More Firms Used Facebook To Block Older Job Seekers, Lawsuit Alleges (chicagotribune.com) 223
A proposed class-action lawsuit alleging Facebook's ad placement tools facilitate discrimination against older job-seekers has been expanded to identify additional companies. "When Facebook's own algorithm disproportionately directs ads to younger workers at the exclusion of older workers, Facebook and the advertisers who are using Facebook as an agent to send their advertisements are engaging in disparate treatment," a communications union alleged in the amended complaint, citing a legal test for employment discrimination, filed Tuesday in San Francisco federal court. The union added claims under California's fair employment and unfair competition statutes to the lawsuit, which was initially filed in December. Chicago Tribune reports: The Communications Workers of America is suing on behalf of union members and other job seekers who allegedly missed out on employment opportunities because companies used Facebook's ad tools to target people of other ages. The original filing named defendants are Amazon.com Inc., Cox Media Group, Cox Communications Inc. and T-Mobile, as well as what the union estimates to be hundreds of employers and employment agencies who used Facebook's tools to filter out older job hunters when seeking to fill positions. The amended filing adds Ikea, Enterprise Rent-A-Car and the University of Maryland Medical System to its list of companies who allegedly used Facebook's tools to filter by age. Those three entities, as well as Facebook, aren't named defendants in the lawsuit.
The union alleged in its amended lawsuit that Facebook also uses age-filtering in ads intended to find its own new employees. In January, the union filed an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint about the alleged practice, according to a copy obtained by Bloomberg News. The CWA says it has filed similar claims against dozens of companies, and that the agency has asked those employers, and Facebook, to respond to the allegations. An EEOC spokeswoman declined to confirm or deny the existence of any complaints.
The union alleged in its amended lawsuit that Facebook also uses age-filtering in ads intended to find its own new employees. In January, the union filed an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint about the alleged practice, according to a copy obtained by Bloomberg News. The CWA says it has filed similar claims against dozens of companies, and that the agency has asked those employers, and Facebook, to respond to the allegations. An EEOC spokeswoman declined to confirm or deny the existence of any complaints.
Why do they not want the experience? (Score:2, Interesting)
What is it about these companies (I'm a slightly past middle aged man myself at 38) that they do not want the workers who can actually create the products they desire? This obsession with scraping the bottom of the barrel, using immigrants, the young, the inept basically to formulate complex and towering architecture needed for a complex enough system to be worthy of sale. It makes no sense what so ever.
They are dooming their own bottom line, just look at microsoft since it has been hijacked by foreign in
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'm a slightly past middle aged man myself at 38
Middle aged is generally defined [merriam-webster.com] as 45 to 64. You have another seven years to go before the barista fresh out of college starts offering you a senior citizen discount.
Re: (Score:2)
That would make a 44 year-old a young adult, which I won't go along with, even if they would be young compared to me.
Childhood is 0 to 18, young adult about 18 to 36, middle age 36 to 54, mature adult 54 to 72, old person 72 to 90, and borrowed time 90 and up.
Ok, I know that's more arbitrary than accurate, but still better than saying a 64 year old is middle aged - I'm 62, in relatively good health, and I'm definitely not feeling middle a
Re: (Score:3)
I can't keep up with what middle aged is, our life expectancy seems to jump up every time I approach it.
Because that's how life expectancy works [verywellhealth.com].
I get the feeling I'll be 200 and being called a whipper snapper by 230 year olds.
The older you get the longer your life expectancy... Only the oldest person in the world can outlive his or her own life expectancy. For the rest of us, there is always someone older.
This is related to the common misconception that prehistoric men died around 35. That's really because the life expectancy at birth is skewed by high infant mortality rates. Skeletal remains show a significant fraction lived past 65, and comparison with modern day hunter gatherers in a
Re:Why do they not want the experience? (Score:5, Insightful)
They've been getting away with dirt cheap (Score:2)
young kids don't have the experience to say no to (Score:2)
young kids don't have the experience to say no or that will not work.
Re:Why do they not want the experience? (Score:5, Interesting)
My theory is that organic economic growth in the capitalist West has somehow stalled, and corporations looking for increasing profits are increasingly relying on cost cutting to boost profits.
