Slashdot Mirror
Should Job Seekers Tell Employers To Quit Snooping?
onehitwonder writes in with a CIO opinion piece arguing that potential employees need to stand up to employers who snoop the Web for insights into their after-work activities, often disqualifying them as a result. "Employers are increasingly trolling the web for information about prospective employees that they can use in their hiring decisions. Consequently, career experts advise job seekers to not post any photos, opinions or information on blogs and social networking websites (like Slashdot) that a potential employer might find remotely off-putting. Instead of cautioning job seekers to censor their activity online, we job seekers and defenders of our civil liberties should tell employers to stop snooping and to stop judging our behavior outside of work, writes CIO.com Senior Online Editor Meridith Levinson. By basing professional hiring decisions on candidates' personal lives and beliefs, employers are effectively legislating people's behavior, and they're creating an online environment where people can't express their true beliefs, state their unvarnished opinions, be themselves, and that runs contrary to the free, communal ethos of the Web. Employers that exploit the Web to snoop into and judge people's personal lives infringe on everyone's privacy, and their actions verge on discrimination."
"... and their actions verge on discrimination."
No, legal terms have legislated meanings, ad you don't get to make them up as you go along. Googling someone to see if they're a Nazi child molester on the no-fly list is perfectly legal, and as a hiring manager, you can bet I'm going to keep doing it.
Am I going to sacrifice my own career for this cause? No.
While they shouldn't snoop, It isn't going to stop. Don't you snoop out your potential employers?
Just don't let any non-friends see your Facebook.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
If you work for an employer who does these sorts of sleazy things, why are you still employed there and not looking for another job? They obviously don't deserve your services. I know, I know, "the economy sucks"...but my point still stands.
There are different levels of social networking. My direct supervisor knows that I have a facebook and that I post on slashdot. He knows how to find me on facebook, but not on slashdot (he doesn't know my handle).
An employee that can't realize when it is appropriate to share, how much information to share, and when to post anon, is not an employee that I would hire.
... in the hiring decisions. It's a good thing I checked on Slashdot before we ended up hiring Anonymous Coward.
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
While I am sure most people would like for their potential employers to not look at whatever they've posted of their personal lives online, the fact is that most people will start with getting the job, then caring about how their employer views their personal life.
Aside from that, I don't see why employers should care what I did in college, etc. other than what is on my resume and criminal record.
I almost added "and public records" to that, and then realized that that would include anything freely available on the Internet. On the other hand, it does give them a better idea of whether or not the potential employee would fit well in the company, hopefully by thinking of the other employees.
The subject line says it all - if it's public, it isn't snooping.
First, I'm an employer. Welcome to well-rounded individuals. Try writing good things around the web, and perhaps your potential employers will prefer you because of your life. Write crap, and don't be surprised.
But really, are you going to turn down a job offer because the potential employer searched for you? You can "tell" potential employers that you don't want them snooping, but that doesn't give them any negative for doing so -- you'll still accept the job offer.
But you do have boat-loads of control over your own personal freedom and civil liberties. If you don't want others to judge you, you get to be the judge. Start your own business, and run it any way you choose.
But if you're looking to benefit from someone else's proven model, someone else's money, and someone else's risk, then yeah your liberties are going to go unrespected because you're the one throwing them away.
You want liberty, take a look at what it's like to have complete freedom over a business of your own. You'll find that it ain't liberating in the ways that you were hoping.
By the way, it's excellent, and it's amazing, and I love every minute of it -- now I own and operate two and a half businesses because it's so great.
As always, take the risk, stake your life, then you can have it your way. You want to be an employee, and have your employer tell you what to do and even pay your taxes for you (well, most of them anyway), then you'd better believe that employer is going to look into you.
Besides, what's this liberty on the web crap? Public domain is the name of the game.
I should know. Some jackass posted a page on some site ten years ago claiming I was a woman, but me mistook me for my assistant, who had a subdomain within my company site. The goddamn thing googles within a top ten hit of my name. To this day I can't live that down and it gets old explaining the whole story. The girl died four years later, which only expanded the conspiracy. TIRING.
You can tell your interviewer to not troll for information on google but it just will raise red flags. If I were hiring someone and was asked not to search their name, that would be the first thing I'd do after they'd left.
It's up to the individual to be vigilant and not surrender too much personal information.
I also think it depends what kind of search the interviewer is conducting. Just the name is good enough and isn't unethical. But it could quickly cross the line if you geek out and start running boolean searches across multiple search engines, checking against name, email, domain connections, etc, - in other words, turning into a jackass internet detective.
Employers do not care about the web ethos or whether snooping is fair or not, they only care about risk, profit, and loss. Information, regardless of how it is obtained, has bottom line dollar value to marketers, insurance companies, potential employers etc so any information they find on the web, whether favorable or unfavorable, will be used in the hiring decision. That is just reality and no amount of legislation or penalties will stop that or put the web genie back in the bottle. Really, unless you are a public figure then why do you have to put your real name out there along with whatever it is that you say? Use a pseudonym and say what you want, but be careful to never connect it or allow it to be connected to your real name ever. First rule of the web: never provide your real identity when a fake will do.
Free Speech does not mean speech without consequences. If you're willing to say it, you should be willing to suffer the consequences.
and thats why you use an alias online kids.
1. Set your facebook/irc/whatever status to reflect your positive attitude towards your corporate masters.
2. Blog and upload photos on your various social accounts showing how dedicated you are to working over time and how you're doing it for the team dispite not getting paid!
3. ??
4. Profit!
In fact answer all interview questions with: "None of your business" or "I don't see how that's relevant". If pressed act paranoid and ask if they're secretly with the government.
I also recommend walking in and setting the interviewer's desk and chair on fire. After all you need a way to distinguish yourself from other candidates. If you still aren't sure you'vet made an impression you can poke them in the eye just to be absolutely certain.
Well either that or you can just realise that everything on the web is public and that when you're interviewing for a job any employer might not be able to by law hire at their whim, but in practice that's how it works. If you're a professional keep your public information respectable, or use a pseudonym that isn't easily traced back to you. Drunken photos and rants about sexual exploits are not a good career move. In some circumstances participating in a flame war is inadvisable.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
That's why I keep my online handle disassociated from my real name. I even have two separate email accounts. One I give to friends who know I'm a sick fuck, and one I give to employers who know I'm a good reliable person.
Googling my real name doesn't turn up much that's actually associated with me. Last I checked out of all the hits only two were me; one was a tech troubleshooting site and the other a source code archive.
Googling my main handle turns up all the weird porn I'm into. I really really don't want to have any public link for the two.
I also put most really personal things in a private setting on my blog, so only authorized people can view it. I'm sure it could get out eventually, like an authorized person getting a virus that transmits their browser cache or something, but it's Good Enough for me.
It's next to impossible to determine why a potential employee was not hired unless you have a telepath handy. So no matter how many rules and guidelines and whatnot you draft up, you can't stop people doing it. A typical example has been landlord and tenants - many people have a spare apartment and rent that out. Now in aggregate it's fairly obvious to see that there's some discrimination going on, but trying to somehow prove racism from a landlord choosing one tenant just never happens. Only if there's a repeated pattern of some clearly identifiable trait do you have a shot at it. Obviously a hiring manager is hiring a lot of people so you got quantity. You could probably pick up on him never hiring blacks or woman or people he suspects to be muslims or gays. But proving him disqualifying a very non-specific group of people on vastly different reasons he found online? Not happening.
I'm not trying to argue the morality of it, surely they should leave things alone unless it got good reason to impact your work relationship. But 99% of the time you won't even know you've been victim of it, and even if you do 99% of the time you couldn't prove it. A long shot lawsuit against a corporation for not hiring you, while you're presumably busy seeking other jobs and burning through your nest egg already? Please. The closest thing you can hope for is that these companies miss out on a lot of great talent and that the market will even it out a bit. For you personally it's still the far better option to keep your private life private.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
unfortunately we can't afford to make such a demand right now. also unfortunately employers are missing out on a lot of really good employees because of such idiot policies.
you can't come in in your best clothes with your most eager expression and hand your resume to someone you can make an impression on. job seekers are simply not allowed to make any extra effort any more and it's showing in the quality of a lot of employees I see all over the place.
To some extend we all have control of what information we ourselves put on the web about us. The difficult part to control is what other people put on the web about you. That's almost impossible to control.
As an alternative (and this has worked for me previously) is to point your potential (or current) employer to sites that you do have some control over - like LinkedIn, your SF projects etc. These sites also extend your CV to a certain point - if you manage it properly.
Although it might not prevent them from digging deeper, at least they can look at your serious/positive side without you risking them "stumbling" on all the wrong information only.
Need an ISP in South Africa?
Post whatever you'd like, no one reads /.
Well no one important.
But how will you know if a firm passed you over because of something you said online? It'd be impossible to enforce.
Unfortunately, that's not true. It seems to make sense that there is no way that one could know why an employer did something. But certain legislators don't think that way.
For a number of classes of people ( genders, ethnic groups, etc ) the mere act of not having the right number of people of a certain class can be construed as proof that there was discrimination.
So, someday, after you have posted a picture of yourself butt-naked sharing a twelve-pack with your buddies outside the local convent, and you remain unemployed, you will be able to sue. All you will have to show is that X percent of the population does such things, and if a particular employer has significantly less than X percent of such people among their employees, they are therefore guilty of discrimination.
This is where I get to call you a pansy for not standing up for yourself and get away with it because it's on topic.
You don't even need a real tyrant to muzzle you -- you'll settle for an imaginary one.
I wonder what a prospective employer might think of the value of your input after that -- at least one worth working for.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
check our credit, and background. Lets work on not letting them require samples of bodily fluids before we worry about crap that we voluntarily posted in some public space online.
If the only online presence you have is "that picture" of you dong a keg stand "that one time", or your bloging about how many drinks you had each weekend; then you're the one with the problem. The potential employer cared about or liked you enough to actually check to see what information they could find about you. So they did the fastest, cheapest, thing that they could do they searched your name and guess what they found.
Looking for real work or a career is involved and if you want an employer to invest time and money in you, maybe you need to be more prepared then wearing a suit to the interview. Do something proactive about your web presence, don't whine because the only information they could find online about you was that party you went to last week(or every week). In theory you picked references for your resume that would say nice things about you. Why not get a few posts online about that volunteer work you do?
Lets all change our names to John Smith. Yeah, Google that biches.
If an employer doesn't like what they find, I don't want to work for them.
I even have a "best way to google my name" section on my resume:
"Greg Barton" java -indonesia -kayak -mozart -football
i.e. I'm the Greg Barton who's a java programmer, but not the Indonesia expert, olympic kayaker, football coach, or Mozart scholar.
That actually helped me get in the door on my current job. :)
by law to give prospective employees an honest reason why they were rejected. I know they don't like to do this because of potential repercussions, but that is really not as big of an issue as they try to make it.
The explanation can be as simple as "others were more qualified". There is nothing wrong with this explanation. But if the real reason is different ("I liked the look of Potential Secretary X's legs better", then they should not lie about it... although they will anyway. The point is that they should not, and there should be a rule saying that they should not. It distorts the employment market, which is detrimental to commerce and to society in general.
This would solve a lot of problems. It would help prospective employees actually find out what their weak spots are as far as the job market is concerned (rather than just being told "we picked somebody else"), and thus it would help match up companies with the employees they are actually looking for. Note that someone who is job hunting cannot improve their skills to get a good job if they are misled about what skills are in demand.
Also, if there were actually a law about it, if someone felt that they were rejected for unfair reasons ("the other candidate gave me oral sex"), they would actually have some recourse. Hard to prove? Sure. But if they CAN prove it, then at least they could get some compensation... as they should be able to, because by being rejected under false pretenses, they not only lose a potential job but they are not given the information they need to improve themselves so that they can get another.
I am not talking about discrimination here. I am talking about honesty in hiring. Two very different things. Discrimination laws might (in some cases) make it illegal to hire the person who gave you oral sex, if others were more qualified. My proposed law is not about discrimination at all. As long as you told the rejects honestly why they were rejected, then you would have nothing to worry about... except those discrimination laws of course, which you would have to worry about anyway.
Well, the personal is political
Didn't you learn anything from the Democrats in the 70s?
In order to advance your political agenda you need to socially and professionally stigmatize and shun those who think and believe differently from you.
I mean, well, that classic photo wouldn't impress very many employers....
The world is my oyster. That's why it's always in a stew.
They want to find details about me? No problem. To my name you will find blogs praising the developments of my work area, you will find how I spend time teaching in my spare time, you will find how I am the best buddy of important figures in the field. None of it real, all of it faked, but hey, I'm not lying on my resume. Did I ask you to dig for details about me? No. Did you draw the wrong conclusions by thinking it's real? Hell sure.
You want dirt on me? Find a way to connect my online aliases to me. Doubt you'll make it.
Give your audience what they want to hear. It's way more credible than lying on your resume. It's lying with your alleged life. If employers want to be lied to, that's something I can handle...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Does Google look at your search history when you apply for employment there?
How dare people who know my name enter my own personal name into a search engine and then read the results. THE INDIGNATION OF IT!
Honestly, don't post shit you don't want people to know on the internet. There's only one iluvcapra, not the one that applies for jobs and the one that gets wasted in TJ on the weekend and posts it on his myspace page. Why are you putting things you don't want people to know about you on the public. damn. internet?
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
http://www.xkcd.com/137/
I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
you are amateurs.
AND you should stay off FaceBook. A rational person who actually read and understood their terms of use would never sign up.
This happens not only with emplyers, but border guards are now looking at people's activity online to make sure you represent what you say you are, especially if you're a valid foreign worker working in the US. Beware the blog and social networking site if you're on a visa, because what you post can hurt you.
And don't do anything to connect your chat name with your real name.
The funny thing is that in Videodrome they had this quote:
"Of course, 'O'Blivion' was not the name I was born with. That's my television name. Soon, all of us will have special names â" names designed to cause the cathode ray tube to resonate."
Which could be changed to:
"Of course, 'O'Blivion' was not the name I was born with. That's my Internet name. Soon, all of us will have special names â" names designed to cause the inter tube to resonate."
I never use my real name, or official email when blogging or posting on forums. I never ever posted my pic or anything that can identify me online. I don't socialize online. In fact, most of the time I never use the same user id or email. So no one can track me from forum to forum, or from blog to blog. Some emails I create are just for forums and blogs registration, never for anything official.
Basically typing in my real name or any of my aliases will return random (little to none) results not related to me at all!
GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
How about if we are all just totally honest about everything. Why should an employer hire you if you drink, and they don't think a drinker is the best fit for the job? And if everyone is honest about stuff, maybe it will help people have reasonable expectations.
Looking a publicly available information and using it to make hiring decisions is not "snooping". You put that information up there so that people can know about you.
Same here. It hasn't caused me any problems.
Two things, do the best you can to help people, and be open an honest about your beliefs and ideals online, this tends to help people understand you better, if a potential employer negatively judges you for what you did online, its either a) something you can learn from and improve your character, or b) you were better off not being hired by that employer. People make decisions about how they are able to trust you from what you say and do in your personal life, the same thing happens online. If what you do is not getting the results you want, its time to try something else. But if what you do makes you a good person, and adds value to your life and others, but someone doesn't agree with it, then its just their issue and its not part of who you are. You don't want to work for someone who doesn't have some of your most important interests at heart. If you do, you will end up regretting the job, the people you work with and your time will be a waste. You will feel it in your bones. Dont sacrifice your values for collective beliefs, it will only bring you suffering.
