9 ms·

Your Facebook password should be none of your boss' business

125 points by twentysix 15y ago

Zikes 15y ago
Isn't this illegal during the interview process since Facebook reveals practically every protected status?
- warpspeed 15y ago
  I'd imagine it's probably not illegal, since that's not the only information on your profile. Just like they can't ask you your race or marital status, but when you come in for the interview they can certainly see the color of your skin and if you're wearing a wedding band. It should be illegal though- I'm not sure when it ever became acceptable to ask for someone's login credentials.
  - brown9-2 15y ago
    Should it be illegal though, if the applicants have to agree to do it in the first place? That's the piece of this that seems to get lost - the applicants are, for whatever hard-to-fathom reason, consenting. It's shady, and seems short-sighted, but no one is disclosing information against their will here.
    - Zikes 15y ago
      Asking for protected information is illegal, whether the applicant consents to give it or not.
      - dripton 15y ago
        Can you cite the law?
        Zikes 15y ago
        I am not a lawyer, but having worked in a corporate setting for years this is something that's drilled into us constantly. Edit: A bit of searching leads me to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964). I'm not sure if the wording specifically prohibits asking about protected statuses, but any legal decisions about that would probably have their roots in that Act.
        lambersley 15y ago
        In Canada, there are two provisions of law that are common in many "manager 101" training courses that I can recall: The Employment Equity Act is aimed at protecting women, visible minorities, people with disabilities and Aboriginals. "5. Every employer shall implement employment equity by (a) identifying and eliminating employment barriers against persons in designated groups that result from the employer’s employment systems, policies and practices that are not authorized by law" (1) The Canadian Human Rights Act is aimed at preventing discrimination "practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation,marital status, family status, disability orconviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted." "7. It is a discriminatory practice, directly or indirectly, (b) in the course of employment, to differentiate adversely in relation to an employee,on a prohibited ground of discrimination." (2) I'm no lawyer but I would tread lightly on "differentiating" by any of these statuses. (1) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-5.401/page-3.html#h-5 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-5.401/page-3.html#... (2) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/H-6.pdf http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/H-6.pdf
    - warpspeed 15y ago
      Should it be illegal to ask interviewees to sleep with you in order to be considered for the job? After all you're not forcing them, and some people might be desperate enough for a job to consent.
      - brown9-2 15y ago
        You can already sue for such harassment/discrimination. I just don't see why we need a special law regarding Facebook here if the underlying discrimination possible is already illegal.
        warpspeed 15y ago
        I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that this practice is so wide-spread that there's enough grey area for hiring managers to get away with it, so the current laws aren't enough. Internet social networking is such a new and world-changing concept that I believe new laws are necessary to specifically address these issues.
        brown9-2 15y ago
        But the underlying information - your social interactions and personal communications - are not new. An employer could ask for your email history, banking information, etc. Should that be illegal as well? What about background checks, credit history check, etc? My only point is that I don't see why there needs to be a special exemption for social networking data, if the predatory behavior is already illegal b
        warpspeed 15y ago
        I agree with you that it's silly to think of special laws being created specifically for facebook and the like. The problem with laws in all areas right now is that the internet and everything that came with it is so far "out there" that there's no way that lawmakers 50 years ago could imagine its impact. That's lead to now, where some laws are wholly inadequate to deal with real issues that we face. In hiring laws, it's the applicants that are getting screwed by the lack of these laws, because their choices are to either acquiesce to the hiring manager's demands or lose the job. While it's easy for some people to say "I'd just walk out," a single mother who needs to feed her kids probably wouldn't be so quick to do so. In the end, it's a matter of the job market. If the market were flush with openings, hiring managers would have to be on their best behavior for fear of losing a promising candidate. Right now though, that's unfortunately not the case, so it's up to regulation to give people some basic rights. In my opinion.
    - justinhj 15y ago
      It should be illegal because the balance of power is in favour of the employer most of the time. Same as questions about whether you plan to have children, if it was optional to ask then those who don't would choose to answer and those who do would not, puttong them at a disadvantage.
    - mikeash 15y ago
      It's not hard to fathom at all. For as much as the average person complains about work, people really want jobs. There's a severe power imbalance. If you don't take the job, in most cases there are seven other qualified applications who will take it instead. Odds are that one of them will fork over their login info. And even though few people truly want to disclose it, once it becomes a de-facto standard, people will have little choice. The power imbalance is the crucial problem, and companies shouldn't be allowed to dictate unreasonable terms to employees or potential employees just because that imbalance allows them to obtain consent in most cases.
- brown9-2 15y ago
  It seems that if you were not hired after the company viewed this private information, it would be very hard for the employer to avoid claims of discrimination based on what they could have seen.
  - jiggy2011 15y ago
    as far as I know most of the groups that it is illegal to discriminate against would not require facebook access to confirm membership of.
    - brown9-2 15y ago
      I don't see how your marriage status, parental status or sexual preferences could otherwise be disclosed during a regular job screen process. However, the employer doesn't have to "confirm membership" of any status in order to open themselves up to credible legal action. All they need to do is give the impression that they were given some information about protected status, and their "no hire" decision becomes easily suspect. It would be hard in a litigation setting for the employer, after viewing someone's Facebook data, to be able to cite and document exactly which pieces of information influenced their decision, and which pieces of (discriminatory) information did not influence their decision. This isn't something that a smart employer would want to open themselves up to. It seems like the actual cases cited have all been rather limited in scope (checking prison guards for gang affiliation).
