Slashdot Mirror
One In Five Employers Scan Applicants' Web Lives
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."
Posting to /.
Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
Why does every manager not screen all applicants? Takes 5 minutes.
What would you expect if you admitted you're a drunken dope user on Facebook? An award for honesty?
And the logic of posting photos of yourself in compromising situations online: There is none.
If each mistake being made is a new one, then progress is being made.
On the other hand, social networking profiles gave some job seekers an edge over the competition. Twenty-four percent of hiring managers who researched job candidates via social networking sites said they found content that helped to solidify their decision to hire the candidate. Top factors that influenced their hiring decision included:
Some of the numbers on this article have to be wrong ... 22% shared sensitive information from their prior employer ... ?! What could that be?
My work here is dung.
You don't think this is my real name do you?
No, this is the name of my mortal enemy.
Deleted
You are using the wrong word.
Your private life should be off limits.
What you do in public is public. Having people judge you by how you act in public is they way that the world works.
But guess what poor judgment will effect your life.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Why? The information's both public and readily available. If someone's application for employment is dismissed because they appear to be a drunken stoner that enjoys whining about former employers then...why should the prospective employer not be aware of it?
If it was something that they obtained through the use of private detectives, or contacting previous employers then, maybe, fair enough the applicant should be warned. But if they're stupid enough to post any form of incriminating material online what makes you think they'd heed the warning in the first place?
It helps me avoid the bad ones and possibly increase my chances with the ones I want.
One interview I casually mentioned seeing a really good performance by a local violin player. I hadn't actually gone, just read a review. I didn't mention I knew she was his daughter, either(she'd married, so different last name). I found that after googling him and finding it in the "thanks" section of her website. That got us to talking about classical music, music magnet schools, etc. After we "shared a common interest", I was a shoe-in compared to the rest of the candidates.
Fortunately, I don't work there anymore and he's since retired:) I did actually listen to some of his daughter's stuff, later, and she /is/ a good violin player.
Anyone who can handle being stuck in the woods with 60 kids should be able to handle irate customers pretty easily.
Any manager who scans the supposed web life of an applicant is a complete idiot if they can't verify that what they are looking at is authenticated to the applicant.
Let me put it simply. Send me your real name and address. I'll guarantee that I'll trash any job potential you have with one of these hiring managers.
Which might actually be a good thing, since any such manager has probably also populated the place with fellow idiots.
I've been a victim myself of a web smear campaign, and I can tell you that it's no fun. Plus it will stay around forever, depending on how it's done.
How's the googling going? I hope you like reading my slashdot posts. And if you have karma, mod my posts up, too. In addition to hiring me with a nice fat salary.
So...
Step 1: Keep a professional "personal" site up where you praise your prior employers and you extol the virtues of work and your pride in your accomplishments at your job.
Step 2: (Optional) Keep a separate social site for your friends (which doesn't explicitly list you by name), also set to private.
Step 3: Get the names of the other applicants and set them up facebook accounts where they list their exploits stealing office supplies, being lazy/napping on the job, and taking pot breaks/drinking at work. Extra Credit for including the phrase "Man, I was so WASTED at work the other day!" anywhere in their profile.
Step 4: ???*
Step 5: Hired!
* Depending on state, Step 4 may be "Get sued for libel" (Do not go to step 5, do not collect a monthly paycheck).
Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
>What you do in public is public.
Yes. And why would you bother doing anything for an employer who is petty enough to hold your web presence against you?
At my jobs, the people I've worked for have been into me for who I am.
Somebody checks my facebook page or whatever, it's what it's there for. Somebody has a *problem* with what they find there, they can kiss my ass, and I'd be man enough to say it point blanc even to a boss or prospective boss.
And speaking as a boss, I might do something like this just to test you to see if you have enough integrity to stand up for yourself. If you have a lot of counterculture / political stuff on your shirt sleeve, and you try to pretend to be someone else, I have NO respect for that.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I make sure that if somebody Googles my real name, their first hit is my resume. Everything else is garbage.
It must be nice to have a name that dwells in relative obscurity. For those of us named things like "John Smith", "Charles Barkley", "Ron Jeremy" and "Clown Anal" that's not quite so easy.
I am the richest astronaut ever to win the superbowl.
Are you willing to turn that around? Face it, as an employer and a manager your company and you reflect on me professionally when I work for you. If the company's involved in shenanigans, I'm going to catch the fallout. Think about any technical type still employed at SCO, for instance. If you as a manager pull borderline-unethical stunts, future employers will be wondering if I share those same questionable ethics. So are you OK with me as an employee digging up your credit history and arrest record and everything else, digging up all the internal financial and strategic details your company'd rather not have anyone outside the company knowing about, to go through with a fine-tooth comb to decide if I want to take the risk of working for you?