Social media background checks before appointment
Discussion
Thinking from the other side an education board doesn't want the media hassle of an internet raving loony working for them. My last few jobs have had social media checks.
I remember getting a lecture about online privacy and security, and be of the girls in the course had open media profiles, seeing her in her bikini on a 400" screen in a lecture theatre was a sight to behold!
I remember getting a lecture about online privacy and security, and be of the girls in the course had open media profiles, seeing her in her bikini on a 400" screen in a lecture theatre was a sight to behold!
Our policy is NOT to check social media prior to hiring:
https://www.acas.org.uk/hiring-someone/using-infor...
“Avoid using information that’s on someone’s social media profile to decide whether you interview or hire them.
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
https://www.acas.org.uk/hiring-someone/using-infor...
“Avoid using information that’s on someone’s social media profile to decide whether you interview or hire them.
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
bristolbaron said:
Our policy is NOT to check social media prior to hiring:
https://www.acas.org.uk/hiring-someone/using-infor...
“Avoid using information that’s on someone’s social media profile to decide whether you interview or hire them.
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
This is what I think might happen, highly unionised plus many applicants are quite young and (given the 5 years history they want checked) could have been minors at the time.https://www.acas.org.uk/hiring-someone/using-infor...
“Avoid using information that’s on someone’s social media profile to decide whether you interview or hire them.
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
Oh well, we'll see how it pans out.
21TonyK said:
Just how legal is this?
100% legal. 100% justifiable.
If you publish something on Social Media and choose not to restrict that content then you choose to make that content public which is free for potential employers to use to build a better understanding of the person they are considering hiring.
21TonyK said:
Posted something a potential employer doesn't think is appropriate and you don't get the job?
Who determines what's appropriate and whats not?
In respect of the job, the employer.Who determines what's appropriate and whats not?
If you're not sure yourself the difference between what's appropriate and inappropriate you might do well to change the settings on your pages.... or consider whether Social Media is for you.
bristolbaron said:
https://www.acas.org.uk/hiring-someone/using-infor...
“Avoid using information that’s on someone’s social media profile to decide whether you interview or hire them.
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
I think you'll find that this is advisory rather than law. The only thing that may be upheld in a court is the last bit but very difficult to prove.“Avoid using information that’s on someone’s social media profile to decide whether you interview or hire them.
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
Edited by StevieBee on Tuesday 28th June 19:34
It's a slightly dodgy area... Getting into the realms of "social scoring" etc... And as somebody alluded to above - The question of subjectivity (the person viewing the applicant's SM profile might have a biased view which could then have an unfair adverse effect on the applicants' job application).
If I was going for a new job I would absolutely expect the employer to do a bit of amateur sleuthing (or stalking if you don't want to gloss over it). Not that I have anything to hide but since I value my privacy I do make sure the majority of my online presence is masked as best as possible. Anything they find might turn over info about hobbies (music, cars, dogs etc) and my Ltd company accounts but very little else really. Actually I'm not one to publicly express controversial opinions (not that I have any really!)
We have some properties (a mix of self owned and some owned by my partner's family but managed by me), mainly flats and HMOs. The rental market where I am is absolutely alive with people desperate for good accommodation and every time we advertise a property (usually monthly at the minute!), I get more enquiries than I can cope with - Close to 100 in some cases. I find the quickest way to weed out potential problem tenants is to simply look up their social media stuff and online presence (googling phone numbers is another trick). The ones which don't pass muster due to various reasons/presumptions I make based on my findings immediately get disregarded without even contact let alone viewing. This cuts my list down to a few who seem like decent people which I will then engage with and offer viewings etc.
Is this morally wrong? Should I feel bad about this? It's a cruel world but I can't afford to take risks on problem tenants and I find that social media background checks usually ensure I find the right tenants every time.