- wisty 15y ago
  IANAL, but I don't think it's illegal per say. It's just illegal for the company to consider protected things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination_law_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination_law_i...). However, if it's a civil matter (i.e. you sue), then you just need "balance of evidence", not "proof beyond reasonable doubt". You'll try to prove that it was a factor, and they'll try to prove that it wasn't. You might argue that at this stage you're be neck and neck with the other candidates (having passed the previous filters), and it's just going to come down to a "gut feeling" from the hiring manager - so they will almost certainly be swayed by anything which they might dislike on your Facebook page. I've a feeling it would be a horrible case to try to defend against. There's valid reasons for demanding Facebook login details, but if I were an employer I'd use a trusted third party to look for me, and only report things which have been cleared by a legal team. When the Australian government does security vetting, this is how it works - security personal do all the vetting, keep everything private except the "security clearance passed / failed", and can get thrown in prison if they let the wrong information out.
  - Drbble 15y ago
    Aside: "per se". It's Latin.
jiggy2011 15y ago
I wonder what the implications would be if facebook introduced a feature that allowed a potential employer to "buy" temporary access to a potential employees facebook data? For example you apply for a job somewhere and the next time you log into facebook you get a message that reads something like. "InitTech PLC has requested read only access to your account for 48 hours, please be aware that compliance with this is a condition of employment with InitTech PLC Allow/Deny"
- personlurking 15y ago
  Not to highjack the topic but I also read the IRS uses social media profiles to see if you are living above your means. Something slightly similar to your "temporary access" theory happens if you owe the IRS even a small amount of money. They enter your bank account to seize cash and the bank charges you $100 for the inspection/invasion. As for the topic at hand, I don't see why one cannot simply say they have no Facebook account. Since FB began, there have been more years of myself having no account than there have been of having one (meaning I'm a serial "account-deleter").
  - jiggy2011 15y ago
    You could say you had no account , but if they later found that out to be a lie it could be used to dismiss you as you lied during your application.
    - homonculus 15y ago
      What if you created an account after being hired, or had plausible deniability to that effect? Would you be obligated to inform your employer whenever you manage other social media accounts? The implications of this are terrifying. I'm glad that organizations like the ACLU are on this, because if corporations can set a precedent for this sort of privacy invasion, we're screwed to the nth degree.
      - jiggy2011 15y ago
        It depends what their purpose is in doing this. If it is simply a screen to avoid applicants who would be massively unsuitable , membership of extreme political parties or heavily into drugs etc then perhaps not. Otherwise you might need a form from HR for each social network you join. The way I imagine this will play out in practice is that you will get companies who are "social reference agencies" or similar. They will have special privileges with facebook etc and will be hired by other companies to screen applicant based on a number of factors and will produce a report for the client company that probably wouldn't contain any specific data etc but simply screen for any "red flags".
lukejduncan 15y ago
Is this really becoming common? I agree that it's absolutely wrong, but, every headline I've seen gives the impression this is becoming a common practice. I've never heard of it actually happening anywhere but the few cases cited in the articles.
- jiggy2011 15y ago
  No, I very much doubt it is at all common, most employers wouldn't have the balls to do this. However it does show this sort of thing is attractive from an employers point of view. You would only really need this to become procedure at one large company (say wallmart) to set a precedent that others will follow.
- jonnathanson 15y ago
  The job market is still pretty weak, and many sectors have not recovered at all. So, unfortunately, employers still hold all the bargaining chips. For a lot of job seekers, it may be pretty hard to tell a potential employer to go fuck itself if it makes this sort of request. A lot of people aren't in the position to be picky about employment right now. Especially young people, who are just starting out in the job market. To me, that's what's most troubling about this: employers have the ability to strike now, while the iron is hot. If enough big employers can establish this as a standard practice, then pretty soon it becomes procedural. (Like the background check, the drug test, and other procedures that BigCo routinely uses in hiring practices). In a perfect world, sure, you'd love to be able to walk away from a job offer and say "Well, I wouldn't want to work for any company that subjects me to this...so sayonara, suckers!" But a) vanishingly few people are in a position to do that, and b) there's a real danger that this practice becomes so widespread as to be unavoidable. While I do think the current situation is being blown out of proportion, I think the potential danger is very real.
  - eru 15y ago
    I wonder whether people without an account will start having to create one, just to enable the HR drone to tick the checkbox.
mathiasben 15y ago
Is there anything in facebook's terms of service that would permit their users to share login info with third parties?
- jchrisa 15y ago
  Agree. It might be a crime to comply with this request. Given that it can be a crime ("hacking") to break TOS. Catch-22 Update: 2 of the comments on the ACLU article say this also. I'm surprised this line of reasoning isn't more prominent on the issue.
  - _mayo 15y ago
    Would it be considered "hacking" if you where "willingly" providing your password to them?
    - dangrossman 15y ago
      Accessing a computer system without authorization is a crime. Facebook is the only entity that can dictate the terms of lawful access to Facebook systems. If Facebook's terms dictate that you cannot access their systems using another person's credentials, then doing so is unauthorized and unlawful. I don't know how well that would hold up to the various appeals processes, IANAL, but there seems to be some case law supporting it for now.
      - _mayo 15y ago
        gotcha, I didn't think about that.
jostmey 15y ago
If I had a boss who ever asked me for my facebook password, I would first change my password to a string of about 100 random numbers and letters. Here is an example: sd0w34hd8yjddghaJHj323HDa6GassGa79AsSFlk889FfSDFGd8AS78 Then, I would print this password out on a sheet of paper and give it my boss.
- eru 15y ago
  No, you wouldn't. Because either you stand up against that company policy and show some spine, or if you are more worried about your job than your dignity, you wouldn't dare dream of ticking your boss off. Unless you don't really want the job, and only want to give your potential-future boss access to some juicy information, so that you can sue him easier later on for discrimination against you; and want to have some fun in that process.
  - jostmey 15y ago
    If my boss could not accept my personality traits, then that company is not the right fit for me and I for it.
    - eru 15y ago
      Yes, that's what I meant. And if you don't want to work for them, why give them the password in the first case?
mdkess 15y ago
If I ever had someone demand this, I would update my account to show my sexual orientation as homosexual, my religion to Islam, and my political views to whatever the opposite of my boss's were. Then if they ever tried to lay me off, or not give me a raise, I would point out that the only useful information they possibly could have gotten from demanding my Facebook account were these protected statuses.
- twiceaday 15y ago
  Good luck proving this.
- ahi 15y ago
  Of the three listed, the only one that is actually protected in the United States is religion. In the vast majority of the United States you can be fired for being gay or a republican. If you work for a labor organization in the United States, you have to be fired for certain political views and organisational memberships (the left-wing variety).
  - mdkess 15y ago
    On a federal level yes, but many states (including New York and California) have protection against sexual orientation. I'm surprised to learn that political affiliation is not protected.
    - wisty 15y ago
      Colorado is possibly the best, protecting "any lawful activity".
  - jeffreyg 15y ago
    references?
- InclinedPlane 15y ago
  Ahah! I think you've just hit on the legal remedy for this bullshit. It is illegal for an interviewer to ask about your religion, your race, your age, your political views, your sexual orientation, etc. All of those things are part of the typical facebook profile so asking to even look at someone else's facebook profile for purposes of an interview is a clear violation of the law. Here's a list of things that an interviewer is barred from asking: http://jobsearch.about.com/od/interviewsnetworking/a/illegalinterv.htm http://jobsearch.about.com/od/interviewsnetworking/a/illegal...
nekojima 15y ago
Facebook is such a small part of my online activities that its almost inconsequential. But I would still object to the request as inappropriate on the grounds of personal security (which I prefer to cite over privacy). I'd be much more concerned if they asked for my userids & passwords for email accounts, Skype, MSN, IRC, domain names and 'Hacker News' (especially if they just went by the name & not the content)!!
mirsadm 15y ago
This is a great "I don't want to work here" filter. If I was asked for my password during an interview I would probably leave. I can easily afford to do that because there is such a demand for software engineers (and I'm not even looking!). Unfortunately for others who aren't in the same position I think it is absolutely disgraceful for some stranger to go through your personal stuff just to get a job.
- nirvana 15y ago
  I agree with you. The thing I'm debating is what is the appropriate further action you should take before you leave. I once left an interview because the NDA they wanted me to sign gave them rights to all of my work for the next 6 months, and the right to audit me at any day or time by searching my house! I told the HR person I wasn't willing to sign that, and why, that it would prevent me working anywhere if I didn't get that particular job, and she reacted as if I was being a prima donna.
  - MartinCron 15y ago
    If the HR person thought that you were being a prima donna for not wanting to sign that NDA, then you're just doubly lucky that you didn't wind up working there.
- seancoughlin 15y ago
  Yeah, the unequal bargaining power between the company and the candidate is a real problem. Even if the company makes providing the access information optional, there's still a kind of invasive coercion happening. That said, companies have been requiring that applicants submit credit reports for a long time, so the idea that there's a bright line between what's "private" and what's "public" when it comes to employment isn't quite right.
  - mirsadm 15y ago
    I once worked for a company that did a lot of military contracts. They would ask some of us to get security clearance to be able to work certain projects (and enter the 'secret room'). It was still optional and I never felt it pushed on me even though it would have had career benefits. I opted out because the requirements and paperwork were nuts and part of the deal was that the government would potentially track whenever you left/entered the country and a whole bunch of other things. I thought this was a really nice way of letting your employees have a choice even though in this particular case they probably could have forced everybody to do it. Now you have companies which do not really need to have this personal information asking employees for it. Here's the thing though. If my employees had lots of nasty things to say about my company then my reaction wouldn't be to stop them by monitoring everything they do. Wouldn't you want to try and fix the problem?
MRonney 15y ago
Is there a list somewhere of the companies that do this? If i knew a company required it's applicants to do this, i would be much less likely to shop there.
MRonney 15y ago
I worked at a social media marketing agency for a few months, when I went out of town I gave my manager my login information because my clients would sometimes direct message me instead of email (annoying). A few weeks after returning, some of my new messages would already appear open, and Facebook asked me if I logged into my account from a PC ( NEVER!!) at a different location than normal ( near my managers house). I was upset and went to her boss, they said she was just doing her job and that she had every right to check up on company communication.
- brown9-2 15y ago
  You gave them access to your account, and were surprised they used it?
  - tedunangst 15y ago
    I think the expectation was that the company would stop checking the account after his return, but failing to change your password was a big mistake.
mrpollo 15y ago
Instead I would advice them to buy me a beer or two I bet they will get to know more of me than by watching all of those imgurl links I cross post from reddit.
dreamling 15y ago
I think the whole topic is silly. If your potential employer asked you for passwords to your bank accounts, stock managers or asked you to hand over your journals, why would you comply? I know the job market is still tough out there for people, but why would you want to work for a company that won't trust you based on your face to face interview, the documents you submit, your references and a due diligence web search? Were people compelled to give out their AOL passwords for jobs in the 90's?
- ap22213 15y ago