When employers ask you about your online activities and you feel you are a good person, don't make excuses, calmly tell them that those activities make you who you are and that you wouldn't change it for the world. at the same time admit to those times when you were wrong or made an ass out of yourself. People value honesty over anything, because everyone knows that we all are just human beings, and we are trying to do the best we can.
If you find that you are having trouble finding work because of something you did online and its their for all to see, its time to switch tactics and find another way to make income and rebuild your reputation, start a small business, or work in some kind of care where you are helping people. What ever happens to you good or bad, there is always a reason for it, and its up to you to make the best of it, try new ways of looking at things.
Most of all don't buy into this belief that you cant make a life for yourself because our society is what it is today, just work around it. There is always a way out.
You know... I've hired a bunch of people, and I've had a bunch of jobs over the years.
I not only look online to see what a potential employee is like, when a new boss comes my way, I research the hell out of them, too.
My personal political views, when found to be in conflict with someone, don't stop me from hiring someone. Indeed, say someone were in porn... I would still hire them if 1) I thought they could do the job and 2) they were deep enough in the org that no one would care (from the press point of view). As a hiring manager outside of work is outside of work, period. But, I can learn about how dedicated a person is that way... think how many top notch developers are in open source of their own desire for excellence, they have an tend to have an online presence and a reputation I can understand that I could never find in a simple interview or calling references. I'm out to hire the best that I can... not the most agreeable that I can: the best will contribute to the bottom line, the agreeable may or may not.
As for managers, damn shooting I want to know who I'm going to work for. And frankly, if someone bases a hiring decision for me based on out of work online activities... I don't want to work for them anyway...
People should stop being so pathetic about some of this stuff and understand their own value... including what they believe express it etc. An employer goes looking for you online... so what... if you have value and they are smart... they won't care... if you don't you should be fired anyway... if they fire a valuable employee... they get the worst of it anyway.
My two bits...
Enjoy!
Steven C. Buttgereit.
How so?
Well, the people posting silly stuff about themselves tend to do so while thinking of a certain context and/or being in a particular state of mind (at home, relaxed, with friends, feeling in the mood for some snarkiness). So ... more often than not, context is half the message (if not more). But all and any context is lost in transmission via the Internet, thus loosing about half the message.
Suppose on the other hand that someone *really* has something to hide. They would take exceptionally good care not to leave tracks that are easily available for a hiring manager with some time on his hands and itchy keyboard fingers. They would even change their name if necessary.
Therefore Internet presence is likely to give false positives while false negatives are all but guaranteed. Whilst there might be some justification for Googling to see if people are "a Nazi child molester on the no-fly list", it's really unlikely that you'll find any such clear-cut evidence and for anything less what you find is hearsay evidence at best. It's not illegal, but neither is Tarot reading to screen applicants. But who cares, right?
Hypocrisy, double standards, and CYA ("Cover Your Backside") tactics are as American as apple pie. And the impact on people trying to land a job is simply not the issue for the ones responsible for hiring someone.
Why not?
Well, how would you like to be the manager responsible for hiring someone who subsequently has an industrial accident (while cold sober), and whose web presence shows him/her writing something snarky about getting soused on the job? Or who is subsequently investigated for having one single marijuana plant at home and who has blogged about the virtues of said weed for relaxation? Or someone who creates racial tensions after being hired while his (somewhat racist) blog is there for the world to see? Or (if you work in catering or manufacture baby food) someone who turns out to be sloppy with hygiene when his Facebook page shows him in a messy kitchen?
Would you feel comfortable when the word "due dilligence" is used around you afterwards? Would you like to hear your ambitious rival mouthing hypocritical guff about "putting the company first", "exercising commonsense when hiring people", or "being net-savvy" afterwards?
No?
Then you'd better use *all* online information you can Google your hands on in 5 minutes, right?
I don't think that managers hiring people really believe that an unfortunate scrap of Facebook material makes someone unsuitable. It's just that they've got a choice to make (if they're hiring at all) and they can't waste all morning on it. Any reason to weed someone out that doesn't reflect poorly on them (better yet, which makes them look "savvy") in the eyes the only audience that counts (other executives) is a help.
Fear of being unreasonably second-guessed is a major justification for a whole host of useless security boondoggles, and I firmly believe that it's also why we see employers Googling for people that send in their resume.
My real name isn't MrKaos.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
"Because it's really, really hard to compartmentalize your life that way."
No, it's not.
Did you even look at my name? Jesus, what a loser.
It's probably against their TOS, so their could at least be civil action.
Also, don't forget defamation laws.
If the web search reveals that someone is gay or their grandfather was black and they were refused employment because of that then it would be discrimination in a legal sense.
It would be hard to prove though if the prospective employer kept quiet about it.
" Googling someone to see if they're a Nazi child molester on the no-fly list is perfectly legal, and as a hiring manager, you can bet I'm going to keep doing it.
But don't Nazi children deserve to be molested?
Strangely enough, i think this can work both ways.
I have worked as a software contractor for a few years, and I have seen some disfunctional companies. I have to agree with your practices, captain HR sqeakyclean, because I do the same to you.
The boss I work for, the CIO, even you, get the same treatment you give me. So, if you are having problems with talent passing on your critical positions, well...you gave us the idea. Cat's out of the bag, good luck.
To Slashdot: Yeah, I am sort of being ironic and cute turning the parent poster's idea around. But, really, do this. I have been called in for contracts where half the company is suing the other half, I have worked with religious right wing bigots, and I almost went to an interview with Infinnium labs before I found out about their craziness. As embarrassing as some photos of a drunken kegger might be for you, your employers probably have a whole lot more to hide than you do.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
"Why would I knowingly hire a mentally ill candidate, regardless of if they express it at work?"
"Deluded by others from birth" is not necessarily the same as being "mentally ill".
The situation that is described by this editorial piece is cause by something that we are all to familiar with: our culture has not yet gotten used to the extraordinary communicative power that the internet has given to people. I can't really believe that anyone would think that legislating some clumsy anti-snooping law would really fix the issue, rather we'll simply have to watch it play out. The real question at hand is which will change first, the manic inclination of people to express themselves or the hand-wringing tendencies of companies disbelieve that their employees actually have lives outside of their work. I'm optimistic on this point in that many stubborn, opinionated internet users are productive members of society, meaning that eventually the job market will be forced to pull themselves out of the past and accept the diversity within their workforce. Does anyone really think that the companies who hire the least opinionated/controversial in society are going to have a competitive edge of innovation? Of course not, progressive thinking in this situation will benefit the companies that are so inclined to apply it. We just have to tough it out through a couple decades of waiting for this antique hiring practice to fade (unfortunately I'll be getting out of grad school during that period and let's just say I certainly haven't held back on my self expression).
Come to the interview with a low-down on file on the CEO. If the interviewer brings up anything on line bring this up. After the interview (before if you have the name of the interviewer) look them up. If they turn you down and you are reasonably sure it is because of something online just say "well Computer Weekly will be interested that you find someone unacceptable because they exposed themselves in an office party when you have pictures of yourself stripped naked and tied up in stockings".
Then tell computer weekly. You may never be employed again but you will have the moral victory.
So - you're for Freedom Of Information! Stop Censorship!
And you're right. Censorship of information, especially on The Net, is an idiotic idea which will never work - typical idea of politicians.
However, it *does* work both ways. ;), other people can and will find out.
If you do stupid things on the net (like writing comments such as this one on a public site
Just imagine you have started a nice business. You're looking for good people. On your desk are ten applications, all of which look good, but you only need two of them. Sniffing them out on the net is a perfect way to get more info about them.
The only way you have to be careful about is finding out the real people. For example, if you google my name, you'll find a german professor for Computer Science. Nice, wish I was a prof, but I'm not ;)
Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
Well, seeing as employers are often richer than employees...
This is just a case of "The one who has the gold makes the rules", and power structures being what they are, bosses will do as they please online unless stopped by someone bigger, and quite frankly, a polite request from an employee not to be snooped is, at least from the POV of the boss:
1) A tacit admission they have something to hide
2) A challenge to their authority to check out their employee as they see fit, and be damned with ethics.
