disclosure and defamation agreement. I understand that they have to protect their intellectual property. I have no problem with employers initiating disciplinary actions against employees posting defamatory information about the company online by name. Asking a current or prospective employee to open their lives up for such scrutiny is way over the line though.

Where the hell did this obsessive need to know everything about everyone all the time come from? There are things I don't want to know about myself, much less everyone I know! It seems that privacy is a dirty word in our society anymore. I just don't get it.

So, how would you handle a request to hand over the keys to your accounts by an employer? Would you give in? Would you simply decline? Would you explain that the information within was privileged under EEO laws and that they're prohibited by that law from requesting it? Anyone have a really good idea on how to handle it?

 

[hanson405]

Not surprising to me at all. I went on an interview where they logged on to my private Facebook account and went through every picture, as I explained them. A HUGE eye opener. Sure, you may think that picture of your friend passed out on the floor is funny, but how does that portray you as an employee? As a person?

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

I voted "Get Stuffed".

I don't put up enough info anywhere on the web to be of use anyway, nor do I keep any passwords, account numbers, etc., etc., on the computer. Even my book keeping software is not on the computer.

Woody

 

[Shadowrider]

I would combine numbers 1 and 3.

 

[RidgeHunter]

And the first return for a search for "privacy" on OpenBook is:

And of course it's not the only one:

http://youropenbook.org/?q=privacy&gender=any

Maybe our citizenry, by and large, has grown to be so fundamentally fawtarded that they no longer deserve privacy and have no concept of what it entails? Something to mull over.

E: "privacy employer" is a better search.

http://youropenbook.org/?q=privacy+employer&gender=any

 

[Glocktogo]

Not surprising to me at all. I went on an interview where they logged on to my private Facebook account and went through every picture, as I explained them. A HUGE eye opener. Sure, you may think that picture of your friend passed out on the floor is funny, but how does that portray you as an employee? As a person?

How did you feel about them doing this? Did they hire you? If so, how does that company treat you? Did you get any feedback on that portion of the interview? Did you have any information they saw that would fall under EEO laws?

 

[hanson405]

How did you feel about them doing this? Did they hire you? If so, how does that company treat you? Did you get any feedback on that portion of the interview? Did you have any information they saw that would fall under EEO laws?

It was pretty humbling. Nope, didn't get hired. Yes I got feedback, and it has significantly altered what I post online. That being said, I posted VERY infrequently anyway, and all of the pictures that I wasn't proud of were tagged photos. Needless to say, you can't tag me on facebook anymore without my approval. Not familiar with EEO laws? Did you mean EOE?

 

[RidgeHunter]

It was pretty humbling. Nope, didn't get hired. Yes I got feedback, and it has significantly altered what I post online. That being said, I posted VERY infrequently anyway, and all of the pictures that I wasn't proud of were tagged photos. Needless to say, you can't tag me on facebook anymore without my approval. Not familiar with EEO laws? Did you mean EOE?

Care to tell what type of job it was? How did they go about bringing up the issue?

What if you don't have a Facebook account? Would they get pissed that you don't have enough stalking fodder on the web and not hire you based on that?

 

[MLR]

If it is legal for private employers to ask for the information then I suppose it would all depend on how bad I wanted the job. Its just the next logical step up from drug testing.

Michael

 

[Glocktogo]

EOE and EEO are pretty much interchangeable.

http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/posters/pdf/eeopost.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_opportunity_employment

There's so much that can be learned about a person online, a lot of it covered under EEO/EOE laws. The prospective employer doesn't have to give you a reason they didn't hire you, so it's fairly easy for them to discriminate based on protected categories. Say you were a reservist and proudly posted that info online. The employer sees that and says "They'll be deployed all the time and I need to hire someone who isn't". They put you at the bottom of the stack for that reason. How are you to know that's why you didn't get the job? Same same for age, marital status, race, sexual orientation, etc.

So, what kind of feedback did you get? Did they tell you why they didn't hire you? Do you wish you hadn't allowed them access to your private information?