  I agree, the topic _is_ silly, because most US workers are 'at-will' and can be fired at any time, for any reason. Many people don't know this or don't believe this. Unless you re under specific contract, or live in a few states with employment rights, your boss may fire you just because they didn't like how you type on the keyboard. Recently, I was watching an episode of Mad Men with a friend, and one of the characters abruptly fired one of their employees. My fried was aghast and was glad that 'that behavior couldn't happen today.' Well - it can and does happen today. Last year I worked for a start-up owned by a friend. Before coming on-board, I had agreed verbally on an equity sharing deal. I didn't put anything in writing because I trusted the guy; I knew him for years. The red flag was that he kept waiting for a certain 'favorable legislation to be enacted' before splitting up the corporation. Well, when business started picking up, I reminded him emphatically about the equity, and then I was abruptly fired. Naively, I was shocked that it could happen like that. But, every attorney I called said I was out of luck. Anyway, the point is that employers can probably ask you to do anything they want, that isn't explicitly denied by law. So, it makes sense that they may fire you for not sharing passwords.
  - goostavos 15y ago
    How serious is this Facebook business? I personally do not have one, in this day, is this an actual barrier to getting a job? Not being part of a social website? Either way, employers asking for a password to anything feels insanely slimy.
    - 15y ago
lucb1e 15y ago
I would set up a fake Facebook account if I were very desperately in need for a job. Or just say I don't have one, which is true at the moment. Otherwise, No and Goodbye. Sharing my password, any of them, is simply totally unacceptable. No way. I'm not giving them the key to my front door either am I? Or my ID card with my boss' face on it so that he can impersonate me, because that's also what this is (though that probably won't happen, so they key example is better, but that doesn't make this less true).
pasbesoin 15y ago
As I saw commented elsewhere, giving up your password / access to another person appears to be a pretty clear violation of Facebook's TOS (terms of service). So, my first response might be to ask whether they are soliciting me to breach a legal contract that I've entered. (I'll leave my thoughts on the actual legality or interpretation and reasonableness of claimed legality on the part of the service provider, here Facebook, as a separate question for another time.) At a minimum, this might be enough to ensure e.g. that the unemployment agency decides in my favor with respect to unemployment insurance, if things happen to go that way. I also recall another comment where someone pointed out that their friends on Facebook have an expectation of privacy in their own communications and that s/he will not compromise (betray) that expectation. That seems to me to be a pretty clear ethical argument. As a reasonable person, I would have a hard time challenging the ethics of such a response. Finally, personally, I agree with other comments here, that the access and information is none of their business. What perhaps some (not all) in the preponderance of relatively privileged professions represented on HN may not fully realize, is that for many people in the workforce there is effectively little or no choice. Jobs -- especially with decent pay and benefits -- are hard to come by, and many do not have the financial means to risk an episode or continuance of unemployment. For the sake of those people, as well as ourselves, we need to band together in opposition to this behavior. Even for ourselves, if the practice becomes commonplace, that sets a precedent that may subsequently box us in.
- jchrisa 15y ago
  I'm not a lawyer, but my guess is that if you could get a request like this in writing, the right lawyer would be able to get you a hefty settlement under existing law. Just guessing, but I'd be surprised if it's legal to ask prospective employees to engage in unlawful activities as a condition of employment. As mentioned before, sharing your Facebook password is illegal.
  - grecy 15y ago
    I'm certain that anyone asking to snoop through your Facbook knows they are doing something "wrong" - maybe they don't understand the full implications, but I'm sure none of them would be stupid enough to put the request in writing.
sneak 15y ago
The argument can be made (at least in our industry) that someone who uses Facebook isn't someone you'd want to hire, anyway.
- jcurbo 15y ago
  I don't follow - are you saying you would not want to hire a software engineer that uses Facebook?
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- Karunamon 15y ago
  I'd say quite the opposite. It's normal and expected to be a member of multiple social networks. I'd wonder what kind of IT person doesn't have an account with facebook, twitter, a personal domain, etc. Nice ludditism, though.
  - icebraining 15y ago
    I'd wonder what kind of IT person doesn't have an account with facebook I don't understand neither sneak's position nor yours, really. What exactly is odd about not wanting to feed the privacy black hole that is Facebook? I have nothing against those who do, but frankly I'll avoid it if I can.
    - Karunamon 15y ago
      Most people don't describe Facebook with such terms as a " privacy black hole "
      - icebraining 15y ago
        Most people (even most IT workers) don't use HN either, but I don't wonder "what kind of people" are we for using it.
mhartl 15y ago
This issue isn't an ought, it's an is. Every job is a negotiation, and if your negotiating position and skills are good enough then you won't have to comply with your boss's request for your Facebook passoword. Otherwise, you will.
RandallBrown 15y ago
If someone asked me for my facebook password I would ask for theirs. If they think it's important to see my personal information, they should be fine with me seeing theirs.
- reinhardt 15y ago
  If I had a facebook and someone asked me for my password I would laugh in their face, as if they had delivered the most deadpan of punchlines.
imgabe 15y ago
My idea of an appropriate response to this: Interviewer: Ok then, we'll just need your facebook login information and we'll be all set. Applicant: Sure thing, but first I'll need a key to your house. Interviewer: What? Why? Applicant: I'd like to go in when you're not there and rummage through your stuff, to make sure you're the kind of person I want to work for.
rbarooah 15y ago
How is this different from asking for your Gmail password?
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
nextparadigms 15y ago
Facebook should try and do something about this, because it's in their best interest. If this keeps going, people will either simply quit Facebook, or start making mock-accounts to show to the employees.
- elithrar 15y ago
  > Facebook should try and do something about this, because it's in their best interest. If this keeps going, people will either simply quit Facebook, or start making mock-accounts to show to the employees. What can Facebook do? At best, they can lobby the Government and/or employment regulators in an attempt to bring this practice to light and make requesting passwords and access to private accounts illegal. It's a very indirect method and may not change things now, tomorrow or even next month.
toddnessa 15y ago
It definitely crosses the line to ask or require your employees to access their private information. In cases such as this, employees are being treated more like company property than as free individuals. That's not cool.
hydian 15y ago
A company asking for this potentially opens themselves up to a huge amount of legal liability since a typical Facebook profile can contain an enormous amount of data that they are not allowed to ask during the interview process.

