Employer Demands Facebook Login From Job Applicants

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Employer Demands Facebook Login From Job Applicants

Posted by Soulskill on Saturday February 19, 2011 @06:12AM from the poking-and-prodding dept.

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Alex Madrigal reports in the Atlantic that the ACLU has taken up the case of Maryland corrections officer Robert Collins, who was required to provide his Facebook login and password to the Maryland Division of Corrections during a recertification interview so the interviewer could log on to his account and read not only his postings, but those of his family and friends too. 'We live in a time when national security is the highest priority, but it must be delicately balanced with personal privacy,' says Collins. 'My fellow officers and I should not have to allow the government to view our personal Facebook posts and those of our friends, just to keep our jobs.' The ACLU of Maryland has sent a letter to Public Safety Secretary Gary Maynard (PDF) concerning the Division of Correction's blanket requirement that applicants for employment with the division, as well as current employees undergoing recertification, provide the government with their social media account usernames and personal passwords for use in employee background checks. After three weeks the ACLU has received no response."

43 of 434 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

This is why I don't use facebook by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-19 06:16 · Score: 5, Funny

and it's not just because I don't have any friends
1. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-19 07:25 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I think it's plainly obvious that you're not actually responsible for hiring anyone.
2. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by MoonBuggy · 2011-02-19 07:27 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  If you're going to take nothing more than the fact that I use a particular communication tool as a reason to write me off as irresponsible, I feel fully justified in declaring you as a pompous, superior, neo-luddite based on nothing more than that single Slashdot post.
  Some of my data doesn't need to be private; I'd be as happy to write "Does anyone want to go to the pub tonight?" in giant red letters on the side of a building as I am to place it on Facebook, if that happened to be the most convenient way to get the message to a large group of my friends. Some of my data does need to be private; that data doesn't go on Facebook at all.
3. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by AliasMarlowe · 2011-02-19 07:44 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  So I ask for a Facebook login, but I never look, the only correct answer is 'i don't have one'
  But what if the answer is "I made a load of them, all with my correct name, and abandoned each leaving it empty"?
  
  That's what I did a couple of years ago, as I have an unusual (and fairly memorable) name. It gives me deniability if some sleaze bag (or another person with the same unusual name) associates a facebook stinkbomb with that name. Mind you, I'd probably just say I don't have a facebook account, anyway, as I've forgotten the passwords and throwaway email addresses that were used to create those accounts. But I suppose facebook still counts them among their $hugenumber of users.
  
  --
  Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
4. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by Mistlefoot · 2011-02-19 07:56 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  All facebook users agree to NOT Share their password when they access or use Facebook.
  
  So basically, to work at that correctional facility you MUST show that you are ready, willing and able to break past agreements that you have made and will continue to make in the future (every time you access Facebook).
  
  Nice to see that they want honest people guarding those who are incarcerated. :P
  
  http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=101063233083&topic=15948&post=110792#!/terms.php
  
  Statement of Rights and Responsibilities
  
  This Statement of Rights and Responsibilities ("Statement") derives from the Facebook Principles, and governs our relationship with users and others who interact with Facebook. By using or accessing Facebook, you agree to this Statement.
  
  # Registration and Account Security
  
  Facebook users provide their real names and information, and we need your help to keep it that way. Here are some commitments you make to us relating to registering and maintaining the security of your account:
  
  1. You will not provide any false personal information on Facebook, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission.
  2. You will not create more than one personal profile.
  3. If we disable your account, you will not create another one without our permission.
  4. You will not use your personal profile for your own commercial gain (such as selling your status update to an advertiser).
  5. You will not use Facebook if you are under 13.
  6. You will not use Facebook if you are a convicted sex offender.
  7. You will keep your contact information accurate and up-to-date.
  8. You will not share your password, (or in the case of developers, your secret key), let anyone else access your account, or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your account.
  9. You will not transfer your account (including any page or application you administer) to anyone without first getting our written permission.
  10. If you select a username for your account we reserve the right to remove or reclaim it if we believe appropriate (such as when a trademark owner complains about a username that does not closely relate to a user's actual name).
5. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by clang_jangle · 2011-02-19 08:01 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I wouldn't be so sure. He sounds a lot like the last guy who hired me.
  
