The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

The Facebook job test: Now interviewers want your logins

Need work? Better hand over that password

SaaS data loss: The problem you didn’t know you had

HPC blog When I wrote this blog about how a recent research study correlated social network behavior with employee success, I speculated that we’d soon see employers trying to circumvent Facebook’s privacy policies in order to get a good look at your Facebook pages.

Well, it turns out that some employers aren’t happy with just seeing the public part of applicant profiles; they’re actually asking prospective employees to turn over their Facebook login and password. Wait, did I get that right? (Looks again.) Yeah, I did. They’re outright asking applicants to give them their Facebook login details as part of the interview screening process.

Other companies are requesting that prospective (and presumably current) employees "friend" HR reps or background-checkers on Facebook. Others are requiring applicants to log in to their Facebook accounts from a company-owned computer – I guess they take screen scrapes of the page for later study, or maybe capture the login keystrokes.

If a company requires you to give them an intimate view of your social networking pages during the interview process, might there be something in the employment agreements that gives them the “right” to take a second, third, or fourth look – whenever they want to – after you’re hired?

All of these practices (and more) are outlined in this Associated Press article.

There’s a fine line between vetting candidates and invading their privacy. In my mind, much of what these companies are asking isn’t just stepping over the line – it’s grabbing the line and flailing you with it.

Others are requiring employees to sign non-disparagement agreements to prevent them from pouring slime on the company in social nets during or after employment. It will be highly interesting to see if – and how – any of these agreements are enforced. "Disparagement" is very much in the eye of the beholder, and often hard to objectively define.

If you work in a restaurant and write a post alleging that your co-workers put unspeakable things in the Friday lunch special, that’s pretty clear-cut disparagement. But if you simply post that you wish the restaurant were better supervised, so that employees can’t put unspeakable things in the Friday lunch special – is that disparaging? Yeah, it probably is, even if it’s true.

We all have to assume that anything we put on the web is something that our employer – or mother – will be able to see. (Well, not my mother. I just spent 27 minutes on the phone talking her through playing a DVD on her TV. I’m a nice boy, though – barely yelled at all.)

I think that we’ll see a few trends emerge from this level of social networking scrutiny. First, employees and prospective employees will pay more attention to what they post and what they allow on their pages. Second, I think that more people will have private social network personas, using secondary accounts under nicknames or pseudonyms. (My favorite fake names: "Brody McCracken" and "Dirk Steele", both are guys who make their own rules and don’t care what “The Man” thinks.)

I also predict that corporate HR departments are going to become the new hotbed for fun as they sift through the most embarrassing Facebook pages imaginable, then send around the results tagged with “What the hell were they thinking?” and “Lots of things sound funny when you’re that drunk.” ®

Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner

Interviewer: Give us your Facebook or random social network login....

Me: You must be kidding, this is work, Facebook is not work therefore it is not relevant to this process. Do you want to come round my flat, rifle through my mail, read my SMS, chat with the mrs and ring my parents as well, perhaps you want me to strip off so you can check I haven't had an insulting tattoo on my nuts? I wouldn't work for a company that seriously asks this, so unless I just passed some kind of reverse psychology test then this interview is over, goodbye and consider my middle finger raised in a solitary salute to your quite frankly disturbing HR policy.

*slams door on way out*

39
1

Re: Surely this is illegal

Almost-as-important: Would you hire someone who freely gives out their usernames and passwords because someone asks for them?

But yeah. Do not ask for my password. Because the reply "Take a hike!" may cause offence.

In fact, if you even ask for it (whether I refuse or not), I will be reporting you to the Department of Work and Pensions and the Data Protection Registrar. Aside from the fact that actually GIVING you that password is a breach of Facebook's policies.

37
1
Anonymous Coward

Surely this is illegal

Doesn't the data protection act cover this? you are entitled to a private life. Any company that tries that with me is going to get told to piss off

32
1

More from The Register

SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
 breaking news
You don't need phone lines or cable for ANYTHING, says Dish
The satellite-dish man can sort you out with phone and broadband over the air too
 breaking news
What's HP got under wraps? Looks awfully flash and tape shaped
What happens in Vegas won't stay there - we've got the details
AMD lifts the veil on Opteron, ARM chip plans for 2014
Not much action going on in 2013, though
Microsoft borks botnet takedown in Citadel snafu
Stupid Redmond kicked over our honeypots, wail white hats
IBM's $1bn layoffs latest: Now axe swings in US, Canada - reports
Union claims 121 storage bods canned after dismal sales
NetApp musters muscular cluster bluster for ONTAP busters
Storage array OS overhauled to juggle more nodes, go down on you, er, less
HP adds 'Haswell' Xeon E3s to entry ProLiant servers
Gussies up MicroServer for SMBs, adds baby switches