Eliminating older workers in favor of cheaper and more disposable young people and immigrants is a way to obtain cost reductions.
It also helps to gut the middle class so that you produce an ever larger population of more economically disenfranchised young people who are willing to take low-paying jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Without those smaller businesses starting up, there's a lot less economic biodiversity, which res
Re: (Score:3)
I think there's also a kind of capital trap, where successful companies have so much capital on hand but don't see any way to invest it that guarantees rates of return better than short term investments.
But at the same time, they're successful enough that there's not enough shareholder demand that they invest in new markets so they don't invest it, and the capital remains tied up in Treasuries rather than flowing through the economy as physical plants, wages and raw material purchases.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My theory is that organic economic growth in the capitalist West has somehow stalled, and corporations looking for increasing profits are increasingly relying on cost cutting to boost profits.
Organic growth has stalled so now corporations, driven by the stock market, are focusing on cancerous growth. A company could be regularly turning a net profit of tens or millions of dollars annually, but if it misses an arbitrary growth rate by a percentage point or 2 the stock drops. Just like a cancer, incessant growth will eventually kill the host organism, whether a person or a company.
Re: (Score:2)
You will be either happy or disappointed to know that your theory has a name and has been discussed for decades:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Happy to know that it's not just some crazy-ass dumb idea that has no basis in reality. I know that Tyler Cowen also has his own spin on the concept of stagnation.
Slightly disappointed to note that it's an old idea, somewhat discredited. But I think economic stagnation is kind of an existential risk of any economy, and the failure of any given prediction of stagnation doesn't necessarily mean that any given economic situation can't be described by some kind of structural stagnation.
I also think its likely
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
*looks at Microsoft*
Their stock is way up, and that is all they care about. Nothing else matters to them. Hope you saved some money.
That's only because GCP is failing as a platform so MS somehow fell into the #2 spot in the cloud (which is like being #2 in search).
No surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
LinkedIN (Score:2, Insightful)
All this attention to facebook and none to LinkedIN. Many companies recruit exclusively on LinkedIN.
And with all these social media sites, it's like if you don't sign up, you don't exist.
Of course, it's a no brainer to use the APIs of those sites to screen out undesirables.
No one will ever know.
Re: (Score:2)
What's amazing to me is that they are even using Facebook in the first place to target younger workers. Most young people don't even use Facebook that much anymore. Facebook in general seems like a terrible place to try to find job applicants, especially in the tech field.
Re: (Score:3)
...Most young people don't even use Facebook that much anymore.
That is far too general to have any meaning. There is a trend downwards in young people (under 25) people using Facebook, but many (most?) still do use Facebook. For the 25+ crowd (one could say, the workers being sought) the usage is still quite high, high enough to make job recruiting worthwhile. (btw, Facebook also includes Instagram)
Re: (Score:2)
Desired qualifications:
At least seven years performing predictive analytics in a specific vertical Masters or PhD in Machine Learning, Engineering or Statistics Knowledge of this set of vertical specific applications
How in the world would anybody who is younger than 30 even apply for this job?
Amazon is blantent about it (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And so you have your EEO complaint leading to expensive settlement for the company...
Re: (Score:2)
At a job interview with Amazon they asked how many years experience did I have with Unix. When I replied over 25 years, one of them said how did you get 25 years and I said well I am 52, and I worked for Sun Micro. The lead said, "I wish you hadn't said that, now I can't hire you, too old". And it ended.
So you got to the interview stage without them bothering to check your DoB? Right.
Re: (Score:2)
Come to Europe.
You would be considered a high skilled expert here.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would that matter? And if you didn't tell him, then they would still find out.
An even bigger and more insidious problem (Score:3)
What about the discrimination on the part of potential employers against applicants who simply don't use social media at all, and therefore aren't on FB? That can't be fixed by any action on the part of FB or partners. It's also difficult to prove, grossly unfair, and pretty much impossible to do anything about in the absence of legislation and a serious effort at enforcement.
