One In Five Employers Scan Applicants' Web Lives 566
Ned Nederlander writes "CareerBuilder's new survey finds: 'Of those hiring managers who have screened job candidates via social networking profiles, one-third (34 percent) reported they found content that caused them to dismiss the candidate from consideration.' Some red flags: content about applicant using drugs or drinking, inappropriate photos and bad-mouthing former bosses."
Re:Interview process improvement (Score:3, Informative)
Done right, it could be a positive thing -- the employee could be asked,"Is there anything online that you don't want me to see?" and a decision to hire(or not) would be based on the level of the interviewee's honesty
Great, so when the perspective employee says, "No, don't look online under my name," they'll be pretty much dismissed on the idea that they're hiding things. No problem there.
How about people just stop posting pictures of themselves and their friends smoking pot on the internet? It's really retarded. Putting your "private life" on MySpace and expecting it to stay private is like running an ad in the newpaper about your "private life" and then getting upset when people know about it.
Actions have consequences. If doing something is going to cause you trouble, consider not doing it. If you're going to do it anyway, consider not posting the evidence on a publicly-accessible worldwide network.
Re:Only 20%?? (Score:5, Informative)
Except when your friends with unlocked profiles post pictures with you tagged in them.
There are privacy settings that allow you to block others from seeing pictures you are tagged in from your profile. You can also block people from seeing your friends list and wall.
Facebook has pretty good privacy settings.
Re:Think of it from the employer's POV (Score:3, Informative)
That's a pretty narrow view, considering there are other, more time-tested ways to socialize.
I suppose it depends on the position you're hiring for. I usually tend to frown on developers who don't have a web presence in the form of a blog with technical content and what not. Comments on technical forums or even USENET posts are always good. However, the lack of that presence does not necessarily translate into immediate dismissal, there are many other factors, obviously like the ability to ace a technical interview. But being recognized in your field by your peers is always a *huge* plus.
I really could care less (and again, that's just my opinion and the type of people I hire) if you have a facebook page or not.
Re:Interview process improvement (Score:3, Informative)
Now I'm leaving out a bit of your quote, but let's be reasonable here. Once you post pictures of yourself doing something on the public internet, that picture isn't private any more.
Posting that picture is voluntarily disclosing the information.
To say otherwise is just that "I want to be able to do whatever I want and not be judged by it" nonsense that no one above the age of ~5 should reasonably believe.
If it's on a personal website in a password protected area that you didn't give the interviewer/manager access to that's one thing. But when you put the picture on MySpace or Facebook for everyone to see, it's fair game.
Re:Interview process improvement (Score:2, Informative)
>However, most people are smart enough to hide their facebook/etc.
If you are the kind of person I need to "hide my profile" from, the LAST thing you are going to get from me is my time investment and my skilled labor. Life is too short, and I'm too good for you.
Re:You're not thinking (Score:4, Informative)
Usually, the hiring companies pay a third party to do a background check. And they won't know this -- they just collect everything that might be relevant and condense it into a single score.
Re:Interview process improvement (Score:3, Informative)
"Likely" is sufficient grounds for a hiring decision. This isn't the government. Private employers can hire you and fire you legally for most any reason other than a few protected ones, such as race, religion, sex, etc. They -absolutely- can refuse to hire you based on your political beliefs. Your views on abortion, drug law reform, party of preference, etc. are fair game. Refusing to hire you because they think you look/act shady is fair game. Refusing to hire you because you once smoked pot is fair game. Whether we think such behavior is reasonable or not.
Re:Only 20%?? (Score:4, Informative)
My friend, I'm not even on facebook and people have still tagged pictures with my name. People who probably thought they were doing me a favour. Being able to untag yourself is an absolutely useless feature. Being able to forbid other people to link to your profile in any way, now that would be a feature.
Re:Interview process improvement (Score:3, Informative)
They -absolutely- can refuse to hire you based on your political beliefs.
Incorrect. From http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html [eeoc.gov]
The CSRA prohibits any employee who has authority to take certain personnel actions from discriminating for or against employees or applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age or disability. It also provides that certain personnel actions can not be based on attributes or conduct that do not adversely affect employee performance, such as marital status and political affiliation.