125 points by twentysix 15y ago

Zikes 15y ago

Isn't this illegal during the interview process since Facebook reveals practically every protected status?

warpspeed 15y ago
I'd imagine it's probably not illegal, since that's not the only information on your profile. Just like they can't ask you your race or marital status, but when you come in for the interview they can certainly see the color of your skin and if you're wearing a wedding band. It should be illegal though- I'm not sure when it ever became acceptable to ask for someone's login credentials.
- brown9-2 15y ago
  Should it be illegal though, if the applicants have to agree to do it in the first place? That's the piece of this that seems to get lost - the applicants are, for whatever hard-to-fathom reason, consenting. It's shady, and seems short-sighted, but no one is disclosing information against their will here.
  - Zikes 15y ago
    Asking for protected information is illegal, whether the applicant consents to give it or not.
    - dripton 15y ago
      Can you cite the law?
      - Zikes 15y ago
        I am not a lawyer, but having worked in a corporate setting for years this is something that's drilled into us constantly. Edit: A bit of searching leads me to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964). I'm not sure if the wording specifically prohibits asking about protected statuses, but any legal decisions about that would probably have their roots in that Act.
      - lambersley 15y ago
        In Canada, there are two provisions of law that are common in many "manager 101" training courses that I can recall: The Employment Equity Act is aimed at protecting women, visible minorities, people with disabilities and Aboriginals. "5. Every employer shall implement employment equity by (a) identifying and eliminating employment barriers against persons in designated groups that result from the employer’s employment systems, policies and practices that are not authorized by law" (1) The Canadian Human Rights Act is aimed at preventing discrimination "practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation,marital status, family status, disability orconviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted." "7. It is a discriminatory practice, directly or indirectly, (b) in the course of employment, to differentiate adversely in relation to an employee,on a prohibited ground of discrimination." (2) I'm no lawyer but I would tread lightly on "differentiating" by any of these statuses. (1) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-5.401/page-3.html#h-5 http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-5.401/page-3.html#... (2) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/H-6.pdf http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/H-6.pdf
  - warpspeed 15y ago
    Should it be illegal to ask interviewees to sleep with you in order to be considered for the job? After all you're not forcing them, and some people might be desperate enough for a job to consent.
    - brown9-2 15y ago
      You can already sue for such harassment/discrimination. I just don't see why we need a special law regarding Facebook here if the underlying discrimination possible is already illegal.
      - warpspeed 15y ago
        I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that this practice is so wide-spread that there's enough grey area for hiring managers to get away with it, so the current laws aren't enough. Internet social networking is such a new and world-changing concept that I believe new laws are necessary to specifically address these issues.
        brown9-2 15y ago
        But the underlying information - your social interactions and personal communications - are not new. An employer could ask for your email history, banking information, etc. Should that be illegal as well? What about background checks, credit history check, etc? My only point is that I don't see why there needs to be a special exemption for social networking data, if the predatory behavior is already illegal b
        warpspeed 15y ago
        I agree with you that it's silly to think of special laws being created specifically for facebook and the like. The problem with laws in all areas right now is that the internet and everything that came with it is so far "out there" that there's no way that lawmakers 50 years ago could imagine its impact. That's lead to now, where some laws are wholly inadequate to deal with real issues that we face. In hiring laws, it's the applicants that are getting screwed by the lack of these laws, because their choices are to either acquiesce to the hiring manager's demands or lose the job. While it's easy for some people to say "I'd just walk out," a single mother who needs to feed her kids probably wouldn't be so quick to do so. In the end, it's a matter of the job market. If the market were flush with openings, hiring managers would have to be on their best behavior for fear of losing a promising candidate. Right now though, that's unfortunately not the case, so it's up to regulation to give people some basic rights. In my opinion.
  - justinhj 15y ago
    It should be illegal because the balance of power is in favour of the employer most of the time. Same as questions about whether you plan to have children, if it was optional to ask then those who don't would choose to answer and those who do would not, puttong them at a disadvantage.
  - mikeash 15y ago
    It's not hard to fathom at all. For as much as the average person complains about work, people really want jobs. There's a severe power imbalance. If you don't take the job, in most cases there are seven other qualified applications who will take it instead. Odds are that one of them will fork over their login info. And even though few people truly want to disclose it, once it becomes a de-facto standard, people will have little choice. The power imbalance is the crucial problem, and companies shouldn't be allowed to dictate unreasonable terms to employees or potential employees just because that imbalance allows them to obtain consent in most cases.
brown9-2 15y ago
It seems that if you were not hired after the company viewed this private information, it would be very hard for the employer to avoid claims of discrimination based on what they could have seen.
- jiggy2011 15y ago
  as far as I know most of the groups that it is illegal to discriminate against would not require facebook access to confirm membership of.
  - brown9-2 15y ago
    I don't see how your marriage status, parental status or sexual preferences could otherwise be disclosed during a regular job screen process. However, the employer doesn't have to "confirm membership" of any status in order to open themselves up to credible legal action. All they need to do is give the impression that they were given some information about protected status, and their "no hire" decision becomes easily suspect. It would be hard in a litigation setting for the employer, after viewing someone's Facebook data, to be able to cite and document exactly which pieces of information influenced their decision, and which pieces of (discriminatory) information did not influence their decision. This isn't something that a smart employer would want to open themselves up to. It seems like the actual cases cited have all been rather limited in scope (checking prison guards for gang affiliation).
wisty 15y ago
IANAL, but I don't think it's illegal per say. It's just illegal for the company to consider protected things (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination_law_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination_law_i...). However, if it's a civil matter (i.e. you sue), then you just need "balance of evidence", not "proof beyond reasonable doubt". You'll try to prove that it was a factor, and they'll try to prove that it wasn't. You might argue that at this stage you're be neck and neck with the other candidates (having passed the previous filters), and it's just going to come down to a "gut feeling" from the hiring manager - so they will almost certainly be swayed by anything which they might dislike on your Facebook page. I've a feeling it would be a horrible case to try to defend against. There's valid reasons for demanding Facebook login details, but if I were an employer I'd use a trusted third party to look for me, and only report things which have been cleared by a legal team. When the Australian government does security vetting, this is how it works - security personal do all the vetting, keep everything private except the "security clearance passed / failed", and can get thrown in prison if they let the wrong information out.
- Drbble 15y ago
  Aside: "per se". It's Latin.

