Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Privacy v. Employment


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Privacy v. Employment Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/20/2012 6:23:59 PM   
soul2share


Posts: 7084
Joined: 12/18/2007
From: somewhere out there.....
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

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.


then they assumed wrong about me. I never update my fb and use it only to check out new pics of the grandbabies and see what the rest of the family is up to. I guess from now on if I am asked about fb, I will just tell them I don't use social networking sites and leave it at that. Like others have said, it's none of their fragging business.


QFT!!!

Ironically, I started to apply for a job at K-Mart, and they wanted me to log in thru FB, NOT!!!! Didn't go any further in the process.

Considering that I call home aobut once every month or 2, FB is a way to kkep up with the news from home. I do have 2 nieces that think it's cool to put themselves out there with their friends at the bar....I hope they wake up soon. That stuff is forever!

< Message edited by soul2share -- 3/20/2012 6:24:43 PM >


_____________________________

I have to stop saying "How stupid can you be?"...people are starting to take it as a challenge!

*Not a fuck was given.*

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/20/2012 7:48:50 PM   
LadyHibiscus


Posts: 27124
Joined: 8/15/2005
From: Island Of Misfit Toys
Status: offline
My FB is pretty tidy, but it's MY page, not something I randomly offer access to.

DEEPLY glad to be self employed.

_____________________________

[page 23 girl]



(in reply to soul2share)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 8:57:14 AM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
Senators Question Employer Requests for Facebook Passwords

Two Democratic senators are asking Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to investigate whether employers asking for Facebook passwords during job interviews are violating federal law, their offices announced Sunday.

Troubled by reports of the practice, Senators Charles E. Schumer of New York and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said they were calling on the Justice Department and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to begin investigations. The senators are sending letters to the heads of the agencies.

The Associated Press reported last week that some private and public agencies around the country were asking job seekers for their social media credentials. The practice has alarmed privacy advocates, but its legality remained murky.

On Friday, Facebook warned employers not to ask job applicants for their passwords, presumably so they could view applicant profiles on the site. The company threatened legal action against applications that violated its longstanding policy against sharing passwords.

A Facebook executive cautioned that if an employer discovered that a job applicant is a member of a protected group, the employer might be vulnerable to claims of discrimination if it did not hire that person.

Personal information such as gender, race, religion and age are often displayed on a Facebook profile — all details that are protected by federal employment law.

Not sharing passwords is a basic tenet of online conduct. Aside from the privacy concerns, Facebook considers the practice a security risk.

“In an age where more and more of our personal information — and our private social interactions — are online, it is vital that all individuals be allowed to determine for themselves what personal information they want to make public and protect personal information from their would-be employers. This is especially important during the job-seeking process, when all the power is on one side of the fence,” Mr. Schumer said in a statement.

Specifically, the senators want to know if the practice violates the Stored Communications Act or the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Those two acts, respectively, prohibit intentional access to electronic information without authorization and intentional access to a computer without authorization to obtain information.

The senators also want to know whether two court cases relating to supervisors asking current employees for social media credentials could be applied to job applicants.

The senators said they were writing a bill to fill in any gaps not covered by current laws.

_____________________________

Curious about the "Sluts Vote" avatars? See http://www.collarchat.com/m_4133036/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#4133036

(in reply to LadyHibiscus)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 9:23:00 AM   
LaTigresse


Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
I don't go around handing out keys to my house and I am not going to go around handing out the 'keys' to my internet activities.

My main FB is now used for family and very close personal friends. A few of my friends are actually clients of the company I work for. I try to remain cognizant of that fact. I also now have several minors that see my FB page as well as potential photo clients. That all being said, while my FB is pretty fucking boring, I'm still not giving out the 'key'.

_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 10:26:33 AM   
LoreBook


Posts: 257
Joined: 2/22/2012
Status: offline
I wouldn't either.

_____________________________

WITHOUT "ART" THE EARTH IS JUST "EH"



LLT

(in reply to LaTigresse)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 1:21:33 PM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
I find the questioning of whether or not this is an invasion of privacy pretty bizarre.  Yes, everything on the internet is "forever" but FB and most social media sites have privacy settings for a reason.  My FB privacy settings are set so only people in my "network" can see anything.  I have it that way for a reason.  I have no desire for people to be able to look at my account without my knowing them.

