Slashdot Mirror
Employer Demands Facebook Login From Job Applicants
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."
and it's not just because I don't have any friends
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.
"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.
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
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.
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?
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.
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.
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
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