  --
  Caveat Utilitor
6. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by Yvan256 · 2011-02-19 08:11 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I see Facebook more like a Geocities 2.0
  Except a lot of people who had a website on Geocities also had a minimum of technical knowledge.
7. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by mr_walrus · 2011-02-19 08:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  the fact you knowingly allow someone else to continue using your name online would make
  me wonder if i really want you working for me. you seem 'irresponsible' in employer speak.
8. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by aaaaaaargh! · 2011-02-19 09:05 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Na, Geocities was much cooler. It had dark corners and silent backwaters, nobody used his real name, and the company didn't constantly try to steal your data or lock you into their money making scheme.
9. Re:This is why I don't use facebook by MoonBuggy · 2011-02-19 11:17 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Some people are naive/stupid/misguided. Many people use social networking. As such, there is a significant overlap between the two groups, and people therefore do inadvisable things using social media. I don't see it as any causal, or even correlated, relationship - I'd be interested to see any studies to the contrary, but anecdotally I'd say the incidence of 'stupid' on Facebook is roughly the same as in the general population (i.e. depressingly high), meaning it's use as an indicator is negligible.
So, have two accounts? by DWMorse · 2011-02-19 06:18 · Score: 3, Funny

One full of HOORAH, LOVE THE GOVERNMENT! and liking AMERICA: WE'LL PUT A BOOT IN YER ASS, but without many friends attached. And then you'll have your other (perhaps similar) Facebook page, but with your real friends and activities. That's not misleading, they wanted your Facebook login. They got it. No biggie.

--
There's a spot in User Info for World of Warcraft account names? Really?
I have to applaud the ACLU... by Cjstone · 2011-02-19 06:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

A lot of people have the opinion that the ACLU is only about shutting down the speech of Christians/Whites/Men/*insert majority group here.* I think this case proves that not to be the case, and demonstrates the good that the ACLU actually does: Protecting personal privacy, freedom of expression, etc. This is a very important case, one that could potentially set a very bad precedent. It's good that there's at least one somewhat powerful organization on the side of personal privacy in this case. I hope groups like the EFF get involved as well.
1. Re:I have to applaud the ACLU... by BitZtream · 2011-02-19 06:31 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  A lot of people have the opinion that the ACLU is only about shutting down the speech of Christians/Whites/Men/*insert majority group here.* I think this case proves that not to be the case
  Why exactly? They can still be anti-majority and still support things that are otherwise good. The two are not mutually exclusive.
  I don't think the ACLU goes after majority groups, but they certainly go after somethings that clearly they shouldn't be, but thats the double edge sword of an organization like the ACLU, their viewpoint of civil liberties is different than mine. So when they are for something I agree with, I support them and make others aware of their fight, and when they are going off on some wildly retarded tangent like they so regularly do, I make sure people understand why I think its silly or wrong.
  The same for the EFF, though I must admit the EFF is generally more aligned with my own opinions so its rarer that I disagree with the EFF but it certainly has happened.
  One of the things all Americans (I don't want to speak for other countries though its certainly the same in some others) need to remember is that we all don't have to agree on everything. The only thing we all REALLY need to agree with is that its okay for others to have a differing opinion, and its okay for them to do things we don't really agree with as long as they aren't really bothering or harming anyone else. And that is just about where everyone fails, myself included. Its not always easy to accept someone else's opinion, viewpoint or way of doing things.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
2. Re:I have to applaud the ACLU... by N0Man74 · 2011-02-19 07:11 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  A lot of people have the opinion that the ACLU is only about shutting down the speech of Christians/Whites/Men/*insert majority group here.
  A lot of people also voluntarily subject themselves to media outlets that flood them with propaganda that tells them that ACLU, liberals, democrats, and muslims all do hate and undermine Christians, Whites, men, and American values.
  A lot of people are clueless, lied to, misinformed, confused or just outright ignorant. Their views frequently don't match reality, but that doesn't stop politicians from catering to their whims.
  As an example of how out of touch with reality some people are, in 2009, a Pew Research Poll that was conducted in order to study perceived media bias actually found that 14% of people though that Fox News was mostly liberal. How could someone even come up with such a conclusion? Are these people so far to the right that even Fox looks liberal to them? Have they just never seen it? Or maybe they believe Fox's own propaganda that all news media is liberal, and assume it means them too.
  However, back to the main point, the ACLU is about protecting people's rights and isn't taking religious sides. They have also defended free speech of Christians when that speech was challenged as being too hostile toward muslims or gays. The ACLU has even sided with those who protested against the ACLU!
  http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/
  And sure, a lot of people don't acknowledge this or care, but a lot of people also suffer from confirmation bias
3. Re:I have to applaud the ACLU... by hedwards · 2011-02-19 07:59 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  To be fair, Fox does sprinkle in known lies pretty liberally.
Balance? by Seumas · 2011-02-19 06:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