jiggy2011 15y ago

I wonder what the implications would be if facebook introduced a feature that allowed a potential employer to "buy" temporary access to a potential employees facebook data? For example you apply for a job somewhere and the next time you log into facebook you get a message that reads something like. "InitTech PLC has requested read only access to your account for 48 hours, please be aware that compliance with this is a condition of employment with InitTech PLC Allow/Deny"

personlurking 15y ago
Not to highjack the topic but I also read the IRS uses social media profiles to see if you are living above your means. Something slightly similar to your "temporary access" theory happens if you owe the IRS even a small amount of money. They enter your bank account to seize cash and the bank charges you $100 for the inspection/invasion. As for the topic at hand, I don't see why one cannot simply say they have no Facebook account. Since FB began, there have been more years of myself having no account than there have been of having one (meaning I'm a serial "account-deleter").
- jiggy2011 15y ago
  You could say you had no account , but if they later found that out to be a lie it could be used to dismiss you as you lied during your application.
  - homonculus 15y ago
    What if you created an account after being hired, or had plausible deniability to that effect? Would you be obligated to inform your employer whenever you manage other social media accounts? The implications of this are terrifying. I'm glad that organizations like the ACLU are on this, because if corporations can set a precedent for this sort of privacy invasion, we're screwed to the nth degree.
    - jiggy2011 15y ago
      It depends what their purpose is in doing this. If it is simply a screen to avoid applicants who would be massively unsuitable , membership of extreme political parties or heavily into drugs etc then perhaps not. Otherwise you might need a form from HR for each social network you join. The way I imagine this will play out in practice is that you will get companies who are "social reference agencies" or similar. They will have special privileges with facebook etc and will be hired by other companies to screen applicant based on a number of factors and will produce a report for the client company that probably wouldn't contain any specific data etc but simply screen for any "red flags".

lukejduncan 15y ago

Is this really becoming common? I agree that it's absolutely wrong, but, every headline I've seen gives the impression this is becoming a common practice. I've never heard of it actually happening anywhere but the few cases cited in the articles.

jiggy2011 15y ago
No, I very much doubt it is at all common, most employers wouldn't have the balls to do this. However it does show this sort of thing is attractive from an employers point of view. You would only really need this to become procedure at one large company (say wallmart) to set a precedent that others will follow.
jonnathanson 15y ago
The job market is still pretty weak, and many sectors have not recovered at all. So, unfortunately, employers still hold all the bargaining chips. For a lot of job seekers, it may be pretty hard to tell a potential employer to go fuck itself if it makes this sort of request. A lot of people aren't in the position to be picky about employment right now. Especially young people, who are just starting out in the job market. To me, that's what's most troubling about this: employers have the ability to strike now, while the iron is hot. If enough big employers can establish this as a standard practice, then pretty soon it becomes procedural. (Like the background check, the drug test, and other procedures that BigCo routinely uses in hiring practices). In a perfect world, sure, you'd love to be able to walk away from a job offer and say "Well, I wouldn't want to work for any company that subjects me to this...so sayonara, suckers!" But a) vanishingly few people are in a position to do that, and b) there's a real danger that this practice becomes so widespread as to be unavoidable. While I do think the current situation is being blown out of proportion, I think the potential danger is very real.
- eru 15y ago
  I wonder whether people without an account will start having to create one, just to enable the HR drone to tick the checkbox.

mathiasben 15y ago

Is there anything in facebook's terms of service that would permit their users to share login info with third parties?

jchrisa 15y ago
Agree. It might be a crime to comply with this request. Given that it can be a crime ("hacking") to break TOS. Catch-22 Update: 2 of the comments on the ACLU article say this also. I'm surprised this line of reasoning isn't more prominent on the issue.
- _mayo 15y ago
  Would it be considered "hacking" if you where "willingly" providing your password to them?
  - dangrossman 15y ago
    Accessing a computer system without authorization is a crime. Facebook is the only entity that can dictate the terms of lawful access to Facebook systems. If Facebook's terms dictate that you cannot access their systems using another person's credentials, then doing so is unauthorized and unlawful. I don't know how well that would hold up to the various appeals processes, IANAL, but there seems to be some case law supporting it for now.
    - _mayo 15y ago
      gotcha, I didn't think about that.

jostmey 15y ago

If I had a boss who ever asked me for my facebook password, I would first change my password to a string of about 100 random numbers and letters. Here is an example: sd0w34hd8yjddghaJHj323HDa6GassGa79AsSFlk889FfSDFGd8AS78 Then, I would print this password out on a sheet of paper and give it my boss.

eru 15y ago
No, you wouldn't. Because either you stand up against that company policy and show some spine, or if you are more worried about your job than your dignity, you wouldn't dare dream of ticking your boss off. Unless you don't really want the job, and only want to give your potential-future boss access to some juicy information, so that you can sue him easier later on for discrimination against you; and want to have some fun in that process.
- jostmey 15y ago
  If my boss could not accept my personality traits, then that company is not the right fit for me and I for it.
  - eru 15y ago
    Yes, that's what I meant. And if you don't want to work for them, why give them the password in the first case?