Never mind that search engines can associate you with the wrong things if you have the misfortune of having the wrong name. And never mind that some sleazeball who hates your guts could ruin your life by spamdexing your name along with some raunchy terms (like hentai).
Employers who look through web profiles are just rummaging through garbage heaps and do so at their own risk. Because while an employee may have little control over what else his online persona may be associated with (again, other people with same name), but there is also little control for the employer. However, that doesn't stop them.
So:
Surf defensively, because bosses have hooked a nice source of information, and like it or not, they ain't letting go. One may as well bow to the inevitable, submit to their place on the totem pole of power, and simply suck it up, keep their online presence clean, and cross their fingers that they won't be unlucky enough to be victimized by a search engine blunder that misassociates them.
Because, in the end, it's all about power. Are you going to resist a google search just on principle? Or are you going to be wise and realize that you ultimately have no control over what your boss is going to look for.
And if you're a boss, take your googles with a grain of salt. You're casting a pretty big fat net when you google someone, and no telling what you'll find, or even if what you dig up has any relevance. Remember that people other than your candidate have influence over what you will find.
Well, college is a learning experience, and you've learned something!
Seriously, you wouldn't post your address, phone number, SSN, or bank account details on the web, so why be so dumb as to use your real name?
Anyhow it's an easy fix - just change your name. Some plastic surgery wouldn't hurt (well, it might) as well.
Employers are increasingly trolling the web for information about prospective employees
No they are not - "trolling" means "posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community", which is a lot closer to what kdawson is doing with this.
By basing professional hiring decisions on candidates' personal lives and beliefs, employers are effectively legislating people's behavior, and they're creating an online environment where people can't express their true beliefs, state their unvarnished opinions, be themselves, and that runs contrary to the free, communal ethos of the Web
What a load of tosh. When you put things out in the public space, you have in effect decided that it isn't essential to keep it private; thinking otherwise is a bit like the joke where somebody says "Let's keep this our little secret" on air. The solution is not to make it "illegal" for employers to find what you have yourself made public, but for people to think once or twice before they go public.
Honestly, there's far too much of this "I want to have to fun, but I don't want to suffer the consequences" attitude around. Personally, I think if you are not prepared or able to think ahead in your private life, you shouldn't be given a job with too much responsibility.
By basing professional hiring decisions on candidates
While I am a senior linux engineer, I also contribute to the technical hiring of candidates. "professional hiring decisions on candidates" do not involve how technical someone is but how they fit into the team and organisation. There is no room for a double agent in a work place and those double agents are highly likely to be those who are antagonistic in their forum posts.
Its common practice for employers to check out candidates this way, and understandable too.. An advertising agency I know even stated that they expected any future candidates to have a significant presence online - contributing to blogs and so on in a professional sense.
Many of us use social networking to make professional connections, so we shouldn't be too surprised when employers effectively take us up on our offer.
The issue is a real problem for people looking to change jobs. Many employees are contractually barred from taking part in Linked-in or posting their CV to recruitment sites, and that is unfairly restrictive.
The job market should be a transparent one, where employees feel free to say to their bosses - "naturally I'm in the market for a better offer" - in other words, employees should be free to exercise the same right to choose how they sell their services, as employers are as buyers of those services.
I've been working on a new "ethical recruitment" site that hides employees from their current employers. It works by allowing candidates to select domains that represent the firms they wish to hide from. So if my employer was Microsoft, I'd select microsoft.com, and any other domains user by Microsoft employees for email.
Without a human check, that wouldn't be water tight, so all employer registrations are checked by humans before being activated so that employers don't get to masquerade as dummy companies and troll for information.
Its a brand new site so there's not much there yet, but check out http://www.playfairandnoble.com./
Information in the public domain, is information in the public domain.
If you put it there, then make sure it represents you in a good light, and you won't have a problem.
I'm actually fairly satisfied that if an employer does key my name into Google, they'll see a whole load of stuff that represents me quite well.
The alternative to giving a shit what anyone else thinks is to work for yourself.
Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
Two things:
hany
I use lots of networking sites to managed my network of friends, ex colleagues, etc ...
On those sites I just publish my resume, and a neutral picture.
I do not let people, even my connections, see who my connections are. I just let employers read the number of connections, and read a few endorsements.
Then I post on the Internet pictures, gps trails, comments on blogs, etc ... but never with my own name.
Rather than changing all the HR people, or passing a law to not forbid using my vacation pictures against me, I prefer to adapt to today's reality.
So far it works perfectly.
As an IT manager myself (hence the AC), I strongly believe that people's general behaviour should be considered. If someone is untrustworthy outside work - for instance, if they've agreed to a legally binding contract such as marriage and then broken it by committing adultery - then I would not be able to trust them full stop. People are either trustworthy or they're not. If someone is prepared to screw someone else over outside work, I fail to see why that attitude would change just because it's between 9-5 Mon-Fri.
Isn't this a bit like posting a stupid, childish (imagine the most idiotic thing you can and then some) article in every major newspaper across the country, with photos of yourself half naked, drunk and pissing on the police station - and then going to a job interview and screaming "don't you dare read those articles - that's my personal life"?
One thing you should keep in mind is that although we our government is democratic in America, our workplace is not. And frankly it's at work that we spend the majority of our hours, the majority of our days. You might even say that our workplaces are ruled by a king, or at least a junta, whose powers are very much in the medieval mold.
This game will waste your life. Don't clicky!
Question is who'd like to work permanently for a company which bases its employment decisions on personal opinions or wether they manage to find anything even remotely offending about the prospective employee.
It's a professional relationship, not a love affair, so chances are high you'll run into other problems when working at such a place in the medium to long-term, so why bother signing with them in the first place?
Ever wondered whats wrong with the world? http://www.ishmael.org/
I've told so many people: the world has gotten really small. You could engage in some distasteful act on the sidewalk in front of a potential employer's office, or you could post it on youtube. But if you want nobody to know, choose not to. Just because you can, doesn't always mean you should. I, for one, hope it keeps the riff-raff down in the workplace, and helps HR hire people who demonstrate they have sound judgement. That's a quality that tends to appear during the workday, if you have any, as well into your after-hours life.
Now HR people can have another reason to justify their existence AND justify wasting time on facebook! I suppose it's better than playing pretend psychologist or playing Wonder Woman with the polygraph lariat of truth. Remember kids, it's nothing personal when you get rejected, it's just the modern equivalent of chicken gizzards look wrong.
Suppose I Google the name of my prospective employer to find out if he or she is an irresponsible dickhead who likes to post pictures of himself drunk online? Should I be allowed to do that, or not? If I can, why can't they?
Here's a tip: keep stuff that you want to be private, private. Don't put things on the Internet that don't reflect well on you. Or, alternatively, go right ahead and be prepared to take the consequences.
How about some personal responsibility for once?
I piss off bigots.
Do your own snooping on company management. Find out what the executive committee does on and off hours. Any of them been troubled by financial scandal, large or small? Certainly, there are plenty of executives who have been caught up in some money game along the way somewhere, and one might think that the current economic climate might put people off working for the company if they were fully aware of the facts.
Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
What's the difference between not hiring a scumbag that I knew before an interview and not hiring a guy that I found out was a scumbag by doing research on him?
Nothing.
"employers are effectively legislating people's behavior, and they're creating an online environment where people can't express their true beliefs"
People will be who they are regardless of whether they post online or chat on the phone or IM someone, etc. I, for one, would not like to work next to someone who is a far left/right wing nut.
Google found me through the Internet. I don't believe I was made to sign an NDA about that email, so I can say that much.
I guess they found some of my old rants on the kernel mailing list, when I was too young to know better. (And yes, it was with this email address.) Nothing came of it, but it was still a pleasant surprise.