"We live in a time when national security is the highest priority, but it must be delicately balanced with personal privacy"
Calling it a delicate balance is a sleazy way of excusing any violations by suggesting that it's such a difficult fine line that nobody could be expected to do the right thing, all the time. There is no delicate balance. Personal privacy and liberty must always trump security, for without privacy and liberty, there's nothing worth securing. There's no point in protecting a bank vault that has already been looted of everything.
Also. A corrections officer in a prison. Hardly in a position to be trading secrets with Iran or Osama.
1. Re:Balance? by msobkow · 2011-02-19 06:35 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  This isn't a case of "delicate balance." It's a sickening abuse.
  He's a corrections officer, not some top-level CIA gumshoe!
  
  --
  I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
2. Re:Balance? by guyminuslife · 2011-02-19 07:43 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  It's really strange to talk about abuse and rights violations, and the prison guards are on the *receiving* end.
  
  --
  I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
Privacy is so 20th century. by meepzorb · 2011-02-19 06:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

Cue the "no such thing as privacy! glorious free market! employer rights 100% teh awesome! john galt ROX!" posts in three... two... one...
1. Re:Privacy is so 20th century. by cowboy76Spain · 2011-02-19 07:45 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Bullshit. Lots of it.
  Your statements can only be true if and only if the employement is a sellers'market (there is more demand for employees than supply). Else, the situation is "You don't want to give me your FB login? Fine, the next applicant will and you won't get another interview"
  Add to it that corporations are really out of hand for everything that they can control, and you'll see that soon everywhere you go will demand not only you FB login to check it but also to post praises to your employer and ask your friends to buy their products (and beware of befriending "known radicals" or visiting "non-adequate" sites). The more power they can get over you, the more power they can get. The only constraint would be the money they need to spend to control you.
  Your employer already has a lots of power over you. Give him more, and you'll end being your slave. What is fine for me if that only applied to idiots willing to comply with it, but soon they will think everyone is an idiot thanks to people like you.
  
  --
  Why can't /. have a rich-text editor? Editing your own HTML is so XXth century.
2. Re:Privacy is so 20th century. by ScrewMaster · 2011-02-19 09:49 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  They shouldn't. However, they have every (and should have every) -right- to ask.
  I disagree with you, and you're not seeing the bigger picture here.
  
  In any event, I wouldn't be so sure that they automatically have that right. The fact is, there are many things that an employer cannot ask a job applicant. Religion, sexual orientation, and political affiliation are a few that are generally prohibited. So far as I'm concerned, if a company cannot ask someone if they are straight or gay, they sure as Hell shouldn't be allowed to ask for their Facebook password. Or their email account, or their bank account, or anything else along those lines (and if you think it will stop with social networking, you're naive, I'm afraid.) I'm of the opinion that employers should be barred from any such investigation of candidates: would you want to be judged by the contents of your Facebook page (or the contents of the Facebook pages of your family and friends?) Think about that for a moment, and then tell me that employers should have any rights whatsoever in this regard.
  
  If your job is so sensitive that your resume and references are insufficient (and I might that that only a tiny, tiny fraction of the job market is so critical) then let them pay for a background check.
  
  What they are trying to do, when you get right down to it, is an end run around the relevant labor and anti-discrimination laws using information from social networking sites. If you happen to be gay, or a Jehovah's Witness, or a Tea Party member, would you want a potential employer trolling your Facebook account? The law says such attributes are none of their business, and cannot be used to make a hiring decision. But you also know that if that information is made available to employers, they will most certainly use it. But, if it's illegal to do so anyway, why should they have access to it in the first place? Any company that even asks for your social networking account info just tipped you off to the fact that they do not respect their workers. Keep looking.
  
