Publications
Partners
I was listening to a debate on the radio recently about how employers check the social network accounts, like Facebook and Twitter, of prospective employees to assess their suitability for employment.
This isn’t a new trend. In 2008, Computerworld reported that 20% of employers were searching social networks during the screening process. The following year, a survey by Careerbuilder revealed that this figure had jumped to 45%.
The radio debate went something like this:
• Radio DJ introduces topic.
• Person phones in with horror story of how boss (principal of a school in this case) discovered pictures of her on Facebook at a pimps and ho’s party and how she got hauled over the coals for it.
• Boss of a company phones in and tells of how he is currently assessing 100s of CVs and using Facebook and Twitter as a filter “to determine whether candidates would fit in with the organizational culture.”
• Radio DJ sums up by saying we should be careful of putting information out there that we wouldn’t want employers to see.
Does anyone else see what’s wrong with this picture? Social networks are social environments. Workplaces are professional environments. Would I put my party hat on and go to work drunk? Not if I had more than two brain cells, no. So why do bosses feel they have a right to poke their noses into my social life?
Let me set the record straight: I’ve never been a “professional persona” kind of gal. Who I am at home is who I am at work. I hardly ever dress the part and because of the nature of my job, work and play generally blend into one for me. But it grates me to think that someone would feel they can tell who I am and whether I’d be a good employee by checking out my party pics.
How, exactly, are employers measuring candidate suitability by behaviour on Twitter or Facebook? Two things they’re said to be looking for, according to the Computerworld article, are alcohol or drug use and inappropriate photos. The boss who called in to the radio debate said he was looking for swearing on Twitter, “because that would indicate that the candidate wasn’t suitable for client interaction.”
Good grief. Logical conclusion to this argument: I have a job, therefore I’m not allowed to go to parties, drink alcohol, swear, or be photographed doing any of the aforementioned.
Big Brother much?
I can think of only one effective use of this kind of screening: when employees bad-mouth their current employers on social networks or give out confidential information about their job. We all know about Dooce and how she lost her job for blogging about it. As a result, those of us with more than a smidgen of intellect steer clear of (too much) negative talk about our jobs on social networks.
But deleting my party pics and feeling constrained about being myself on my own social network accounts? Sorry employers, that’s just not going to happen. Either avert your eyes, or find yourself on the wrong side of my water-tight privacy settings.
Are you friends with your boss and/or colleagues on your social networks? Has it ever posed a problem for you? Or do you find that it strengthens your relationship?
This isn’t a new trend. In 2008, Computerworld reported that 20% of employers were searching social networks during the screening process. The following year, a survey by Careerbuilder revealed that this figure had jumped to 45%.
The radio debate went something like this:
• Radio DJ introduces topic.
• Person phones in with horror story of how boss (principal of a school in this case) discovered pictures of her on Facebook at a pimps and ho’s party and how she got hauled over the coals for it.
• Boss of a company phones in and tells of how he is currently assessing 100s of CVs and using Facebook and Twitter as a filter “to determine whether candidates would fit in with the organizational culture.”
• Radio DJ sums up by saying we should be careful of putting information out there that we wouldn’t want employers to see.
Does anyone else see what’s wrong with this picture? Social networks are social environments. Workplaces are professional environments. Would I put my party hat on and go to work drunk? Not if I had more than two brain cells, no. So why do bosses feel they have a right to poke their noses into my social life?
Let me set the record straight: I’ve never been a “professional persona” kind of gal. Who I am at home is who I am at work. I hardly ever dress the part and because of the nature of my job, work and play generally blend into one for me. But it grates me to think that someone would feel they can tell who I am and whether I’d be a good employee by checking out my party pics.
How, exactly, are employers measuring candidate suitability by behaviour on Twitter or Facebook? Two things they’re said to be looking for, according to the Computerworld article, are alcohol or drug use and inappropriate photos. The boss who called in to the radio debate said he was looking for swearing on Twitter, “because that would indicate that the candidate wasn’t suitable for client interaction.”
Good grief. Logical conclusion to this argument: I have a job, therefore I’m not allowed to go to parties, drink alcohol, swear, or be photographed doing any of the aforementioned.
Big Brother much?
I can think of only one effective use of this kind of screening: when employees bad-mouth their current employers on social networks or give out confidential information about their job. We all know about Dooce and how she lost her job for blogging about it. As a result, those of us with more than a smidgen of intellect steer clear of (too much) negative talk about our jobs on social networks.
But deleting my party pics and feeling constrained about being myself on my own social network accounts? Sorry employers, that’s just not going to happen. Either avert your eyes, or find yourself on the wrong side of my water-tight privacy settings.
Are you friends with your boss and/or colleagues on your social networks? Has it ever posed a problem for you? Or do you find that it strengthens your relationship?