Young, dumb, and naive (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Simple Solution (Score:2)
College job fairs block older job seekers (Score:2)
Posting ads in a printed newspaper blocks younger job seekers.
Posting ads on a community notice board at the supermarket blocks online grocery shoppers seeking jobs.
etc...
Re:Wrong word (Score:5, Insightful)
Not presenting an ad to someone does not block them from applying to a job.
Kind of hard to apply for a job you don't know exists.....
Re:Wrong word (Score:5, Insightful)
But does one have the right to be informed of the existence of all open job positions?
If I wanted to hire for my business and just asked around my friends for recommendations/referrals without doing a "public" job offering, have I violated either the law or your sense of ethics?
For a big company, I would imagine that posting it at company.com/careers constitutes a fair public announcement for anyone that wishes to inquire.
Re:Wrong word (Score:5, Insightful)
If I wanted to hire for my business and just asked around my friends for recommendations/referrals without doing a "public" job offering, have I violated either the law or your sense of ethics?
Depends. When you ask your friends for recommendations do you say "no one that can remember the 70s?" If so, then quite possibly yes, you have violated the law. If these companies are focusing on one class of people over another based on a criteria that is not inherently necessary to the job function then they are definitely breaking the spirit of the law, if not necessarily the letter.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even a lot of older people can't remember the 70's....
I guess you could argue that if you remember the 70s you were either very young, very old, or you did the 70s very wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
My friends are all in their 30s and most their acquaintances are in their 30s. So without saying or intending that, this procedure is a) not visible to the majority of job seekers of any age and b) mostly excludes those that can remember the 70s just by virtue of the social circle to which the question went.
That's the point -- I've cast a net out fo
Re: (Score:2)
My friends are all in their 30s and most their acquaintances are in their 30s. So without saying or intending that, this procedure is a) not visible to the majority of job seekers of any age and b) mostly excludes those that can remember the 70s just by virtue of the social circle to which the question went.
That's the point -- I've cast a net out for prospective employees but done so in a way that targets a particular demographic.
What's more, in this hypothetical, I haven't posted the job anywhere else. So if you are not an acquaintance of one of mine, you literally cannot find out about this job.
If the law makes this is illegal, I'd be quite surprised.
Again, it depends. In your specific example, the criteria preventing people from getting hired is you (or by extension, your friends) don't know the (potential) applicant. You are not (by reasonable assumption) explicitly avoiding people based upon a protected class and would presumably hire someone that is qualified and in a protected class.
Now, if one of your friends said his 45 year old next door neighbor just got downsized and needs a job, but is a good worker and qualified for the job and your resp
Re:Thought-crimes (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, whether or not your action is a crime depends on your thoughts during the act.
Which makes it a thought-crime
No, it does not. The thought of discrimination against an older person is the motivation behind your act, but it is the act itself that is illegal. Let's take your logic: I break into a house to steal something. The owner is home and I end up killing them. I didn't plan to kill them, therefore I am not guilty of murder because it wasn't my thought to kill them.
Thought crime is when you can be arrested simply for having a thought or an idea. Once you have moved beyond thought into action, you are no longer in thought crime territory but actual crime territory. And this happens regularly during criminal proceedings, for example when to attach hate crime charges. A white guy beats up a black guy, and it's assault. The white guy says white supremacist/derogatory things while beating up the black guy? That speaks to his motivations for the crime and lends evidence towards a hate crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is not illegal to not hire an older person. It is precisely my thoughts about it, that may make the not-hiring illegal.
That's not a thought crime though. Once you have taken the action of not hiring that person (yes, for those of you are trying to be pedantic, not acting is still acting) because they are old you have committed an actual, physical crime. Your thought is the motive for the crime.
Re: (Score:2)
The contents of my thoughts determines, whether the very same action is a crime. Ergo, thought-crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lying is wrong, Murder is wrong. Intent may be important to determining the gravity of the wrongness. But it should not decide, whether it is wrong at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Lying is wrong, Murder is wrong. Intent may be important to determining the gravity of the wrongness. But it should not decide, whether it is wrong at all.
