Social Network Suicide

There was a time when job seekers need only concern themselves with a sharp resume, neat appearance and fresh breath.

Looking good on paper and in person are still requirements of the job hunt, but more and more candidates are being viewed through an additional lens – social media.

The practice, referred to as online vetting or cybervetting, involves obtaining information through social networking sites (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, MySpace, et al.), blogs or search engines (Google, Yahoo!).

It is not illegal, but is not widely held as acceptable. But because of the wealth of information that’s available just a mouse-click away, it isn’t hard to imagine the first thing a hiring boss does when receiving an application or resume is to search for the applicant’s name on the Internet.

“Without a doubt, there are companies that do that,” said Mike Whittington, a partner with the executive recruiting firm Cameron Smith & Associates in Rogers.

“Social networking is really playing such a big part in all communication, and it’s something that recruiters as well as hiring managers use as an additional tool.”

Because of the rapid growth of technology, it would seem foolish for employers to ignore it as an additional resource.

According to a recent Econsultancy report, LinkedIn has more than 100 million professionals using its platform. Facebook has around 640 million users worldwide and Twitter reports 175 million registered users.

When it’s in the best interests of their company to do so, why wouldn’t an employer take advantage of that kind of reach to find out as much as possible about the person who wants to work there?

For the jobseeker, depending on the information that’s mined, it could mean the difference between landing and losing a job. Social media gaffes and digital photo trails that live forever can end the careers of the most powerful, (i.e. Weiner, Anthony).

 They can certainly keep a beginner from getting a foot in the door.

For the employer, the bottom line is determining what type of judgment a potential employee would use.

The average Facebook user creates 90 pieces of content every month, according to CareerBuilder.com. That’s a lot of indicators that potentially can be used to judge – fairly or unfairly.

If seen by people who are making important decisions about your future, posting pictures or information that could be viewed in a negative light can be a dangerous proposition.

Call it social network suicide.

 

Wanted: Additional Information

According to a 2009 survey of more than 2,600 hiring managers conducted by CareerBuilder.com, 45 percent of employers said they use social networking sites to screen employees.

Eleven percent of employers plan to begin using social networking sites for the screening process. Consider that a reflection of the ever-growing technology age.

“That doesn’t surprise me,” said Sara Staley. “The generations that are coming into the workforce are more technologically oriented than previous generations and the Internet and social media sites are where [hiring managers] and recruiters will source their candidates moving forward.”

Staley is the Bentonville and Rogers branch manager for Staffmark Investment LLC, an employment staffing company with more than 300 locations in 31 states.

The company’s aim is to act as a matchmaker between jobseekers and employers and as such, sees a large share of paper applications and conducts countless interviews.

From her perspective, Staley says the kind of personal information found on Facebook, Twitter or MySpace is irrelevant.

“I don’t think that whatever somebody puts on [his or her] Facebook page should affect [his or her] skill set or whether or not [he or she] is capable of doing a job,” she said. “It’s not a practice we use. I can’t speak for all Staffmark offices. Everybody is different in the way they source candidates, but I don’t think that technique would be something we would utilize.”

Staley did add that she would feel comfortable going to a job applicant’s LinkedIn profile because it’s not as much personal as it is business oriented. Others agree.

“In the past, you used to meet someone and exchange business cards,” Whittington said. “That’s LinkedIn. That’s your card now. It’s not necessarily [only for] a job seeker, but it says, ‘This is who I am and this is what I do.'”

Whittington said he believes companies aren’t mining social networking sites necessarily for negative or positive information. They just want additional information.

Or, when prompt processing is a plus, a recruiter may turn to cybervetting to get the ball rolling on the screening process.

“Sometimes as we are recruiting we may not have their resume yet and we just want to get a jumpstart on it,” he said. “I don’t think you make a decision based on that information. It’s not something we review or put any weight on.

“But, with Facebook being something that hiring managers are looking at, or at least have that option, if you’re someone looking to make a career change, you should make sure you’ve got everything buttoned up, so to speak.”

 

A Sticky Wicket

On the Staffmark website is the following disclaimer: Staffmark is committed to providing equal employment opportunity for all persons regardless of race, color, religion, sex, age, marital status, national origin, citizenship status, disability or veteran status.

Does that sound like information that might be readily viewable on a social networking page? Depending on a user’s privacy settings, it well could be.

The disclaimer is, of course, a reminder of federal and state laws that prohibit prospective employers from asking certain questions that are not related to the job they are hiring for.

Judging a job applicant – and ultimately disqualifying him or her based on racy findings – is one thing.

Discovering information that is legally prohibited is another.

“Technology is making our personal [lives] and our private hard to separate,” said Cyndi Nance, professor of law at the University of Arkansas. “So much is unsettled. Privacy laws in the states differ and the distinction between the public and private sector is quite a mish mash.”

One thing that overrides everything else for HR professionals is that hiring decisions must be reached on unbiased, legal considerations.

“It can be a sticky wicket,” said Kris DeLano, the HR director for Marshalltown Co. in Fayetteville. She has more than 25 years of HR experience and serves on the board of the Northwest Arkansas Human Resources Association. “Unless you protect that stuff, it is out there in a public domain. If you have Facebook and don’t have the right privacy settings, an employer can go get that without repercussion. But, once you know it, the onus is on the employer to prove that the information wasn’t used as the reason for hiring and not hiring.”

To date, these issues haven’t been addressed by the legal system, though that seems inevitable considering the legal risks involved. There are numerous unanswered questions involving discrimination, invasion of privacy, First Amendment rights and authenticity of information.

Nance said it’s a “pretty hot topic” among the American Bar Association set and will be a central topic at the ABA national meeting in Toronto in August.

Additionally, an article published recently in the Employment Screening Resources News reported that ESR – a nationwide background screening provider accredited by The National Association of Professional Background Screeners – will soon offer the white paper Managing the Risks of Using the Internet for Employment Screening Background Checks to provide an informative introduction to using Internet search engines and social network sites for employment background checks.

Melanie McClure, a partner at Cox, Sterling and McClure PLLC in North Little Rock, focuses on employment law and also maintains a blog about employment law issues at aremploymentlaw.com. In terms of vetting a candidate, McClure said she has yet to see a case arise from a candidate claiming to be denied employment because of social media.

“[Cybervetting] can create some risk,” she said. “But personally, I don’t think it’s enough to not do it. The information you can gain is very valuable.”

McClure did note the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the federal statute that requires employers to get consent from a job candidate before conducting a background check.

“Historically that’s been a criminal background check or a credit check,” she said. “I haven’t seen a case that just reaches into Googling anybody.”

Just last month, a startup company called Social Intelligence Corp. – which does background checks for companies via social media – was given approval by the Federal Trade Commission, concluding that the company operates within the boundaries of the FCRA.

The bottom line, McClure said, is to proceed with caution when cybervetting.

“If employers look at Google or any other social media source and do it in a systematic way, keep good records and document their practices, they’re going to be fine,” McClure said.