Slashdot Mirror
House Kills Effort To Stop Workplace Requests For Facebook Passwords
An anonymous reader writes "House Republicans today defeated an amendment introduced yesterday that would have banned employers demanding access to Facebook accounts. While the practice isn't widespread, it has caused a big brouhaha after reports surfaced that some organizations were requiring workers to hand over Facebook passwords as a condition of keeping their current job or getting hired for a new one."
Here's why it was voted down. Nobody disagreed with banning the practice, just the implementation:
"I think it’s awful that employers think they can demand our passwords and can go snooping around. There is no disagreement with that. Here is the flaw: Your amendment doesn’t protect them. It doesn’t do that. Actually, what this amendment does is say that all of the reforms that we are trying to put in place at the Federal Communications Commission, in order to have them have an open and transparent process where they are required to publish their rules in advance so that you can see what they’re proposing, would basically be shoved aside. They could do whatever they wanted on privacy if they wanted to, and you wouldn’t know it until they published their text afterward. There is no protection here." - Greg Walden (Oregon GOP rep)
SEC. 5. PROTECTING THE PASSWORDS OF ONLINE USERS. Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this Act shall be construed to limit or restrict the ability of the Federal Communications Commission to adopt a rule or to amend an existing rule to protect online privacy, including requirements in such rule that prohibit licensees or regulated entities from mandating that job applicants or employees disclose confidential passwords to social networking web sites.
I'm not even sure if Walden read the amendment, because I can not in any way see how he derived his criticisms from this text. On a personal note, this is sad. I'm starting to think that Republicans are actively trying to drive us moderate Republicans away. I know at this point in the election process they play to the far right, and they won't really care about the middle until the general election, but they need to realize that if they keep going like they are, pretty soon there won't be any of us left to listen. We'll have already left.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Coercing credentials and accessing foreign computer systems with them is already illegal. So why forbidding it again?
If your potential employer asks you for the password, tell him, that you would infringe on Facebook's Terms and Condition, and if he succeeds, he is infringing on the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
But they can't. Seriously. It is illegal now. In Texas, it is a state jail crime. (I am sure in other states too, but I do not know all the laws.) The FaceBook TOS forbids sharing passwords, and using another password is "accessing a computer or system without the express permission of the owner" and put both the user and the employer in violation of the Texas hacking statute.
Also, my FaceBook includes information that is protected under a few employment acts. It includes things like race, sexual preference, age, and religious affiliation. By asking, they are breaking employment law.
Are you a member of any protected class? Display that information prominently on your Facebook page. When you are asked for your account information, give it to them. When you don't get the job, sue them.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Well, unfortunately for you (and the rest of us), the Democrats and Republicans both agree the government should tell you exactly what you can and cannot do with your own body.
The few times I have been asked, I let the interviewer know the laws they just violated. In Texas, it is a state jail crime. (I am sure in other states too, but I do not know all the laws.) The FaceBook TOS forbids sharing passwords, and using another password is "accessing a computer or system without the express permission of the owner" and put both the user and the employer in violation of the Texas hacking statute. Also, my FaceBook includes information that is protected under a few employment acts. It includes things like race, sexual preference, age, and religious affiliation. By asking, they are breaking employment law.
The few times I have done this, the HR person has been genuinely surprised. In one case I was offered the job, but declined. That request (which came down from the top) was not the only short sighted thing they were doing, by far. Often, this question is a symptom of how the company is managed, and in that case it is good to know early.
"Moderate Republicans?" Is that a Republican who thinks contraception is permissible by married women with the consent of their husband? Or one who would allow a Muslim to convert to Christianity rather than killing them outright? Heal gays rather than hang them? Use conventional munitions against Iran rather than nuking them outright?
In the party that put forward Sarah Palin in 2008 and packed Congress with Tea Party freshmen in 2010, just what exactly makes one a "moderate?"
Heh, there was an article in our local paper yesterday about how our local police and fire departments do this and are proud of it. Well, they don't ask for the credentials, they have you log into your account in front of them and then hand the machine over so they can browse around to their liking. They called it an "in-depth background check" or something like that, and touted the usual "it's for the children!" BS. They have implemented this practice for all potential new hires, and have also said they will begin doing it for all current employees as well in the next month or so. Sigh.
Precisely the point. There are existing laws which make the request for account passwords illegal, including the fifth amendment and that pesky little clause about search and seizure.
The problem is, the way the US handles enforcement of such laws means that the corporations will continue to get away with it until the ACLU or EFF or someone else helps a citizen file a lawsuit over the issue.
After several years of fighting, the judge(s) will eventually declare that the corporations actions were illegal, someone will get their willie slapped, and things will go back to "normal".
But not until you've put up with YEARS of abuse of your rights as citizens.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
This entire fiasco is stupid. It's already completely illegal to request someone's Facebook login information as a condition of hire, since it divulges restricted information (marital status, age, orientation) that it is already illegal for them to ask of you. You can already tell them "I'm sorry, but that would divulge my marital status, age, and other information that is illegal for you to request."
If you can't ask them to follow one law, what makes you think that you'll be able to ask them to follow a new law? This entire law is redundant, and it is quite right that it was eliminated.
"I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
All they have to do is prove/claim that even if they came in contact with that information, it wasn't used to influence a hiring decision. Companies collect that kind of information from applicants all the time (i.e. to support audits on job retraining programs, veteran employment, equal opportunity employment laws).
Companies with large enough HR teams do this by compartmentalizing access. A company might designate an HR rep to handle information pertaining to protected classes. So long as the hiring manager doesn't see that information it's not a big deal.