Right or wrong is merely window dressing for the masses. If a child "accidentially" kills a person by their act and they aren't charged with a crime is it not "wrong"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Now you're getting into motive, not thought crime.
How is motive not thoughts before or during the act?
The important distinction though is that until you DID something no crime was done. Having a bad thought is not a crime, performing a "bad" action is.
Correct - not wanting to hire an older person is not an offense, nor is hiring a young person even though you don't mind hiring an older person. Taking the action of not hiring someone because they are older IS an offense. It's not the thought that is the offense, it's the thought and the action together.
Re:Wrong word (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, I think that companies that limit their potential pool of applicants and talent for any reason are just shooting themselves in the foot, unless you want to argue that older applicants are less qualified. In some cases they may not have exposure to the latest languages, frameworks, etc. but 20 years of experience is worth a lot in its own way.
The other part of me thinks that these companies want young employees fresh out of college that they can work like a dog for a few years before casting them off. Older employees aren't anywhere near as willing to put up with that shit and likely have life commitments outside of work that don't afford them the opportunity to slog through 60 work weeks.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And older employees actually tend to use things like Vacation (follows your comments) and their health insurance. I admit as an older worker that's around about 50%+ 20 somethings where I work I"m enjoying reasonably priced benefits. Also older workers may be higher up on the pay scale as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Health benefits. Unless you are in the biggest of risk pools (large state, Fortune 100) the policies can have rates that scale with age (and sex). If you are a health insurer, the best pool of subscribers is 18-40 year old males. They pays their money and they takes their chances. And don't have pap smears or kids.
There are lots of carve outs for stuff like this. Many companies can't get insurance policies that are offer different prices for various patient classes. But there are enough of them that c
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It all depends on how you are doing it; if you specifically filter on age (or likely high school/college graduation date or other probable indicators of age), then you will get in trouble.
We use Toaster or some other random named job board system that is popular with the young'uns and colleges these days. Most of the candidates have 0.5-2.5 years of experience in our field, which is something we are targeting for some positions.
Other positions we want 10-30 years of experience. Our average age is well ove
for H1B no you can't make it an non public job pos (Score:3)
for H1B no you can't make it an non public job posting
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The employer would have to specify on Facebook what age group to target. If they specified anything that excluded anyone of working age then that was intentional discrimination.
This is an example of the screen they would see (ignore big red arrow):
https://www.socialmediaexamine... [socialmediaexaminer.com]
Re: (Score:3)
But does one have the right to be informed of the existence of all open job positions?
That's not the problem, the issue is the pay-per-view model that Facebook uses.
If you advertise a job on Monster or some other job site you pay for the time it is displayed there. Doesn't matter how many people view it, so there is really no point in them offering to hide it from certain demographics.
If you advertise a job on Facebook you pay for impressions and click-throughs. So advertising to demographics that you have no intention of hiring costs you money. Of course, if you don't care about the applica
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, if you don't care about the applicant's age there is no problem, but if you do then Facebook offers handy tools to save you some cash.
Sure, you save cash by getting to hire cheap labor by avoiding directly discriminating against applicants... ;^)
Or did you mean in the advertising bill for impressions?
All the same, you save some cash right
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If I post a job advertisement in Elle magazine, am I (given I know the demographics of Elle's readership) discriminating against men? Similarly, if Rolex posts in ad in The Economist, are they discriminating against non-white folks? Does an ad placed in Noir discriminate against the same white folks who benefit from the ad in The Economist?
Firms already target their ads, where do you propose we draw the line?
Re:Wrong word (Score:4, Informative)
> Firms already target their ads, where do you propose we draw the line?
Targeting ads isn't necessarily the same as excluding others from viewing them. Your job posting may be viewed by anyone who reads Elle, even if they aren't part of Elle's target demo. Your job posting on Facebook will not be shown to anyone 35+ if you specifically request it only go to 18-34. There is no "flipping through a copy in the waiting room at the dentist's office" equivalent on Facebook. That's where the line is.
Re: (Score:2)
If I've posted the job on company.com/careers, anyone can casually "flip through" the open positions there.
Re: (Score:2)
"if Rolex posts in ad in The Economist, are they discriminating against non-white folks"
No, they are discriminating against the "less wealthy".