While it is somewhat understandable that there could be certain careers (PR comes to mind) where how they operate their social media (and Twitter) might be relevant in an interview.  Typically though, those people have their privacy settings wide open for anyone to look, making the need for access information irrelevant.

I rarely post to my Facebook page, and use it primarily to keep in touch with my cousins.  As someone else stated, "young folk" have yet to learn that posting "party" pictures can reflect negatively on them.  Why should having friends/family members who do that reflect badly on me?

If this kind of thing is allowed, social media sites would quickly become obsolete as so many people would stop using them for worries about what others would view about them (not necessarily bad, lol).  In all jobs, the employer has the right to be concerned about illegal drug use, but that is what drug testing is for.  UPS has rules about alcohol consumption.  Last I remember was that alcohol could not be consumed within 8 hours prior to a driver's shift.  Completely reasonable.  Not reasonable for some HR person without a life or an ax to grind to be surfing employee/potential employees' FB pages in search of conduct "against company policy."

Even the concept of "no non-disparaging remarks" is really a joke.  Do they honestly believe a social networking site spreads that stuff faster than word of mouth?  After all, people have been bitching about their employers since the dawn of time, the only difference now is that people are sharing it with larger groups of friends at one time.

When I worked for the Department of Corrections, State of Florida, it was a "company" rule that we could not associate with convicted felons.  Those of you who live in Florida know that Florida is a mecca for felons and if you avoided anyone who had ever been arrested, you would sit home alone 90% of the time, lol.

A person's age, marital status, religiouse beliefs, cultural beliefs are protected from my employer.  Unless of course, they are able to view these things on your FB page.  Then they also are privy to whether or not you had a fight with your partner, your kids, your parents, your best friend as well.  There really is no logic in saying that they can "use" that information to determine how you handle conflict. 

It has been a long held belief that what we do in our private lives is not our employer's business.  Why should social networking sites change that belief?

Worse is that with the current economy, employers are finding more and more "reasons" (read "excuses") to delve as deeply into the personal lives of their employees and applicants with complete abandon.  It is completely logical to do a criminal background check on an employee.  People defended being able to look at credit reports as a valid means of vetting potential employees.  The "concept" that someone in debt would not make a trustworthy, responsible employee was widely accepted.  Now it is acceptable to want someone who is already employed as a "preferred" candidate (regardless of the fact that is belies the concept of "loyal" employee).  Now we are expected to accept that our whole personal life and interaction with friends need to be subject to a potential employer's judgement in determining whether or not one is "suited" for a position. 

Many people have careers which they love, but the reality of life is that we should be working to support our lives, not have lives that support our careers (except for a few exceptions).

If such a thing continues, it puts undue pressure on people who are desperate for jobs to cave in.  How many people can say "no" to these requests and potentially lose a job that will keep a roof over their heads.  Granted, if society as a whole would refuse such requests, employers would have to stop asking, but even then there are always the people who are so eager to kiss ass and reticent to take a stand that they would still do it.


(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 3:46:13 PM   
Soyokaze


Posts: 390
Joined: 4/1/2007
Status: offline
I've heard of this happening for a while and find it pretty disgusting. I don't even have a facebook account.

_____________________________

"When I was a little kid, I wish the first word I ever said was 'quote' so right before I died I could say 'end quote'" -Steven Wright

(in reply to GrandPoobah)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 4:09:08 PM   
mummyman321


Posts: 2102
Joined: 10/31/2005
From: Dusseldorf
Status: offline
FB actually made a statement telling Employers not to ask for people passwords. FB stated they would enterain taking legal action against an employeer for doing so.

This does violate the free speach amendment. The sad part is many people do not have the resources to go sue a potential employer. If you are scraping to get a job chances are you do not have the money/time to go take legal action when you are trying to put food on the table.

_____________________________

Life - Its not about where you are but about the journey to get there - I prefer to choose the road less traveled

(in reply to Soyokaze)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 4:26:19 PM   
GrandPoobah


Posts: 120
Joined: 11/20/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mummyman321

FB actually made a statement telling Employers not to ask for people passwords. FB stated they would enterain taking legal action against an employeer for doing so.

This does violate the free speach amendment. The sad part is many people do not have the resources to go sue a potential employer. If you are scraping to get a job chances are you do not have the money/time to go take legal action when you are trying to put food on the table.