I can't really find a good thread to attach this to, but it has to be said -- this isn't just about "turning the tables" and scoping out management. If you're going to screen out negative candidates, also screen for positive ones.
At least, some of the things I've said on Slashdot have been moderated insightful, interesting, and informative. Maybe they actually are. I'm really not sure what kind of dirt you could dig up on me (and David is a common enough name), but I intend to counteract that not by hiding, but by putting out more good stuff.
If the highest ranked page on a Google search of me is my Github account, I'm doing something right.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
First, I'm an employer. Welcome to well-rounded individuals. Try writing good things around the web, and perhaps your potential employers will prefer you because of your life. Write crap, and don't be surprised.
But really, are you going to turn down a job offer because the potential employer searched for you?
I definitely won't turn the offer down, assuming I haven't concluded you are a crook in which case I'l definitely will turn your offer down (snooping works both ways and it's a bit harder to hide your embarrassing past as an employer). Whether you snoop me or not doesn't really matter. You can snoop my real online identity all you want and not discover a thing about my more controversial opinions or actions because I have carefully crafted my real online identity to reflect nothing any perspective corporate masters such as yourself will find offensive. Snooping me or most other perspective employees will usually show you nothing other than just such a carefully cultivated facade. If it doesn't the perspective employee in queston is dumber than a sack of straw... if that is even possible. Like most other people I voice any opinions that might be offensive to my employer under a pseudonym on the internet. Some of these pseudonyms can probably be traced back to me if the employer puts in a disproportionate amount of work but most employers are are content with a google search and the gossip network. Things I will hide behind a pseudonym includes my opinion of an employer in general and specifically their hiring and firing practices and the draconian and borderline fascist clauses they put in employment contracts. Other things worth hiding include any opinions I have that might smell of left wing politics, not to mention criminal beliefs like environmentalism, the fact that I consider creationism to be a giant joke or the fact that I consider religion to be the greatest confidence scam of all time, the list goes on.... and on..... and on......
sue the pants off of anyone who posts information about them online and actively investigate to determine the identities of anyone posting online about them that turns up in a Google search.
Unlike us, they have deep pockets and legal departments.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Who would have thought?
I had this happen to me several times, employers or possible employers attempting to view me on Facebook. I actually had to change my public settings to private. They attempted to reprimand me because on a friday I called in sick to go to a concert (they wouldn't give a vacation day) and found out because of photos and comments on Facebook.
...my boss is s dick!
So is it OK if I take pictures of your wife's underthings? They ARE in public view..!
This is probably a problem in jobs where people want interchangeable droids. But the sort of jobs wanted by the sort of people who read /. want people with originality and flexibility. And if you are original and flexible, you are probably going to have an original and flexible private life. So if an employer is going to get upset about the somewhat odd (but legal) things you may get up to at home, they are probably so strait-laced that you don't want to work for them, and they are probably not going to succeed in the long term. (If you do illegal things AND post them to the Net, you are too stupid to deserve the job.)
Certainly a net search on my name reveals a lot about me - very boring, mostly, but accurate. But if any employer objects to any of the trail I have left, I probably don't want to work for them anyway. Of course, when the economy crumbles to the point I am reduced to burger flipping, I may change my mind.
Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
Really, if you're worried about what potential employers might think of you, you could just try not acting like a dick.
Or you could just use a made-up name. Do as I say or do as I do. Take your pick.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
There is one really simple reason why I check the on line persona's of all my potential employees. And that is because people ALWAYS bring their personal life to work and who someone is has more impact on me as an employer than what their skills were. So if someone has a dysfunctional "private" life they will bring that to work. That costs me money and negatively affects others in the workplace
Also surprise surprise you are not machines! If you are a moron outside of work you WILL be a moron inside of work. If I could hire you for your skills and you brought NOTHING else to the office there would be absolutely no reason for me to do more research on you. However you don't, you bring attitudes, pre conceptions, baggage from previous employers, dreams, aspirations, wants, desires, etc etc etc. These are 99% of the time MORE IMPORTANT than the skill set you bring!
I need someone with development skills. Easy I can find lots and lots of people with that skill. However that's only a small part of what anyone looks for in an employee.
I need someone with development skills, drive, an ambition to take ownership of a project and deliver it, the ability to work with others and communicate well, someone who wants a long term role, someone who will fit with the office culture, etc etc etc.
When I offer you a job I'm not just paying you to deliver a service. I am inviting you to become part of my family. I am attaching my name and reputation to the work that you do and the interactions you have with others. I am asking you to enter into a serious relationship with me. And I am having to do this based on something that is almost certainly inflated, inaccurate and self-serving (your CV, by its very nature its a sales document!) and a 2 hour meeting. In some cases I might throw in a psychometric or maybe a couple more interviews but that's it!
Can you seriously blame me for wanting to find out as much as I possibly can about you before we walk down the aisle? And because I live in a country where employment law favours the employee so once you are in the family its an awful lot easier for you to leave me then it is for me to leave you. And that doesn't take into consideration the damage you could do to the rest of my family.
If not, it is irrelevant.
Chained to a Donkey at your stag do? Doesn't stop you being a good worker.
Hate drug laws? Only important if you're applying for a position in the DEA.
Into dogging? So? You're not going to hump the secretary in the stairwell (well, rumour has it this happened with the CEO one christmas. He still gets hired...).
etc
What is this guy smoking? These are the same guys we all complain about not having a clue.
Why would an employer fail to check up on you if they're investing in hiring you?
If you're stupid enough to leave evidence of yourself in public view you deserve to get the clue bat.
-- Programming with boost is like building a house with lego. It's a cool but I wouldn't want to live in it
You bet we should tell perspective employers to STFU about what we do off-hours; however, they will also be the first to tell you that how you act away from the office reflects on them since it will become known for whom you are employed. By taking a stand in this manner, you effectively tell them "Don't hire me, I like to express myself." Also, keep in mind there are "right to work" states, that allow for hiring and firing for no reason whatsoever.
So, if you're going to post on Slashdot, Digg, or wherever, use a name that isn't who you are. Do you think my mother named me "Fudgefactor7?" Get real.
Because liberals are much more willing to sue for discrimination, I have worked with some very, very left-wing people. However, conservatives and libertarians often have to be very careful because it is easy for a corporation to follow through on accusations that the mere acceptance of conservative or libertarian beliefs is prima facie evidence of bigotry and other corporate no-nos. I know I would be marginalized or fired for the stuff that I write on my blog, which is why I put my real name only on the Movable Type plugins that I write (which are also not indexed by Google).
Anyone can post stuff with my name in it. It would be easy to pollute the web with crap information, pictures etc to destroy your reputation. I can put a picture of some drunk on Facebook and label it with your name. The whole thing could get pretty nasty....
...richie - It is a good day to code.
This is individual megalomania coming home to roost. People who ever planned on having jobs should have considered this situation before putting their lives online as if others need to see them in the first place. It is odd that people so wilfully shun personal privacy.
Toss up a couple fake sites that has you volunteering at the church (with photos), helping old ladies cross the road, etc.
legal terms have legislated meanings, ad you don't get to make them up as you go along.
Words have given meanings, and you don't get to redefine them as you go along. I don't see it being specified that these actions are illegal discrimination. Discrimination is a word in the dictionary, that is not simply a legal term.
You are confusing the fact that laws usually only concern themselves with particular classes of discrimination (e.g., based on race etc), but this has nothing to do with the definition of the word itself.
Is it discrimination? Well, it depends on your point of view. I presume he wasn't referring to simply Googling, but using that information to turn someone down, for a reason that wasn't related to their individual merit for the job. That would be discrimination by the dictionary definition, even though it's legal.
you know people could always... oh I don't know... NOT USE THEIR REAL NAME.
Pen names have always been a legitimate way to conceal ones identity.
I've been using one for over 10 years now, so long that I doubt there is almost anything on the net (aside from some purchases) in my real name.