  You want to know what kind of a worker I am, read my resume, contact my references ... and hire me. Or don't. But keep your sticky paws off my privacy. How I present myself to you, as an employer, what information I choose to give you, is up to me. If you later find out that I lied, you can fire my ass, but you are absolutely not entitled to rifle through my private life, no matter how much you might like to do so.
  
  --
  The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Refuse by syousef · 2011-02-19 06:24 · Score: 5, Interesting

If you're actually prepared to sue, I'd say refuse to provide the login, and let them terminate you. Then go after them for wrongful dismissal.

--
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Facebook TOS says you may not share password by a_n_d_e_r_s · 2011-02-19 06:30 · Score: 5, Interesting

From http://www.facebook.com/terms.php
Statement of Rights and Responsibilities
This Statement of Rights and Responsibilities ("Statement") derives from the Facebook Principles, and governs our relationship with users and others who interact with Facebook. By using or accessing Facebook, you agree to this Statement.
...

You will not share your password,
(or in the case of developers, your secret key),
let anyone else access your account,
or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your account.
So they wanted him to break the Facebook Statement of Rights and Responsibilities ?

--
Just saying it like it are.
1. Re:Facebook TOS says you may not share password by thsths · 2011-02-19 06:47 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  TOS may not be the main problem. I would think that this is also a federal crime "Intentionally accessing a computer without authorization to obtain: ...
  Information from any protected computer if the conduct involves an interstate or foreign communication" and "Knowingly and with the intent to defraud, trafficking in a password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization" under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
  It is about time that the FBI starts to investigate, and clears up this nest of computer crime! :-)
2. Re:Facebook TOS says you may not share password by darkonc · 2011-02-19 07:03 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  So, giving out his Facebook password, by violating facebook's terms of service, would make his (and the facility's) access of the facebook a federal crime (by some legal theories and decisions).
  Break a crime as part of a job interview? For a job as a prison guard -- and end up in jail with his former charges??? hell no... better to sue for wrongful dismissal!
  
  --
  Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
3. Re:Facebook TOS says you may not share password by Cederic · 2011-02-19 09:08 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  This fails to fall under the typical terms of duress
  "Do X or you lose your job" isn't duress?
Re:Why the password? by Culture20 · 2011-02-19 06:30 · Score: 4, Funny

I refuse to support what I consider a complete waste of time and computing resources.
So can I have your /. account? I'd like to drop 200,000 or so from my UID. Impress the ladies, you know?
Innocent have no problem by amiga3D · 2011-02-19 06:33 · Score: 3, Funny

If you have nothing to hide this surely shouldn't be a problem.
Re:Why the password? by mswhippingboy · 2011-02-19 06:41 · Score: 3, Informative

/. is only a 90% waste of time. That's an acceptable level for me.

--
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an oncoming train.
Re:Why the password? by LynXmaN · 2011-02-19 06:46 · Score: 3, Funny

I refuse to support what I consider a complete waste of time and computing resources.
So can I have your /. account? I'd like to drop 200,000 or so from my UID. Impress the ladies, you know?
Six digits is impressive? Kids this days...

--
May the source be with you!
Re:Why the password? by shogun · 2011-02-19 07:03 · Score: 3, Funny

my.lawn->get_off(you);
False dillema by SuperBanana · 2011-02-19 07:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

I was actually thinking it's a false dillema, starting with the premise that "national security is the highest priority." Sure as hell isn't for me. I just want a functioning public transit system, power, running water, and law and order in my community. Funny how our state got slammed with record levels of snow, and the National Guard couldn't help out...because they're deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq. Funny how funding for social spending has dried up and all the teenagers in my community are now running around shooting each other (and innocent bystanders) because they have no education, no job, no future. The only people that seem concerned about national security are the people paid to do so or the people who otherwise benefit from such efforts and its rhetoric.

--
Please help metamoderate.
1. Re:False dillema by Stryker2 · 2011-02-19 11:53 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  No. The National Guard has always has dual missions, state and federal. National guard troops even get extra training during their basic training, to cover dealing with riots. The feds fund the majority of the costs so that the guard is available in case of need, but they still have to request the guard from the governor. They get around that "nicety" by threatening to take away federal funding.
  What they were not intended for was long term recurring deployments outside of declared wars.
  