Facebook has indeed threatened action, and they're clearly big enough to fund a suit. In addition, since they've taken so much heat about their own privacy issues, they are hyper-sensitive to somebody else making them look questionable.

The fed is also looking seriously at this, primarily because seeing a FB account would allow an employer to identify "protected classes" of applicants...thus gathering information they're not allowed to ask as a part of the hiring process. They could, for example, determine a person's age pretty easily, a question that would immediately cause legal action if they put in on the application.

Some companies might continue doing this for now, but the first time somebody gets hauled into court, you can bet the rest will take notice. I spoke with a very senior HR consultant...a good friend...who told me this thing would blow up into a REALLY BIG MESS if companies continue, and she's regularly an "expert witness" in employment discrimination lawsuits. In fact, when some companies see she's scheduled to testify, they roll over because they know she knows the law and will pick them apart.

(in reply to mummyman321)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 4:39:38 PM   
soul2share


Posts: 7084
Joined: 12/18/2007
From: somewhere out there.....
Status: offline
One other little thing...how many of you have credit cards on your FB account to play their games and stuff. I've used mine in the past thru FB, but remove the number as soon as I'm finished.

As far as the credit report check someone mentioned......I'd like to see that donne away with also. As a victim of identity theft, explaining all the crap on my report that isn't mine is a pain in the ass, that is, if I even get as far as being able to explain it. I automatically tell prospective employers that I'm an ID theft victim, but I shouldn't have to tell them that at all. My credit rating has nothing to do with my job performance....just syain'.

_____________________________

I have to stop saying "How stupid can you be?"...people are starting to take it as a challenge!

*Not a fuck was given.*

(in reply to GrandPoobah)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 5:01:50 PM   
PollyAMorris


Posts: 13
Joined: 12/8/2011
Status: offline
Some have said that they would give an email address that they never use, but I have been given to understand, that email from the same computer can be traced to a single IP address, and thus linked to other email addresses.

(in reply to GrandPoobah)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 9:56:55 PM   
LookieNoNookie


Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

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."


I don't know why everyone's so freaked out about this shit.

Some of you (maybe even most of you) need to learn that (I know it's crazy) the internet is not private.

Oh I know...that's an amazing thing to consider but guess the fuck what?

It's a gigantic fucking cesspool of data!

"OH FUCK.....I JUST PUT SOMETHING ON SERVERS AROUND THE WORLD......YOU MEAN......OTHERS CAN SEE THIS?"

Well.....color me surprised.

Son of a bitch.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 10:16:03 PM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie



I don't know why everyone's so freaked out about this shit.

Some of you (maybe even most of you) need to learn that (I know it's crazy) the internet is not private.

Oh I know...that's an amazing thing to consider but guess the fuck what?

It's a gigantic fucking cesspool of data!

"OH FUCK.....I JUST PUT SOMETHING ON SERVERS AROUND THE WORLD......YOU MEAN......OTHERS CAN SEE THIS?"

Well.....color me surprised.

Son of a bitch.



You're right the internet is not "private."  However, if I give someone my FB login information, they can look at emails I may have sent to a friend.  While a hacker could probably do the same thing (although I have no idea why they would be interested), an employer openly seeking that information IS an invasion of privacy.

I'm all about the concept that on a "work" computer, owned by one's employer, a person should not think anything they write, post or do can be considered "private." 

However, I do have an "expectation of privacy" when it comes to what I am doing on MY computer, from MY home, as long as it doesn't violate local or federal laws.  My employer has no right to know how often I fight with my partner, if I look at or talk about sex on the internet, curse like a sailor outside of work, write erotica and advertise it on my FB account or anything else if I CHOOSE not to share that information.

Now if they really, really feel the need to know this information, they can hire a hacker (like Penelope Garcia on Criminal Minds) who can hack into my computer and get all this information.  Oh wait, that would be considered an illegal invasion of my privacy!  Employers are trying to skate around this issue by claiming employees are "willingly" providing the information, when in reality, the employer is pressure them to do so with the fear that it will get them fired or keep them from being considered for a position. 

In my opinion, it is just as bad as the proverbial "casting couch" making a potential employee feel that if they don't comply with the company's request, they have no chance of getting the job. 

There is a world of difference between looking to access someone's personal information on their personal page that is not viewable to the public and "googling" a person to see what might be in "cyber world" about them.