I am not a layer, but my guess it that it verges on illegal. Once, my mother took a business course and learned what was legal for a Hiring Manager to ask for on an application. It was very limited information and the reason was to help prevent discrimination.
The idea of EEOC is that people should be hired on their merits and abilities. Now I understand background checks for criminal activity, but at what point will someone be forgiven? If you did the Time for a crime, how long will it be before you can become an active member of society and begin to earn respect back? Isn't that what jail was ment for, to re-integrate people back into society? As for illegal activiy, if you're willing to put it on the web, knowing it's illegal, and you haven't been charged, are you still innocent? Yes. Innocent until proven guilty. It's a tough pill to swallow, but there are circumstances behind everything that people do or have done and will do.
It is a hiring manager's job to find qualified people who work well in their company. Outside of that, they should not go beyond what legal guidelines have been set in place. People mess up, plain and simple, almost everyone has at some point in their existance. Who has the right to judge you for it and for how long?
I'm not saying I'm right in my opinion, and I don't support criminal activity. But if I'm at some goofy party and share that memory with friends and I get drunk and don't do anything illegal, and someone posts stuff about it with my name, I should not be judged for that.
For the record, I avoid posting under my real identity all the time.
Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
You have the right to say pretty much what you want without the government interfering. But, that doesn't mean there will not be repercussions of said speech.
It is not snooping to see what you have said in public. Yes, the internet is a public place and if you have a tendency to say and do things that would be embarrassing or disconcerting to a prospective employer, don't be surprised when the prospective employer search public information and decides you are not what he wants for an employee.
Stop being a dumb-ass and keep your private life private and quit flaunting your stupidity in public if you don't want it held against you.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
Why do you suggest discrimination is only a legal term? Discrimination is something that happens, whether it is legal or not. I may discriminate against someone based on their clothes or the type of car they drive or the colour of their shoes: it's still discrimination. If anyone is trying to make up the meaning of the word, it's you saying it only applies in a legal sense.
"I was raised by a cup of coffee" -Homsar
Don't use your real name.
Don't post embarrassing text or photos.
Police the net for others posting anything about you and get them to remove it, unless it is true.
If someone catches you doing or saying something stupid, then posts it online, well, that's too bad.
Think before you do anything embarrassing. Assume it will be posted.
Hardly anyone will do to much research to link even a slight difference in name to you. For example, I use my initials publicly, but my name with friends. People who call me "JD" think that's the preferred name - it isn't.
Really, who wants to work for close minded yes men?
Unfortunately, the workplace is a place where conformity rules. Managers do *not* want people with opinions - despite what they say. They want staff that make them look good, and give them no work.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
One can make life easier for an employer by providing in a cover letter links to a good stuff. For example, participating in a sport competition usually leads to the name appearing in the web list with results. Participating, say, in a photography exhibition provides a link to the web version of this exhibition. The same about conferences, seminars, etc.
Or a link to the page with all one's training certificates on own website (if this link is obscure no one except the intended audience will see them).
I would say not a fake stuff, but take care that there is real serious good stuff on Internet and have the links ready.
Not all human beings are leaders, or have a dominant disposition and tenacity necessary to create and run their own business. Most people, in fact, are not capable of doing that - which is a function of evolution. Without conformity, there's no group (and power of the group). Too many leaders, there's no group. No leaders, and there's no direction.
So, from an ethical point of view, what are you asking people to conform to? This is very important, because it's been shown time and again, in history, and the laboratory, that *all* people are prone to "do as i say, and not as I do" morality.
Conformity in the workplace reaches staid proportions. Censoring people for having opinions *outside* the workplace is a recipe for "thought-crime", and almost certain moral hypocrisy
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
It's not only what we post about ourselves, but what others post about us that gets online and is publicly available.
Consequently, career experts advise job seekers to not post any photos, opinions or information on blogs and social networking websites (like Slashdot) that a potential employer might find remotely off-putting. Instead of cautioning job seekers to censor their activity online, we job seekers and defenders of our civil liberties should tell employers to stop snooping and to stop judging our behavior outside of work, writes CIO.com Senior Online Editor Meridith Levinson.
I'm going to have to go with option three here:
Find an employer who values independent thinkers, and who will find your analysis of economic issues to be a sign of an active, critical mind. That way, you increase your chance of getting a job, and of not working for a boss who is looking for a mindless cog.
And if all your online posting is about boobs, well, guess what, you're probably not the right guy for that boss to hire. Career experts and CIO magazine seem to betray one helluva bias here - that people are juvenile idiots, who should get jobs despite their vapid nature. That is ridiculous.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
My big concern is who verifies this stuff? If my Name is Jim Smith how do they know if what they are looking at online is truly my information...and what is to say that some one has not intentionally gone and performed a smear campaign of my good name. I have seen plenty of information online that looks like it was posted by jilted lovers...the funny thing is people often times believe the disinformation.
I think if you put it out there publicly to be found and it costs you a job offer, then the company probably wasn't a good fit for you anyway.
Yeah, go into a job interview and tell the person interested in paying YOU how to do their job. That's sure to get you the position. Please, people, keep this crap up so I can keep landing jobs on my first interview.
It's as inconsistent as genetics. Dominance isn't an act of opening one's mouth - it's interpersonal.
There's a whole *science* of how people work, that's developed far beyond arm-chair philosophising. You can't use wishful thinking to change the human condition.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Do what I do, don't use your name for anything on the internet and have a separate email address for professional matters. It's not hard to simply use your screen name and make sure potential employers never find out what it is.
With the utter lack of ethics in business now, employers confuse loose morals with not being trustworthy.
These same people checking up on you are most likely guilty of some breach of ethics and/or morals. They're human.
and who the fuck are they to judge? If you want to post photos of you passed out drunk on your myspace page, that's your choice.
If you pass out drunk at work then and only then can they start to worry about your competence as an employee.
Their behavior IS unethical.
They're using their grammar skills there.
The author of this article takes the stance that what you do outside of work is relevant to your on the job performance...http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/cs/2009/01/the_interview_question_you_sho.html
By basing professional hiring decisions on candidates' personal lives and beliefs, employers are effectively legislating people's behavior
Yeah, that's not what 'legislating' means.
Web. Employers that exploit the Web to snoop into and judge people's personal lives infringe on everyone's privacy,
Yeah, that's not what 'infringe' means.
and their actions verge on discrimination.
Yeah, that's not what 'discrimination' means.
We can't debate the issue if we do not agree on the terminology, and there's no reason not to be using the generally-accepted legal meanings of these terms.
My opinion is that if a place won't hire me over petty personal stuff, I don't need to work for them that badly. I spent my childhood and so far most of my youth studying so I'd be worth hiring, you can be sure I'm going to enjoy the benefits now.
For my current job I rolled up to the interview in a beat up old track car (I've heard it's a common practice in North America to rent a shiny new car just to drive to an interview) with shaggy hair. I was shaved, dressed nicely and otherwise well-groomed though. I gave straight honest answers to everything. I sent my resume from my personal email address - my slashdot username at gmail. That alone is enough for some people to scoff at, one previous place that interviewed me commented on it (although the work environment there seemed far too uptight for my liking). A search for my username would have turned up my Slashdot posts, me shootin' the shit in various forums, right down to the lolcats and dirty humor, my hobbies, along with a few positive things like me giving tech advice etc. Searching for my real name would turn up little or nothing. I don't have a Facebook page or anything like that, I value my privacy more than that.
So I let them have that, and they hired me. It's been a pretty good fit so far. Let's say I got a job at the place that scoffed at my username - would I want to work at a place so uptight if I had a choice?
So on the topic, I don't think employers should disqualify a potentially good worker on personal grounds - while totally within their rights, it's just wrong.
"Well Mr. Smith looks perfect on paper, he's got a clean criminal record and good references, but I've found photos of him "cosplaying" here - my informal research indicates this is a common pasttime for sexual deviants - and you can see he enjoys violent videogames here, he shows interest in a hacker forum here, and he jokingly doctors this photo of a fat woman on the back of a motorcycle here. I don't think we want this type in our company."