If I was going for a new job I would absolutely expect the employer to do a bit of amateur sleuthing (or stalking if you don't want to gloss over it). Not that I have anything to hide but since I value my privacy I do make sure the majority of my online presence is masked as best as possible. Anything they find might turn over info about hobbies (music, cars, dogs etc) and my Ltd company accounts but very little else really. Actually I'm not one to publicly express controversial opinions (not that I have any really!)
We have some properties (a mix of self owned and some owned by my partner's family but managed by me), mainly flats and HMOs. The rental market where I am is absolutely alive with people desperate for good accommodation and every time we advertise a property (usually monthly at the minute!), I get more enquiries than I can cope with - Close to 100 in some cases. I find the quickest way to weed out potential problem tenants is to simply look up their social media stuff and online presence (googling phone numbers is another trick). The ones which don't pass muster due to various reasons/presumptions I make based on my findings immediately get disregarded without even contact let alone viewing. This cuts my list down to a few who seem like decent people which I will then engage with and offer viewings etc.
Is this morally wrong? Should I feel bad about this? It's a cruel world but I can't afford to take risks on problem tenants and I find that social media background checks usually ensure I find the right tenants every time.
I've heard it said it's best to get someone who isn't the decision maker to review the social media and let the decision maker know of any positives or red flags. The decision maker should not look at it. That way you avoid the risk of the decision maker seeing factors that aren't on a CV and aren't relevant to an application but the decision maker feels prejudiced.about and consciously or subconsciously favouring or rejecting a candidate based on these.
Maybe more about unconscious bias than anything legal. Most places are trying to be as fair as possible (as an organisation) but the hiring manager obviously wants the best person for their team so may ignore company policy. Of course they'll never admit the reason someone didn't get a job was because of something they saw on Facebook.
Hoofy said:
"Can we have your social media account info?"
"Sorry, I don't use it."
Next step?
Type their name into a search engine and social media sites. It’s not going to help with John/Jane Smith, but will get plenty. Especially the sort with a less professional presence. "Sorry, I don't use it."
Next step?
Would people class LinkedIn as social media?
bristolbaron said:
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
In what way is the second one close to breaking any law? Outwith of protected characteristics, I'm not aware that any hiring process legally has to offer a level playing field. You're quite entitled to ask one candidate to build a cold fusion reactor whilst measuring another on their ability to drink vodka.they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
Llew said:
Is this morally wrong? Should I feel bad about this? It's a cruel world but I can't afford to take risks on problem tenants and I find that social media background checks usually ensure I find the right tenants every time.
Not wrong at all. I’d say it’s very sensible.Alex Z said:
Would people class LinkedIn as social media?
Yes.bristolbaron said:
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
When you publish something, the meaning of the word is essentially to ‘make public’. When you do this, you have no legal recourse of protection regardless of how they use that information.
Douglas Quaid said:
The easiest way for this to not be an issue is to not use social media.
Yes.... or, think about what you post and /or learn how to use the privacy settings.deckster said:
bristolbaron said:
You might be breaking the law, particularly if either of the following points apply:
they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
In what way is the second one close to breaking any law? they did not agree to you using the information in this way
you looked at some applicants’ social media profiles, but not others”
However, it's impossible to prove and there exists no law on the specific point, only on the basis of any discrimination based upon the insight that enquiry uncovered.
The only example I can think of is if one of the applicants is a female in her late 20s and a look at her social media profile reveals posts about buying pregnancy testing kits or content relating to her trying for a baby. In this case, if the employer then chooses the other applicant (male) then there may be grounds for discrimination - but that relates to the reasoning rather than the means by which the information was obtained.
Douglas Quaid said:
The easiest way for this to not be an issue is to not use social media.
The trouble is a lot of people do. I asked a potential grad about it a couple of years ago (before 2016...) and they said they weren't worried about, everyone they were in competition with had similar on theirs. And what defines "social media", put it this way, how many people would you hire based on their N, P & E history?
As to how I respond to that question from a hiring manager? I'll show you mine when you show me yours, we both want to know who we are working with after all.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff