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 behaviour."
In Spotsylvania County, Va., the sheriff's department asks applicants to friend background investigators for jobs at the 911 dispatch centre and for law enforcement positions.
"In the past, we've talked to friends and neighbours, 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" behaviour 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.
Source
First time posting here - I'm kinda nervous. Anyway, idk if this article belongs on ontd_political, but I thought it was interesting and thought it was worth sharing.
http://www.canada.com/Employers+request
However, for most jobs this is an egregious violation of a person's right to privacy and a life outside of their place of employment. Just because you work for someone, doesn't mean that someone has the right to know absolutely everything about you. And I can think of some horrible ways in which this could be abused to prop up discrimination.
Edited at 2012-03-21 03:38 pm (UTC)
Or use a fake last name on your Facebook. I just use the first three letters of my last name.
Edited at 2012-03-21 03:40 pm (UTC)
What?
I have a 3 meeting rule when adding people on fb. I have to have met and spoke with you at least 3 times before friending.
Fuck everyone who thinks this is acceptable. What part of "privacy" do these creeps not understand?
Not only personal information, either, but things like deep, soul-baring conversation about sexuality and mental illness and the like---and not only the applicant's sexuality and mental illness but their friends' experiences with such.
Utterly not okay to go handing that off to some corporate shill who is, incidentally, probably not legally held to confidentiality the way people in, say, the medical industry are. Say somebody knows a guy who happens to work this job in a company where hir ex or hir ex's best friend is interviewing, a conversation, and hey, here's a printout of a conversation with hir! Or better yet, here's the password---pretend to be this ex's friend to hir and get some current information or get a mindfuck in.
Really not good at all.
This combined with the fact that being involved in LGBT groups is less likely to get one a job basically means I'm fucked...
While what these creeps are doing is probably illegal, you need to protect yourself now. You wouldn't have to in an ideal world, but frankly, we're not living in one and this one we have is getting scarier every day.
THIS
But honestly, this is like asking someone to hand over all their private correspondence and their diary and their photograph albums so the employer can browse through it.
I have nothing to hide but I would never, ever give someone my facebook password as part of an interviewing process.
This sounds like companies are looking for rank-and-file employees that will be faceless/soulless and not have opinions or lives that could "reflect badly" on the company and are using this as a way to determine if they "fit."
People simply aren't that neat and tidy, no matter what you do.
But of course, with no oversights on what they can do and their feelings of entitlement moving from "vast" to "ludicrous" the "jobs creators" are feeling pretty darn untouchable right now as they continue to push and flex and blur that distinction which separates "wage slaves" from ACTUAL slaves.
And that's the real despicable thing here.
Then there's the fact that this goes around anti-discrimination laws... Sure, they can protest that that's not what it's about, but there's no telling how they'll be influenced by what they see. Hopefully someone will push for this to be illegal.
especially since twitter and livejournal my own safe spaces.
i agree that for public offices or jobs like being a police officer is necessary to look further than a background check - but beyond that: those employers can fuck off.
If and when I start job hunting again, current FB name gets renamed to something like 'Benedict Sparkles', and I start a fake FB, where everything's public and I'm the most normal and boring person in the world.
They may have changed it since, but when they first administered that they said that the name you pick is the name you have for life.
And it really frightens me because I have an internet trail since I was a young teen. Can stuff I did when I was 12 or 13,which wasn't anything bad mostly neopets and fanfiction, but also journals were I vented. Can that potentially be used against me because maybe that employer doesn't like it? And that's small potatoes compared to other things.
Anything past that, fuck you, there's no fucking way that's legal. It's a security violation at a lot of companies to hand over your computer login and password, but somehow turning over your FB to a POSSIBLE employer is a-okay? HELL no. I don't even give my husband my FB logon info; there is no fucking way I'm giving a goddamn stranger that shit.
Also, when I'm not at work, I AM NOT ON YOUR TIME. YOU DO NOT OWN ME. I'M NOT YOUR FUCKING PROPERTY. FUCK YOU. (The only place this isn't applicable, ironically, is the military ... where we defend everyone else's rights and don't get jack ourselves. XD )
Here's to a long night of changing things online...