mdkess 15y ago

If I ever had someone demand this, I would update my account to show my sexual orientation as homosexual, my religion to Islam, and my political views to whatever the opposite of my boss's were. Then if they ever tried to lay me off, or not give me a raise, I would point out that the only useful information they possibly could have gotten from demanding my Facebook account were these protected statuses.

twiceaday 15y ago
Good luck proving this.
ahi 15y ago
Of the three listed, the only one that is actually protected in the United States is religion. In the vast majority of the United States you can be fired for being gay or a republican. If you work for a labor organization in the United States, you have to be fired for certain political views and organisational memberships (the left-wing variety).
- mdkess 15y ago
  On a federal level yes, but many states (including New York and California) have protection against sexual orientation. I'm surprised to learn that political affiliation is not protected.
  - wisty 15y ago
    Colorado is possibly the best, protecting "any lawful activity".
- jeffreyg 15y ago
  references?
InclinedPlane 15y ago
Ahah! I think you've just hit on the legal remedy for this bullshit. It is illegal for an interviewer to ask about your religion, your race, your age, your political views, your sexual orientation, etc. All of those things are part of the typical facebook profile so asking to even look at someone else's facebook profile for purposes of an interview is a clear violation of the law. Here's a list of things that an interviewer is barred from asking: http://jobsearch.about.com/od/interviewsnetworking/a/illegalinterv.htm http://jobsearch.about.com/od/interviewsnetworking/a/illegal...

nekojima 15y ago

Facebook is such a small part of my online activities that its almost inconsequential. But I would still object to the request as inappropriate on the grounds of personal security (which I prefer to cite over privacy). I'd be much more concerned if they asked for my userids & passwords for email accounts, Skype, MSN, IRC, domain names and 'Hacker News' (especially if they just went by the name & not the content)!!

mirsadm 15y ago

This is a great "I don't want to work here" filter. If I was asked for my password during an interview I would probably leave. I can easily afford to do that because there is such a demand for software engineers (and I'm not even looking!). Unfortunately for others who aren't in the same position I think it is absolutely disgraceful for some stranger to go through your personal stuff just to get a job.

nirvana 15y ago
I agree with you. The thing I'm debating is what is the appropriate further action you should take before you leave. I once left an interview because the NDA they wanted me to sign gave them rights to all of my work for the next 6 months, and the right to audit me at any day or time by searching my house! I told the HR person I wasn't willing to sign that, and why, that it would prevent me working anywhere if I didn't get that particular job, and she reacted as if I was being a prima donna.
- MartinCron 15y ago
  If the HR person thought that you were being a prima donna for not wanting to sign that NDA, then you're just doubly lucky that you didn't wind up working there.
seancoughlin 15y ago
Yeah, the unequal bargaining power between the company and the candidate is a real problem. Even if the company makes providing the access information optional, there's still a kind of invasive coercion happening. That said, companies have been requiring that applicants submit credit reports for a long time, so the idea that there's a bright line between what's "private" and what's "public" when it comes to employment isn't quite right.
- mirsadm 15y ago
  I once worked for a company that did a lot of military contracts. They would ask some of us to get security clearance to be able to work certain projects (and enter the 'secret room'). It was still optional and I never felt it pushed on me even though it would have had career benefits. I opted out because the requirements and paperwork were nuts and part of the deal was that the government would potentially track whenever you left/entered the country and a whole bunch of other things. I thought this was a really nice way of letting your employees have a choice even though in this particular case they probably could have forced everybody to do it. Now you have companies which do not really need to have this personal information asking employees for it. Here's the thing though. If my employees had lots of nasty things to say about my company then my reaction wouldn't be to stop them by monitoring everything they do. Wouldn't you want to try and fix the problem?

MRonney 15y ago

Is there a list somewhere of the companies that do this? If i knew a company required it's applicants to do this, i would be much less likely to shop there.

MRonney 15y ago

I worked at a social media marketing agency for a few months, when I went out of town I gave my manager my login information because my clients would sometimes direct message me instead of email (annoying). A few weeks after returning, some of my new messages would already appear open, and Facebook asked me if I logged into my account from a PC ( NEVER!!) at a different location than normal ( near my managers house). I was upset and went to her boss, they said she was just doing her job and that she had every right to check up on company communication.

brown9-2 15y ago
You gave them access to your account, and were surprised they used it?
- tedunangst 15y ago
  I think the expectation was that the company would stop checking the account after his return, but failing to change your password was a big mistake.

mrpollo 15y ago

Instead I would advice them to buy me a beer or two I bet they will get to know more of me than by watching all of those imgurl links I cross post from reddit.

dreamling 15y ago

I think the whole topic is silly. If your potential employer asked you for passwords to your bank accounts, stock managers or asked you to hand over your journals, why would you comply? I know the job market is still tough out there for people, but why would you want to work for a company that won't trust you based on your face to face interview, the documents you submit, your references and a due diligence web search? Were people compelled to give out their AOL passwords for jobs in the 90's?