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 10:31:08 PM   
GrandPoobah


Posts: 120
Joined: 11/20/2008
Status: offline
I have seen one instance where FB was directly related to work, and the application of that data was, in my opinion, reasonably valid.

The company has a policy that employees can be disciplined or terminated if they create a "hostile work environment." Usually that would mean things like bullying behavior or leaving threats or whatever. In this case, the employee was posting some pretty extreme things about another employee on their FB page, and, not surprisingly, amongst their "friends" were other employees. So...the boss determined that the person was 'creating a hostile work environment" even if the creation wasn't happening on company time or a company computer. It might have been one thing if it was posted here on CM, where it's unlikely other employees would see it, but posting it on FB, with known employee "friends" crossed a different boundary. THAT seemed reasonable to me, but this "pre-employment checking up on you" doesn't.

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 10:33:38 PM   
LookieNoNookie


Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie



I don't know why everyone's so freaked out about this shit.

Some of you (maybe even most of you) need to learn that (I know it's crazy) the internet is not private.

Oh I know...that's an amazing thing to consider but guess the fuck what?

It's a gigantic fucking cesspool of data!

"OH FUCK.....I JUST PUT SOMETHING ON SERVERS AROUND THE WORLD......YOU MEAN......OTHERS CAN SEE THIS?"

Well.....color me surprised.

Son of a bitch.



You're right the internet is not "private."  However, if I give someone my FB login information, they can look at emails I may have sent to a friend.  While a hacker could probably do the same thing (although I have no idea why they would be interested), an employer openly seeking that information IS an invasion of privacy.

I'm all about the concept that on a "work" computer, owned by one's employer, a person should not think anything they write, post or do can be considered "private." 

However, I do have an "expectation of privacy" when it comes to what I am doing on MY computer, from MY home, as long as it doesn't violate local or federal laws.  My employer has no right to know how often I fight with my partner, if I look at or talk about sex on the internet, curse like a sailor outside of work, write erotica and advertise it on my FB account or anything else if I CHOOSE not to share that information.

Now if they really, really feel the need to know this information, they can hire a hacker (like Penelope Garcia on Criminal Minds) who can hack into my computer and get all this information.  Oh wait, that would be considered an illegal invasion of my privacy!  Employers are trying to skate around this issue by claiming employees are "willingly" providing the information, when in reality, the employer is pressure them to do so with the fear that it will get them fired or keep them from being considered for a position. 

In my opinion, it is just as bad as the proverbial "casting couch" making a potential employee feel that if they don't comply with the company's request, they have no chance of getting the job. 

There is a world of difference between looking to access someone's personal information on their personal page that is not viewable to the public and "googling" a person to see what might be in "cyber world" about them.


So don't give 'em your damn password!

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 10:40:42 PM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
I'm disabled and have a small business that I own and operate, so it isn't an issue for me.

The point is that in this economy, people can't afford to "just say no" to the request.  They need to be considered for every position they apply for and don't necessarily have the luxury of being able to take a stand against the request.  Shit, in today's economy, even an employer asking "inappropriate" questions about marital status, kids etc., would garner an answer in this economy, where in the past, a person might not have given a second thought to telling the interviewer that those questions had no bearing on their job performance.

For people who have a family to support, taking a stand could result in their family losing the roof over their head or going hungry until an employment opportunity comes up where the request isn't made.

I see it as a form of bullying, harassment and potential discrimination.

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 10:44:09 PM   
LookieNoNookie


Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GrandPoobah

I have seen one instance where FB was directly related to work, and the application of that data was, in my opinion, reasonably valid.

The company has a policy that employees can be disciplined or terminated if they create a "hostile work environment." Usually that would mean things like bullying behavior or leaving threats or whatever. In this case, the employee was posting some pretty extreme things about another employee on their FB page, and, not surprisingly, amongst their "friends" were other employees. So...the boss determined that the person was 'creating a hostile work environment" even if the creation wasn't happening on company time or a company computer. It might have been one thing if it was posted here on CM, where it's unlikely other employees would see it, but posting it on FB, with known employee "friends" crossed a different boundary. THAT seemed reasonable to me, but this "pre-employment checking up on you" doesn't.


Bullshit.

With so many news stories about some freak loading up a carbine and snapping off a few close friends on his or her (usually a guy) way to the local pub, as an employer, I'd like to know EVERYTHING about a potential employee/psycho fuck.

