By Marissa Levy
It’s a well-known fact that employers often use the Internet to vet
their applicants, scouring Google and social networking sites such as
Facebook and LinkedIn to aid in their background checks. But as these
social networking sites roll out more stringent privacy protections
that allow users to block access to their profiles, employers have
started taking more drastic steps to get the scoop on their
applicants.
Rather than trying to get around these new privacy protections,
probing employers are cutting straight to the source by asking
candidates to hand over their Facebook login information when applying
for a job. Others employers request candidates to open their Facebook
profiles during the interview itself, allowing their would-be bosses
to scroll through applicants’ private information right in front of
their faces.
Facebook stands by their terms of use, stating this practice violates
their policies against sharing passwords. On Friday, Facebook
executives warned employers not to ask job applicants for their
usernames and passwords to the site to search their applicants’
profiles.
Troubled by reports of the practice, Democratic Sens. Chuck Schumer of
New York and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said they are calling
on the Department of Justice and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission to launch investigations. The senators are sending letters
to the heads of the agencies.
Sen. Schumer says: “An employer shouldn’t be allowed into that almost
sacred domain of things you just share with your five best friends, or
your spouse or your child. You shouldn’t be required to give up your
private life just to get a job.”
David Gerwitz, renowned technology journalist and U.S. policy adviser,
agrees with Sen. Schumer. “Asking to view your public postings is like
asking for your home address and then taking a drive by your house to
see where you live. Asking for your Facebook password is like
demanding the key to your house, your alarm code, and to be put on
your bank account as a signer. They are very different degrees of
request and it’s quite unfortunate that people are conflating the
two,” Gerwitz said.
ACLU advocates are also crying foul, saying this practice is a clear
violation of personal privacy. Furthermore, opponents believe this
practice just another way of finding out information, such as gender,
race, religion, age and marital status – all details that are
protected by federal employment law. Lawmakers in California, Maryland
and Illinois are considering legislation that would ban this practice.
Out of work candidates may feel pressured to turn over their login
information to get hired in today’s incredibly competitive job market.
But the question is, should you have to turn over your private
information just to keep yourself in the running for a position?
Some candidates have refused point blank, while others have complied
with employers’ requests. Robert Collins handed over his Facebook
login information when applying for a job with the Maryland Department
of Public Safety and Correctional Services. Read more about his
experience in a transcript of his recent interview with NPR.
According to its website, the purpose of Facebook is to promote “openness and transparency by giving individuals greater power to share and connect…” Although openness is one of the principles of Facebook, this is a qualified openness which, due to advanced privacy settings, permits the social networking site’s users to choose who they want to “be open” with. Although I do feel employers have a right to ask for a prospective employee’s Facebook login and password, I do not believe that this is a right that should be executed. The employer, like any other internet user, should be permitted access to the information that the applicant chooses to make available for public viewing. Accordingly, I agree that Facebook users should not put any posts or pictures on the publicly accessible portions of their Facebook that they would not want prospective employers to see. However, when an employer seeks access to the privacy protected areas of an applicant’s Facebook, that employer is further blurring the already thin line between work and a person’s personal life. There are certain things people say and do at home that they would most likely refrain from in the office setting. Likewise, there are most likely things people say and do in the privacy protected areas of their Facebook page that they would not consider proper office etiquette. Just as people are permitted to keep what they say and do in the privacy of their own home from employer scrutiny, I feel that job applicants should be able to keep the privacy protected areas of their Facebook page from employer scrutiny as well.
I agree with Senator Shumer when he says that, “you shouldn’t be required to give up your private life just to get a job,” however, given the current economy and how hard it is for people to get jobs, it seems entirely feasible that many will succumb to the pressure and give up an enormous amount of their privacy. While some may argue that this is just a new form of a “background check”, it is disarming to think how far employers will be allowed to go if given the opportunity. As a result of entering college in the early stages of Facebook, I had to learn quickly that with each new Facebook feature, there were new things that I had to do in order to protect my privacy from certain individuals. Facebook has made it easy for individuals to protect their privacy in different levels, giving users the option to prevent people they are not “friends” with from accessing their information or pictures, or to even prevent their “friends” from seeing certain information. With that said, allowing potential employers to log into the website circumvents all of the privacy options that Facebook has put in place, and the amount of personal information that a potential employer can gain through this “search” would not only be detrimental to the person who handed over their password, but to those who refuse to as well.
This issue is not simply localized to applicants in the job market. Middle management, who interview and peruse the candidate’s Facebook profile, can be susceptible to legal action. In his parable, Reginald Scott Braithwaite, highlighted scenarios where ‘big brother’ can be in for a surprise when they look too deeply. He surmises inspecting an interviewee’s profile, and discovering information that may be seen as ‘red flags’ for certain employers, such as sexual orientation or intent to take legally sanctioned paternal leave, illnesses, religion, political affiliations, and other factors, could leave the company vulnerable to anti-discrimination litigation. The company wouldn’t be even able to claim a failing to disclose information argument, since they are asking for the information themselves! Braithwaite thought in those scenarios the interviewer would feel compelled to hire these people, whether qualified or not. He also fears an inability to properly manage these applicants once they were hired, in terms of advancement and censuring there idea’s and work product, also stemming from pressing litigation, which could damage any company’s reputation. While his parable is fiction the moral rings true: infringing on human rights to privacy can cause trouble for all parties involved.