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Let's say I'm the best recent-college-graduate candidate since sliced bread. I come with glowing reviews.
However, someone with the same name as me lives in the same town and shares some common hobbies. But he's on the no-fly list and and is out on bail on charges of child molestation. Let's say he's innocent too, we all know there are errors on the no-fly list and let's say he's in a messy divorce and the child abuse charges will fall apart in a few weeks.
You get my resume. It looks good. But you do your research and you see that John Smith from Smalltown who likes to bowl is on the no-fly list and is out on bail for child molestation. What do you do?
Let's say you trash my resume, and your competitor picks me up. Within a couple of years I'm speaking at a trade show and you are wondering in the back of your mind if I took the train or drove.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
While I certainly don't know all the details of this incident, can you blame your employer for reprimanding you? You called in sick to go to a concert and then you got caught.
If you told your child to mow the lawn and they claimed they couldn't because they were sick and then sneaked out to play with a friend, what would you have done?
All I can think of when I read this article is this most excellent xkcd strip http://xkcd.com/137/
The whole Facebook terms of service furore was so last week! Just because you doesn't want to be on Facebook doesn't mean everyone else should stay off.
Maybe it's time to buy a tinfoil hat, close your bank accounts and never leave the house.
Also probably stay out of the front room in case the Google Street View car comes driving by.
... as what other people attribute to me online.
It's illegal to discriminate against members of certain protected classes but only with respect to that class.
Naked beer-drinking isn't a protected class.
Even if it was, the employer would be off the hook unless:
OR
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I see by a Google Search you've been dead since 1631, and we don't hire your kind here. By your kind of course I mean zombies.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
This is why I do not post any information about myself online and if I do it is never with my real name. I am truly grateful my name pulls up no results in google.
I caught my boss doing that once and I asked her why. She replied "well I heard that all hiring managers do that now" I told her thats a poor excuse and that we should not do it. Yes I told my boss that because I am not a coward like half the people that post here.
If your resume was looked at: "We hired another candidate"
If your resume is among the BIGNUM% that never get looked at: Sorry, our search algorithm didn't pick yours from the pile.
Our search algorithm consists of one or more of the following depending on our mood:
1) Only mailed in resumes on vellum paper with a real stamp and handwritten address accepted
2) first come first served
3) having juicy search terms
4) Rank by least legible
5) Random pick by CEO's 6 year old daughter
6) Negative karma on Slashdot required
7) Referrals from CowboyNeal
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Anything prohibited by US unemployment laws. Some HR depts are now telling their people not to do this. A court case may decide this.
Just set up your own business and be your own boss. Problem solved.
Split personality's on the internet really show their benefit here. You keep two identity's on the internet, and they should never reference each other. Do your work and resume worthy activity under one identity, while expressing your opinion and having your *playtime* under the second.
You can let your close friends know the link between the two, but make the connection offline. This way, you only allow the snooping guy to see what you want him to, and you increase your chances of getting that paycheck that is becoming more elusive lately.
Treat it like the separation between work and home, and if you don't have that separation, sucks to be you.
I'm reminded of the line from the movie Barbershop where Eddie says, "If you can't speak your mind in the barbershop, then where can you speak it?" Slashdot has always been a place where I thought I could speak my mind without incurring penalties. So what would a potential employer learn about me here? They would find that my politics is more liberal than some employers would like. They'd find out that I'm an unabashedly pro-union, pro-employee free choice act, anti-religion, anti-abortion, pro-open source, pro-socialized health care, anti-illegal-immigration, pro-legalize marijuana, pro-gay marriage, pro-second amendment, pro-prosecute Bush and Cheney advocate. I'll put it all right here in one place so they don't have to look further. If you can't have me work for you because I hold any of these positions, then you don't want me to work for you.
Discrimination on the basis of what? That you are a druggie, a drunk, or just a dick? I don't think those are protected statuses.
you should read everything on the internet as if it had "but I'm probably talking out of my ass" appended to it.
If they fail to hire the best person for the job because their decision is based on irrelevant criteria, then they're not going to be as profitable as they could have been. The employee will work for someone else.
Employment is a mutually beneficial arrangement. The employer and his competitors have plenty to gain by not being blind fools. Whoever is less foolish, will win.
Employers are increasingly trolling the web for information about prospective employees
Trolling; a method of fishing using hooks and bait.
Trawling; a method of fishing using a wide net dragged through the water.
Which would you say best functions as a metaphor for searching through a large number of websites? And which functions as a description for placing inflammatory material on the internet, hoping to catch a response?
So, unless the employers here are posting in internet forums invitations for applicants to make idiots of themselves, they are trawling.
Geez, that alone should disqualify them from any job that doesn't involve flipping burgers.
If you make a career off of porn and your mom understands this, that's fine. But if you're going to put a picture on your Cryspace page that has you giving oral sex to somebody, or talk about your deranged beliefs that you're really some anime character that's been killed and reincarnated, well, as fascinating as some people would find this, you've just engaged in a nice friendly career limiting move. The former shows you as irresponsible, the latter shows you as creepy.
This sig no verb.
Isn't the easiest solution to avoid posting things that might bite you in the ass later. Put the face forward all the time that you'd want to have forward if you were going for a SSBI. Or, in the words of one of my mentors, "Don't go stupid places with stupid people and do stupid things."
"Should Job Seekers Tell Employers To Quit Snooping?"
Early in the interview. Bring it up often. And make sure to maintain extended eye contact to emphasize your point.
Stop using your real name on the web! Hint: I am NOT ex-governor of Washington State Gary Locke! I have a relatively uncommon name, but there are at least 6 other people in the US with the same exact name -- why should I be held responsible for anything embarrassing these other people do?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Rant... If you participate in social networking sites and the worst time vampire twitter, you waive your rights to any privacy! This article or claim is ridiculous. You dont want people to know a particular aspect of your life, then why are you posting it on a website? Nobody cares what you're doing. Posting your activities or life online is a poor way of alleviating the feelings of anomie. Real social interaction, real social networking is the only way to do that.
And I am sure someone will mention the point of disinformation relating to this. Employers beware. I could make myself look really good online when in fact it may be all bullcrap.
people on ludes should not drive
....and they are free not to hire you.
In the real world, this is going to happen no matter how many laws are written to prevent it.
People still do not get hired for being old, or a little too dark-skinned, or female no matter how many laws you pass. Only the most draconian, dictatorial of laws would prevent that. It's a reality you learn to live with unless you want bureaucrats telling you who you can hire/work for.
So, be careful out there. Don't post anything that you don't want to be known by 6 billion people.
And please don't tell me that you use "Facebook Privacy" to protect your drunken pictures or comments.
Facebook security ends at Facebook's borders. Once its on one of your 2000 "friends'" computer screens, that hugely funny rant about your boss can be cut and pasted into anything and posted anywhere.
HR people look for black and white noise. Hide the black, embellish / invent the white. Instead of forbidding HP snoops to look at you online, turn the table, invent, lie about good things online. The goal is to make online searches as unreliable as possible, so the jerks stop using google as a lazy crutch to make hiring decisions. (Poison the well, they will stop going to it.)
Something I did for the last 3 years - intentionally lied and impersonated myself as a specialist in professional online forums.
I specifically maintained 4+ online nicknames targeted to create an impression of active, positive, knowledgeable professional and sprinkle good tactful humor on top.
Every time I negotiate another contract I present only the right online handle to the interviewer. I give linux-lover to open source friendly IT shops. I give skilled .Net / Web Services persona to purist MS shops.
I hide completely my vacation / family / personal pictures in non-public sharing sites under generic log in handles.
I strongly encourage everyone to act similarly. We need to place doubt in lazy HR person's head. The lazy top has to come to realization that next time they end up with a squicky clean drone instead of a real, colorful person, they are possibly letting a scammer in and are doing a disservice to the company.