ap22213 15y ago
I agree, the topic _is_ silly, because most US workers are 'at-will' and can be fired at any time, for any reason. Many people don't know this or don't believe this. Unless you re under specific contract, or live in a few states with employment rights, your boss may fire you just because they didn't like how you type on the keyboard. Recently, I was watching an episode of Mad Men with a friend, and one of the characters abruptly fired one of their employees. My fried was aghast and was glad that 'that behavior couldn't happen today.' Well - it can and does happen today. Last year I worked for a start-up owned by a friend. Before coming on-board, I had agreed verbally on an equity sharing deal. I didn't put anything in writing because I trusted the guy; I knew him for years. The red flag was that he kept waiting for a certain 'favorable legislation to be enacted' before splitting up the corporation. Well, when business started picking up, I reminded him emphatically about the equity, and then I was abruptly fired. Naively, I was shocked that it could happen like that. But, every attorney I called said I was out of luck. Anyway, the point is that employers can probably ask you to do anything they want, that isn't explicitly denied by law. So, it makes sense that they may fire you for not sharing passwords.
- goostavos 15y ago
  How serious is this Facebook business? I personally do not have one, in this day, is this an actual barrier to getting a job? Not being part of a social website? Either way, employers asking for a password to anything feels insanely slimy.
  - 15y ago

lucb1e 15y ago

I would set up a fake Facebook account if I were very desperately in need for a job. Or just say I don't have one, which is true at the moment. Otherwise, No and Goodbye. Sharing my password, any of them, is simply totally unacceptable. No way. I'm not giving them the key to my front door either am I? Or my ID card with my boss' face on it so that he can impersonate me, because that's also what this is (though that probably won't happen, so they key example is better, but that doesn't make this less true).

pasbesoin 15y ago

As I saw commented elsewhere, giving up your password / access to another person appears to be a pretty clear violation of Facebook's TOS (terms of service). So, my first response might be to ask whether they are soliciting me to breach a legal contract that I've entered. (I'll leave my thoughts on the actual legality or interpretation and reasonableness of claimed legality on the part of the service provider, here Facebook, as a separate question for another time.) At a minimum, this might be enough to ensure e.g. that the unemployment agency decides in my favor with respect to unemployment insurance, if things happen to go that way. I also recall another comment where someone pointed out that their friends on Facebook have an expectation of privacy in their own communications and that s/he will not compromise (betray) that expectation. That seems to me to be a pretty clear ethical argument. As a reasonable person, I would have a hard time challenging the ethics of such a response. Finally, personally, I agree with other comments here, that the access and information is none of their business. What perhaps some (not all) in the preponderance of relatively privileged professions represented on HN may not fully realize, is that for many people in the workforce there is effectively little or no choice. Jobs -- especially with decent pay and benefits -- are hard to come by, and many do not have the financial means to risk an episode or continuance of unemployment. For the sake of those people, as well as ourselves, we need to band together in opposition to this behavior. Even for ourselves, if the practice becomes commonplace, that sets a precedent that may subsequently box us in.

jchrisa 15y ago
I'm not a lawyer, but my guess is that if you could get a request like this in writing, the right lawyer would be able to get you a hefty settlement under existing law. Just guessing, but I'd be surprised if it's legal to ask prospective employees to engage in unlawful activities as a condition of employment. As mentioned before, sharing your Facebook password is illegal.
- grecy 15y ago
  I'm certain that anyone asking to snoop through your Facbook knows they are doing something "wrong" - maybe they don't understand the full implications, but I'm sure none of them would be stupid enough to put the request in writing.

sneak 15y ago

The argument can be made (at least in our industry) that someone who uses Facebook isn't someone you'd want to hire, anyway.

jcurbo 15y ago
I don't follow - are you saying you would not want to hire a software engineer that uses Facebook?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
Karunamon 15y ago
I'd say quite the opposite. It's normal and expected to be a member of multiple social networks. I'd wonder what kind of IT person doesn't have an account with facebook, twitter, a personal domain, etc. Nice ludditism, though.
- icebraining 15y ago
  I'd wonder what kind of IT person doesn't have an account with facebook I don't understand neither sneak's position nor yours, really. What exactly is odd about not wanting to feed the privacy black hole that is Facebook? I have nothing against those who do, but frankly I'll avoid it if I can.
  - Karunamon 15y ago
    Most people don't describe Facebook with such terms as a " privacy black hole "
    - icebraining 15y ago
      Most people (even most IT workers) don't use HN either, but I don't wonder "what kind of people" are we for using it.

mhartl 15y ago

This issue isn't an ought, it's an is. Every job is a negotiation, and if your negotiating position and skills are good enough then you won't have to comply with your boss's request for your Facebook passoword. Otherwise, you will.

RandallBrown 15y ago

If someone asked me for my facebook password I would ask for theirs. If they think it's important to see my personal information, they should be fine with me seeing theirs.

reinhardt 15y ago
If I had a facebook and someone asked me for my password I would laugh in their face, as if they had delivered the most deadpan of punchlines.

imgabe 15y ago

My idea of an appropriate response to this: Interviewer: Ok then, we'll just need your facebook login information and we'll be all set. Applicant: Sure thing, but first I'll need a key to your house. Interviewer: What? Why? Applicant: I'd like to go in when you're not there and rummage through your stuff, to make sure you're the kind of person I want to work for.

rbarooah 15y ago

How is this different from asking for your Gmail password?

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

nextparadigms 15y ago

Facebook should try and do something about this, because it's in their best interest. If this keeps going, people will either simply quit Facebook, or start making mock-accounts to show to the employees.

elithrar 15y ago
> Facebook should try and do something about this, because it's in their best interest. If this keeps going, people will either simply quit Facebook, or start making mock-accounts to show to the employees. What can Facebook do? At best, they can lobby the Government and/or employment regulators in an attempt to bring this practice to light and make requesting passwords and access to private accounts illegal. It's a very indirect method and may not change things now, tomorrow or even next month.

toddnessa 15y ago

It definitely crosses the line to ask or require your employees to access their private information. In cases such as this, employees are being treated more like company property than as free individuals. That's not cool.

hydian 15y ago

A company asking for this potentially opens themselves up to a huge amount of legal liability since a typical Facebook profile can contain an enormous amount of data that they are not allowed to ask during the interview process.