FUCK privacy.

I've had people come in to my office, sit down on my couch and their record says "fired/layed off/transitioned" (and frankly, in this economy....any and all can mean any and all things) and then when I sit down with this person and I ask "so....why were you let go from such and such company?" and then they proceed to tell me (with an absolutely straight face) "well....I was late for the 5th time by just barely 2 hours....and my boss was pissed ('can you believe that???!!!).....so I just decked the fucking son of a bitch straight away....dropped the bastard flat out".

I've actually had a potential employee tell me this TO MY FACE! (No shit....word for fucking word).

Fuck privacy.....I want to know everything I can about some of these gawdamn psychos.

Trust me...as an employer...if I could keep a 357 magnum legally under my desk.....I'd have 7 of them.

< Message edited by LookieNoNookie -- 3/26/2012 10:46:59 PM >

(in reply to GrandPoobah)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/26/2012 11:18:38 PM   
GrandPoobah


Posts: 120
Joined: 11/20/2008
Status: offline
What you'd like to know is not in doubt, and you might well have great reasons for wanting that information. On the other hand, the LAW says you can't ask some of those things, and if you do, the applicant can claim discrimination...and YOU'LL LOSE! It really is that simple. I have a close friend who is an HR consultant, and she often talks about cases where she's appeared as an "expert witness." She talks about things like applicants who got thousands of dollars because the employer asked them their age, or one I recall where a group of five applicants got something like $10 million (collectively) because they were each asked about their religion.

Yes, you'd like to know a lot of things, and some things you can ask about. By the same token, there are things you'd like to know that you can't ask about. If you're concerned that an applicant might not be truthful, you don't have to hire them. However, the first time an applicant finds you've done something illegal, you might just find yourself looking for work, and telling the interviewer that you were terminated because you couldn't follow the law. THAT won't make you look terribly attractive to a potential employer.

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/27/2012 12:13:42 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

quote:

ORIGINAL: GrandPoobah

I have seen one instance where FB was directly related to work, and the application of that data was, in my opinion, reasonably valid.

The company has a policy that employees can be disciplined or terminated if they create a "hostile work environment." Usually that would mean things like bullying behavior or leaving threats or whatever. In this case, the employee was posting some pretty extreme things about another employee on their FB page, and, not surprisingly, amongst their "friends" were other employees. So...the boss determined that the person was 'creating a hostile work environment" even if the creation wasn't happening on company time or a company computer. It might have been one thing if it was posted here on CM, where it's unlikely other employees would see it, but posting it on FB, with known employee "friends" crossed a different boundary. THAT seemed reasonable to me, but this "pre-employment checking up on you" doesn't.


Bullshit.

With so many news stories about some freak loading up a carbine and snapping off a few close friends on his or her (usually a guy) way to the local pub, as an employer, I'd like to know EVERYTHING about a potential employee/psycho fuck.

FUCK privacy.

I've had people come in to my office, sit down on my couch and their record says "fired/layed off/transitioned" (and frankly, in this economy....any and all can mean any and all things) and then when I sit down with this person and I ask "so....why were you let go from such and such company?" and then they proceed to tell me (with an absolutely straight face) "well....I was late for the 5th time by just barely 2 hours....and my boss was pissed ('can you believe that???!!!).....so I just decked the fucking son of a bitch straight away....dropped the bastard flat out".

I've actually had a potential employee tell me this TO MY FACE! (No shit....word for fucking word).

Fuck privacy.....I want to know everything I can about some of these gawdamn psychos.

Trust me...as an employer...if I could keep a 357 magnum legally under my desk.....I'd have 7 of them.


All that says is that your vetting process of simply going through resumes needs some serious re-examination.

So you want to know "everything" about your potential employees...ok.  Are you willing to divulge the same information to them? 

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Privacy v. Employment - 3/27/2012 4:53:07 AM   
Exidor


Posts: 135
Joined: 12/31/2011
Status: offline
quote:

They could, for example, determine a person's age pretty easily, a question that would immediately cause legal action if they put in on the application.


Once they get your Social Security number they'll have a fair idea of how old you are. Coupled with your work history, any half-awake HR drone could guess within a couple of years.

Now that SSNs are routinely issued at birth it's even simpler.

(in reply to GrandPoobah)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Privacy v. Employment Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.219