Poison the well!
Whoever tagged this with "goodluckwiththat" is wise.
Bosses will do as they damn please no matter what laws we pass, so why bother trying?
Have you ever applied for a job, been rejected, and called back to politely ask for any feedback they'd be comfortable sharing, that would help you in your job search?
I used to do that (now I own the company, so there isn't much point), and I received a ton of valuable feedback. I do not exaggerate when I assert that my best ever job interview was one in which I was not hired. The interviewer gave me invaluable feedback that I used for years of successful interviewing.
Try it sometime. I think you'll find that employers are way more candid than you'd expect. I'm pretty candid with folks who bother to ask.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
Boy, I'll tell you what, after reading some of the posts here, there is no way in hell I'm ever gonna hire this "Anonymous Coward" person...
Rebuttal: it's not like there's only one division of the public and private. Perhaps you enter a strip club, and you do things that are "public" within that domain - i.e. everyone in the strip club can see them. However, maybe you go back and give a special dance, so you're doing something more exclusively private within an already private domain.
My point is that the entire 'Public-Private' argument is folly because there are no universal nor concrete definitions of 'public' and 'private.' And thus I'm sick of people using the "well, you shouldn't have done it in public" argument. We're talking about issues fundamental to human psychological well-being, and it's not constructive to just play off people's fears like they're overreacting.
So, what do you do if some child rapist shares your name?
I believe it to be bad advice to avoid pictures and other identification online. Because there is that prolific and verbose idiot that happens to share your name. If all that can be found is that guy, then they may think he is you.
I am always amazed at what you kids say and do our your social network sites.
BTW: Get off my lawn.
As the ACLU has pointed out, companies that do random drug testing of employees actually have lower productivity than those that don't.
Anecdotally, I knew an ISP that was taken over by another larger company in the 90s. The new owners' policy of mandatory drug testing was instituted, and practically all the experienced sysadmins left for jobs where they wouldn't have to pee in a cup with someone watching. The downtime became ludicrous, and the company lost thousands of customers.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
There is a well-defined class of personal issues you can't discriminate based on. The rest is fair game (at least in the US), both for web searches and for question.
I can ask you if you smoke pot. I can not hire you because you have a photo of yourself smoking pot on your MySpace page. I can also not hire because you are a virulent anti-drug crusader and don't like that because I smoke pot.
If its public data. Embarrassed by your life? Don't publish it.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
My two cents about the idea is, employers have been digging the dirt on their employees since before the Net age, and they're going to keep doing it right up until it bites them in the ass. It was harder back when to dig up dirt because it was hard to get to without spending lots of time and money, but now you can pay some guy (or if you're somewhat good with computers do it yourself) to browse a few sites, look through a few search engines, and they have your whole life story, permission or not. No point in arguing about it because they're going to keep doing it, even if they do get a suit that goes through, because they won't care.
Or just don't put garbage about yourself online.. How about that instead?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I have said to an interviewer, "That is none of your business", and ultimately gotten the job.
You are even stupider if you get fired for posting a pic of yourself grabbing your boss's wife's ass.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
you are googling to see if they are Democrat or Republican? Christian, Muslim, Jew or Atheist? A Nazi child molester would be found on the background check, your argument appears to be without merit and likely to be covering illegal and unethical practices.
I'm an employer / capitalist oppressor now, and yes, I look up applicants on the web. Beats having them come in for job interviews if it's obvious they're not what I'm looking for. Frankly, I don't care what sort of stupid stuff someone does on their own time, I'm just interested in what kind of a person they are. And the last person I interviewed had this posted on MySpace:
http://xkcd.com/137/
That was enough to convince me that she would be a good fit here. I interviewed her and she was the first to be offered the job. Granted, her resume alone would probably have been enough to get her an interview (out of about 70 submitted, more than half were total garbage) but her online presence is what got her on the short list.
I'd tell them to keep on snooping, right up until they've eliminated every single potential hire on the planet.
The way I see it is simple: a career is not a one-way relationship. There's a lot more to it than a steady paycheque. For one, I value respect much higher than pay. If someone makes big-money hiring decisions based on drunken Facebook pics, they clearly don't respect my right to have a real life outside of their cubicle reality. Even if they did hire me, they would hate me and I would hate them... fire and water, cat and dog, rebel and piece-of-shit-conformist-swine. I don't want to work in that kind of hostile environment.
I do believe in hiring people with not only the right skills, but the right personality for your company. Contrary to media belief, there are quite a few successful businesses out there that don't have "casual fridays" or "opportunity-targeted coaching, because they're not run by deranged abusive control-freaks. Does my choice of t-shirt slogan have any impact on my ability to mash letters on a keyboard ? Does the fact that I drink tequila instead of boxed wine demonstrate a complete lack of critical thought and judgement ?
If someone can google me and immediately conclude we have irreconcilable differences, that makes me happy because they didn't waste any of my time. I'd rather people know I'm a libertarian asshole, than have them find out the hard way after they've pissed me off once too many.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
Rots o ruck.
..the better. I will soon be starting a company and hiring people, and I'll pick up all the technically brilliant workers who were rejected by these companies for such petty reasons.
Anything that harms my competition's business is good news to me!
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
The employee's privacy has nothing to do with it. Let's say they find drugs in your employee's desk. Maybe they get the idea that he or she has been dealing drugs from the office. Or any number of other scenarios... by allowing them to find the drugs you just caused no end of problems for your company. Oh, yes, there is potential liability: everything from conspiracy before or after the fact to having your entire office building torn apart, and each and every employee (including manager and CEO) having to go to court.
Of course the employee would have no job after that. What about you? If I were your boss I would fire your ass for doing something so stupid.
There is principle too, of course, but there are some very practical reasons.
Why does it seem like I am the only one who hasn't been suckered into "the fingernet". It was ten years ago my father and I would talk about the dangers of the transparent software connections of the future. Precisely why I could never imagine divulging any information about myself except on my own business website.
Why does anyone think you can stop a human from searching online and judging you. Sorry to be the bearer of truth and bad news but if you got suckered into wasting your time divulging yourself on "the fingernet" then don't be surprised if people don't like you and don't take the time to understand you. This is human nature, not a side-effect of the fingernet, you have to overcome human nature to be "further" than others and I rarely see it anymore.
I never post anywhere, but I had to post this, it just crawled right out of me. The new world is here and I'm still living the state-of-mind of the 90's and loving it and you can do it too.
If you would only say/do it with close friends then don't disclose it on the internet, who cares who you think your friends are many, many miles away. This is YOUR life we're talking about.
"legal terms" only exists within the courts!
Outside those buildings and thousands of miles of uselessly complicated wordings, what has been used for thousands of years is simply called "language", whose meaning is not decided by arbitrary papers, but is constantly LIVING AND EVOLVING, in exactly the same way that ancien Latin, Minoean, Celt and Saxon eventually turned into Italian, Spanish, French, Irish, German, English and American ...
Are you really BRAIN-DEAD enough that you seriously believe that ONLY the "nazi child molester" will be forced out of jobs using that system ?
- What if you're a cat-person while HR's employing only dog-ones ?
- What about political activists for the "wrong" side ?
- What if the "nazi child molester" is IN CHARGE of recruitment ?
- What about human rights campaigners, given the US's CIA track record (proudly sponsoring dictatorships, genocides, terrorists and political murders at least since the 1940s, and up to 2009 in the wars they staged) ?
See the clear pattern for stupidity, madness or plain evil emerging ? Or have you already seen it and wish for it to happen, so you'll never employ any of Ron Paul supporters ?
I, for one, pray that it is only your vast ignorance talking here ... - A.Coward
I don't have a Facebook account.
You see? It is that simple.
There is no chance in hell that a prospective employer could link my real name to any of my mussings in the net.
That is what nicknames are for, use them wisely.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.