Understood that many whites are wealthy, but many many more whites are "less wealthy".
Further there is a distribution within non-whites of wealthy, "less wealthy".
Re: (Score:2)
If you ONLY advertise in Elle, yes. If you also place a similar amount of advertising in GQ, no.
Talking about advertising a Rolex is a false equivalence. Demographic targeting of goods is legal pretty much across the board, though refusing to sell goods to people in a protected category is not. Demographic advertising of JOBS is another matter. There are laws prohibiting job ads that exclude a protected category, with the exception of jobs where it's an actual job qualification. (Thus you can advertise for
Re: (Score:3)
The intent is the same. You are impermissibly using a criterion for recruitment. You may not discriminate on the basis of age in hiring.
Re: (Score:2)
There's more than one line.
These guys know all about the lines you are referring to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Kind of hard to apply for a job you don't know exists.....
Why would Facebook be your goto job-hunting source? It is close to my last choice, right above maybe the help-wanted ads in the old fashioned physical newspaper thing.
Honestly now that linked-in has become pretentious facebook I can hardly use that anymore, but even LinkedIn isn't the best source, even ignoring MS having taken over. Most of the jobs through these sources are the kinds of things where they collect your resume, find a reason to not h
Re:Wrong word (Score:4, Insightful)
Kind of hard to apply for a job you don't know exists.....
Why would Facebook be your goto job-hunting source? It is close to my last choice, right above maybe the help-wanted ads in the old fashioned physical newspaper thing.
You are looking at this wrong. In this case Facebook isn't a job-hunting source, it is an employee recruitment source. Companies are paying for ads advertising their open positions, and the allegation is that these companies are using Facebook's ad-targeting data to only serve ads to people who are younger and presumably cheaper. It will be interesting to see how the court interprets the anti-discrimination laws in this case, especially if they are able to show in court precisely what criteria was used to determine who to serve the ad to.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why when I'm looking for a job, I'm actually LOOKING for a job and not surfing facebook and wait for job ads to pop up.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why when I'm looking for a job, I'm actually LOOKING for a job and not surfing facebook and wait for job ads to pop up.
I don't think you know how it works. Today, the ad platform is looking for you, you aren't looking for ads...
Re:That's it (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Except being old is a legally protected class, just like being Black or female. Filter against Californians or beekeepers or people who drive red cars all you want. If you filter based on a protected class you have legal liability.
Legally protected for jobs, but legally protected for targeted ads?
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine that it was filtering for no people of color. Or, at Google, to filter for no white guys.
Your argument is like saying we'll post up a job on the bulletin board at the public court house nearby, yet we'll target under 30s online as well.
Clearly discrimination.
I wasn't saying discrimination in any form is OK, I'm saying there are laws against discrimination in employment, are there any laws that protect against advertising discrimination?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You know there are magazines that cater exclusively to members of protected classes. To riff on your examples, Ebony and Jet are magazines targeted towards African Americans. Cosmopolitan targets females.
Advertisers that specifically buy space in those magazines are surely "filtering based on a protected class". I would hope that they are consciously aware as well, rather than buying ads in Jet thinking they are targeting all demographics equally.
Re: (Score:2)
It all depends on the intent of selecting those magazines for advertising. If the goal is to market stuff to those demographics then that's not going to disadvantage anyone else. If the goal is to make sure white people don't see certain job adverts because for some reason they only want people of colour, that's probably illegal.
In other words it's not the targeting per-se that is the issue, it's if the targeting disadvantages anyone.
Pointless theoretical argument (Score:2)
Advertisers that specifically buy space in those magazines are surely "filtering based on a protected class".
Pointless theoretical argument. Companies don't advertise jobs in those kinds of magazines. Period. They do advertise other things, but those are not protected against discrimination like jobs and real estate are.
And, yes, most HR and real estate people do indeed consider the mix of media buys when planning advertising campaigns. That's because back in the days when companies did advertise jobs in newspapers & magazines, there were discrimination lawsuits because a pattern of job advertising venue choic
Re: (Score:2)
So long as white people can also visit mycompany.com/careers and see the same advertisements, is there an issue?