  --
  Bother, said Pooh, as he called in an air strike.
Re:Why the password? by Xugumad · 2011-02-19 07:27 · Score: 4, Funny

You know what happened last time /. got into a user ID waving competition? http://slashdot.org/~palpatine (#94) turned up and made us all look silly.
Re:Why the password? by Yvan256 · 2011-02-19 08:16 · Score: 3, Funny

Make your password "imnotgivingyoumypassword", problem solved.
Simple solution by Kupfernigk · 2011-02-19 08:20 · Score: 3, Informative

There are a number of people with accounts with variations of my real name, several of whom appear to be grade A sleazebags. As a result, I created a Facebook account in my full name with accurate details, turned everything off and left it empty - purely to deal with this possible situation.

--
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Not always an option to not use facebook by LockeOnLogic · 2011-02-19 08:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

So many posts here are about not using facebook, not having facebook ect... This isn't an option for everyone. A huge portion of my friends use facebook with ages that range from pre-pubescent family members to senior citizens. I have friends around the world with whom I'd have minimal communication if not for facebook. Facebook allows me to keep touch with my friends and acquaintances abroad and at home in a single place that they will check often (too often). I deprive myself socially by not having an account. I don't care for it, but so many people I know use it I have no option. I just avoid saying or posting anything anything remotely incriminating.
1. Re:Not always an option to not use facebook by Cederic · 2011-02-19 09:02 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Anybody that has facebook also has an email address. What's wrong with using that?
Re:Why the password? by Bob9113 · 2011-02-19 08:48 · Score: 3, Interesting

>> I refuse to support what I consider a complete waste of time and computing resources.
> So can I have your /. account?
While I recognize that you were just making a joke, I do think we belittle ourselves more than we deserve.
This is a forge in which deeply rational insights on public policy are formed. While we bicker and have strong and often emotionally influenced opinions, this is also one of the most analytical and empirical debate forums I know of. I have had my poorly formed opinions corrected, and seen many others post responses conceding an opponent's valid point.
Far from useless, I see these forums as among the best examples of the promise social networking holds for advancing society. On these pages are formed perspectives baptized in the fires of passion both for one's view and for truth. That the latter, truth, holds such sway here is what sets us above many and makes this meeting place worthy of respect.

--
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Re:Why the password? by Xugumad · 2011-02-19 09:02 · Score: 3, Interesting

"magg", apparently: http://slashdot.org/~magg/
I worry slightly I spent the time to find that out.
Re:You dont need *that* job that bad.. by evilviper · 2011-02-19 11:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

Sounds like a crappy way to lose the retirement benefits you earned...

--
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Just like employment piss tests by rastoboy29 · 2011-02-19 12:57 · Score: 5, Insightful

People have been tolerating piss tests to get/keep jobs for years, and the inevitable result is that employers reach out for more. The thing to do is apply for jobs when you have one (ideally), and refuse piss tests when asked. If enough people start turning down jobs for that reason, it will go away. But America will have to grow some balls, first.

--
expandfairuse.org
Look somewhere else for work. by PotatoHead · 2011-02-19 19:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

I personally don't use Facebook because it's unknown where the direction of the company is going to go, and they seem to be very aggressive about their use of the data. Don't trust them. It's that simple.
I know many people that do. Of those people, I know plenty that had bad experiences, and plenty that had good ones too. I personally wouldn't judge somebody on a Facebook account, because the use cases are all over the map.
That's what good interview skills are all about. Christ, if they can't do a good read on the person they have DIRECT and IMMEDIATE access to, perhaps it's time to get some education, instead of falling back on shitty things like asking for the keys to people's personal lives.
To me, this shit is all self-correcting. Anybody that makes a mess of their lives on Facebook will probably only get to work in the fucked up places where that shit doesn't matter. Fine by me. Employers who turn to the Internet in abusive ways to get advantage over their employees are not worth working for either.
People tend to sort themselves out over time. No worries here.
The best thing is to just manage your life, and your employment opportunities and think things over before you do them. Shutting some doors that you never, ever plan to walk through isn't too big of a deal. Not sure? Then be conservative about it, until you are. Most of it is all that simple.

--
Blogging because I can...