WSJ.com: The study, a Carnegie Mellon University experiment involving dummy résumés and social-media profiles, found that between 10% and a third of U.S. firms searched social networks for job applicants' information early in the hiring process. In those cases, candidates whose public Facebook FB -2.78% profiles indicated they were Muslim were less likely to be called for interviews than Christian applicants. The difference was particularly pronounced in parts of the country where more people identify themselves as conservative. In those places, Christian applicants got callbacks 17% of the time, compared with about 2% for Muslims.
7 comments:
I hope that this study influences people to look more carefully at what their Facebook profile says about them, and how much information is accessible to someone who isn't part of their friends list. It is no surprise that discrimination happens via social media as well. We all pass judgments on someone when we meet them based on what they look like and what we know about them. The thing is, some people act upon that judgment based on prejudice, and other don't. Because of that, it's important to think about how the way you look and act impacts what others might think of you, and it's just as prevalent on social media as it is in the real world.
I agree with Rusty Rueff's saying on "it is human nature to search." Nowadays, Facebook is literally open for everyone. People just do not realize how much information is exposed to the public or job employers, but it is something that everyone should be aware of. For me personally, I have heard from my mom that someone was fired from his job because of his commentary on Facebook about the company he was in. I also heard that someone did not get a job because there was an inappropriate picture on his Facebook page. I know that the interviewers are not allowed to ask questions about these traits, but they do not even need to do it anymore because with one typing of name, it shows everything that they want. I agree that maybe they can look through inappropriate pictures or status to discriminate or judge the employees because the employees chose to put on with awareness of them being disadvantages. However, I think discriminating against one's belief, look, race, and other stuff is not acceptable and should be banned. Although everyone should be aware and more careful about what they post because Facebook is another representation of the self, I hope that one should be really judged by what the employers receive, not by the stuff that they have been stalking.
James McDonald's point at the end of this article really caught my attention. Any personal information that an individual has made publicly available online is information that is legally obtained by employers, but, as this study points out, hiring discrimination based on some of this information (such as race, religion, etc.) is still illegal. The point about the possibility of discriminating unintentionally comes into play here. If you, as an employer, expose yourself to a job candidate's Facebook profile, chances are you're going to make judgments about them based on that profile that are not entirely justified, or even legal in the case of hiring practices. I agree with Rusty Rueff's point about human nature, and how it makes sense in this day and age for employers to want to jump to the fast, easy way to screen employees, especially in an initial screening process. However, I do think that employers should start being careful about how they let social media screening influence their hiring practices.
Whether or not you think this is legal or ethical, it's a reality when applying to jobs. I personally think that since it's a part of your life that you're choosing to put out into the public, you shouldn't be surprised when an employer utilizes the tools at hand to find out more about a prospective employee. Unfortunately, many individuals aren't aware of these privacy settings, or don't know what to do about them. The ill-informed are at a loss, as is often the case with poorly crafted resumes or cover letters that were rushed ten minutes before the deadline. While many people think that this use of technology is unfair, I think it's as fair as a deliberate search of a high school yearbook, or a hushed telephoning of close friends for dirt on a candidate. I don't think it's the best way to do it and probably says something about the company, but I can see how this isn't so much caused by technology as simply made easier.
I think it's common sense for companies to screen the facebook profiles of potential hires. If nothing else, it's a great way to see if there are mutual acquaintances that can provide more information about the individual. And I don't think they need to provide a written or vocal warning saying that they are going to do this, because it's pretty common practice at this point. However, I do think it disqualifies them from being "Equal Opportunity Employers."
Holy victim blaming, Batman! While a person is undoubtably responsible for the information they share on Facebook, it is never, ever ok to discriminate based on a protected class. Putting your religious beliefs on your Facebook page is completely appropriate social media behavior, and, as an employer, it is your responsibility not to discriminate. If you cannot assure your personal beliefs won't color your perception of a candidate, then you simply should not open the can of worms that is social media. I personally hate how social media has become such a litmus test of professionalism, particularly because it seems to only go one way. I do my part to make sure my online presence is professional and discrete, and I should be able to expect someone charged specifically with not discriminating will not take my marital status, religious beliefs, or any other protected class into account.
This study isn't really about social media, it's about good old American discrimination. It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that people will allow their prejudices to color their better judgement when vetting candidates for a job. Was Facebook somehow supposed to be immune to the ugly side of human nature? Judging from the general level of discourse adorning its pages, I think not. The advice offered by Mr.McDonald at the bottom of the article misses the point, and is given from a typically litigation-conscious point of view. Better advice might be: "Don't be an asshole." Of course employers should look at Facebook and any other information they can find publicly about candidates. The application process is all about tailoring information, and as a potential employer, you should be doing everything you can to get a true picture of a candidate. What someone chooses to broadcast to the world on social media is an important part of that true picture and can say a lot about their judgement, let alone their personal taste. And if an employer is going to discriminate based on race, ethnicity, age, religion, body-type or any of the myriad foolish reasons we limit our understanding, then he would eventually anyway, and advising someone like that to avoid social media so they don't prove themselves an ignorant chowder-head is an apologist's position. Only by recognizing prejudice in ourselves and taking it on in the full light of day can we hope to move beyond it.
Post a Comment