Re: (Score:2)
We can bicker about this a bit more. Facebook is a "social media" platform, not a job searching/application service. Companies like Monster or Indeed would certainly be hit with some government clubs if they biased hiring/promotion based on any protected classes. If people are truly looking for work, then Facebook isn't the only place to look and no site should be solely relied upon to find your next job. The crux of this is *who* sees *what* ads.
Would anybody really care if Facebook decided to only show ca
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So you aren't content with the problems we have now, and are interested in adding even more?
Re:Right to be shown job ads? (Score:5, Informative)
As a stupid question...
When you buy an ad in Teen Vogue, Reddit, AARP, Ebony, or Cosmo, you are buying an ad that is served to every reader of those magazines. The advertiser, the publisher, and the reader take the magazines demographics as it is.
When you buy an ad on Facebook, you down-select from Facebook's demographics based upon categories that are both ordinary and potentially problematic.
And that ca be a no-no. Because failing to serve an ad based on a discriminatory down-selection can be a violation of civil rights laws [nytimes.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Well no, you don't just take it "as-is", you have a choice of Teen Vogue or Ebony or Elle or .... Which is to say you can chose the magazine whose demographic most closely matches.
Re:Right to be shown job ads? (Score:4, Insightful)
Based on this example, if I am looking to hire and using Facebook, then it falls on me to select the appropriate demographics. It isn't Facebooks fault I picked 18-35, so the blame would fall squarely on me.
Sounds like the blame goes to those listing the jobs, though Facebook might have some work to do regarding clarifying what categories on their platform really mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While large corporations are in a different class, small employers are unlikely to target more than one paid platform... and are less likely to keep job postings on the website 100% current (rather than strategic hire positions that are "always open"). Does this put them at risk in your opinion?
Re: (Score:2)
Trump University says it's just smart to hire junior workers and pay them less. Old farts in their 30s and beyond care about too many unimportant things like family and work life balance.
And the ones in their 70s care about accumulating power, giving jobs to their kids and playing golf.
Re: (Score:2)
And the ones in their 70s care about accumulating power, giving jobs to their kids and playing golf.
I can't say I know a lot of 70 year olds in that group. Many I've seen can barely afford a "pot to piss in" and are abandoned in nursing homes or poor living conditions with neglected healthcare because they're not considered useful anymore. Some are doing OK. Many are responsible for the wealth inequality gap that we continue to accept as a society which we can change during a single election period but fail to do so because were sparse and disorganized as a group
The OP was describing Trump...and now that I've explained the joke, its no longer funny.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
W T F ?
Re: (Score:3)
Well, still no safety net, but the independent contractor/self-employed route can be equally lucrative.
Re: (Score:2)
a 54 year old fully experienced fully educated to university level programmer, engineer, lead.
They don't put young people in charge and they don't give old people the grunt work.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't filter on age.
Filter on union membership.
Filter on intelligence and dickishness.
Re:So what? (Score:5, Insightful)
but there is no more place in the modern workforce for the over-30. Let's not delude them into thinking otherwise.
So retirement at 30? Fucking shit hot. All these under 30 must be making so much to provide for everyone over 30 who is no longer able to work. Or should everyone have made enough by 30 to fund an additional 60 years of life? Tricky, but doable if you get everything handed down to you by generations that weren't full of shit though and you don't care about the next generation.
Re: (Score:2)
You just had to take the Troll bait didn't you...
The OP is from an wannabe engineer who I won't be hiring when they come looking for a job because they think they know more than they do :)
Re: (Score:2)
In the book we got Carousel at 21.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have a Facebook account. But were I to begin job shopping, what's to stop me from creating one with a fake age? The worst Zuckerberg could do to be is to suspend my account.
I already 'fake' my age by a few days or months when signing up for various sites who don't have a legal right to know it. It slows people down from scraping the web and setting up fake IDs in my name if they can't get my birthday right. And I get Happy Birthday messages from various sources all throughout the year.
Re: (Score:2)
record the interview and when you have them on tape saying your not X age or did you lie about your age?