Skip to comments.Job applicants asked to turn over their Facebook passwords
Posted on 03/20/2012 7:18:33 AM PDT by bjorn14
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 couldnt see his private profile. She turned back and asked him to hand over his login information.
Bassett refused and withdrew his application, saying he didnt 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
The information collected by Facebook is also private property of Facebook. The data is highly valuable and the company demanding rights to it is theft.
Also, any copyrighted materials on Facebook placed there by the candidate is also compromised when the company demands access to it. That is a violation of copyright law.
There are all kinds of Intellectual Property rights issues with demanding access to private electronic accounts these company HR bimbos dont know or think about.
Great, wonderful Idea!! Now that you are the owner, are you going hire everybody on their word and resume?
Or - are you going to:
"... want to know A-B-S-O-L-U-T-E-L-Y EVERYTHING about that candidate [that you] can POSSIBLY know."?
You can build strawmen and spin fantasies like no freeper I’ve ever known! I’m impressed. I counted no fewer than seven in the last round of puke you spewed.
Sucks to be an incompetent wanker at the mercy of a demanding world, doesn’t it? Like I said, if you find employers so evil, get off your lazy bitchy ass and start your OWN endeavor.
But you can’t, can you? That would take effort, skill, guts, and hard work, and your current account is a bit short on all of those, isn’t it?
Although you accuse everyone who doesn’t agree with you of being a *liberal*, the reality is you’re much more at home with that 99% Occupy Something Someone Else Struggled To Build commie crowd. Because — by Gawd, you are so ENTITLED to your fantasy!
FOAD, wanker TOAD.
What are you 12?? You sound like a juvenile little kid.
Sure, Shirley, they can have my Facebook password. They can have my Bunny Teens password, too!
Nice try. As I recall, they term that tactic “projection”.
By the way, you need a comma between “you” and “12” to form a proper English sentence. Maybe you should have repeated that grade.
Reading an article that a company has the right to “wipe” your personal phone
Also, my cousin told me had to agree to GPS tracking (not the portable kind but hardwired into his engine)on his PERSONAL truck or he would be fired. It was a new company policy and applied to everyone in the company—not just him. this means they can track him 24/7 if they want to and it is perfectly legal. (barf)
Where will this end? It is extremely frightening!
Does you cousin drive for the company in any way, such as errands?
yes but not 24/7 and there is no way to turn it off when he is not working
Brilliant! A new growth industry.
My wife has a fleet vehicle as she drives 25,000 miles a year for the company. They don’t require GPS. They give her the car and pay everything for it; gas, insurance, lease costs, maintenance, car washes, etc. She is even to drive it on the weekends for personal use and they even pay for the gas. For that, she is taxed $30/month State and federal for the benefit. They do it right. It probably costs the company an extra $1,000/year for her to drive it personally, but they more than make up for it through savings in simplified financial accounting and asset management costs. The company is also a CPA firm so they really know their accounting.
Those companies that are penny wise and Pound foolish usually suffer. Competition is getting tighter by the day. Those companies that act badly wont be around much longer. People are simply tired of putting up with it.
That sounds like a great company to work for.
The smart candidate would ask the hiring company if that is what they'd like their employees to do with company passwords, and if not, then what makes them think it's okay to ask others to do the same?
As long as my bosses are willing to turn over the annual employee reviews their supervisors gave them for the past 5 years so I know the sort of anal retentive prying boss I may soon be working for.
Some jobs aren’t worth having.
That's correct. We have a difference of opinion on the subject -- that doesn't make me dogmatic or wrong.
It's a dangerous slippery slope -- applicants already provide a lot of personal data to prospective employer, but there has to be some limit. Where does the line get drawn?
"Mr. Smith, we're please that you came to our interview today. In order to proceed, I need your Facebook and Google+ passwords so I can examine your private profiles."
Later... "Well, so far everything checks out. While Clarice shows you around, please leave your cell phone behind so we can look through your call, text, and photo logs. Don't forget to leave a list of passwords for any apps you currently have installed, and your store password so we can look over your app purchase history."
Still later... "Did you enjoy the tour? We still have some questions, so Gary here will accompany you home so you can let him dig into all of your computer files. After that he'll want to rummage through your mail, look in your drawers and closets (and under your bed), and read any personal diaries, journals, or logs you might keep. Then we'll need a copy of your bank statements for the last three months to look for suspicious... Mr. Smith? Are you going?"
Seriously, is someone who is going to comply with all of that really going to be a better employee than someone who puts their foot down early and say, "no, that's not information that's necessary or relevant"? I say the latter would be more likely to be a good employee than the former. As a prospective employee, an employer who demands that sort of information isn't going to be good employer.
And for this, I'm "dogmatic"? No, just correct.
Typically, that info is for verification purposes and not requested until a job offer has been made.