Job interview? Fork over Facebook Password

[Darth Rotor]

If a prospective employer asked that of me, they would immediately cease to be a prospective employer.

It is both unethical and legally questionable, as giving your password away would be a breach of Facebook's Terms of Service.

But first and foremost, it shows a complete disregard for basic IT security. As a software engineer, I find that to be completely unacceptable.

I think the answer is to find out if you are a lamer or not. Job interviews are full of ********** up questions. (I am glad I don't interview folks for jobs anymore, it's an annoying task ... )

Question during interview: "Will you give us your Facebook password."

Answer" "No. I have certain standards, and one of them is that when I leave the office, I leave it at the office. And you have no right. What did you think I was going to say: yes? I'm not stupid."

 

[tyr_13]

"No I'm not an idiot. Clever way of asking though."

 

[Darth Rotor]

Pithier than mine, well done tyr!

 

[Cleon]

"No I'm not an idiot. Clever way of asking though."

I'm so going to use that in the (unlikely) event this ever comes up...

 

[luchog]

Any place where you have to hide who you are to get the job is sure not a place I'd want to work. I guess I've been lucky.

Being transgendered, minarchist libertarian, pro-drug-legalization, BDSM-afficianado, goth, etc. I wouldn't have a whole lot of options available if I didn't hide who I am.

But that is, ultimately, a red herring. It's not about having to hide who I am, it's about who, really, has a need to know that information about me. My friends do, if I really consider them friends. Anyone I'm intimately involved with, for obvious reasons. But an employer has absolutely no need to know anything about me that does not directly impact job performance. I'm not enough of an exhibitionist to insist that everyone around me know my deepest and most intimate secrets, regardless of whether they have any reason to know.

One of the reasons I like working in IT, employers typically don't care about anything that the Federal government doesn't tell them to care about (which is almost nothing, unless you're dealing with HIPAA or PCI regulations); as long as you can do what you were hired for, to the standards that they set.

 

[luchog]

It's specifically the asking for passwords, thus gaining access to non-public, private activities that people are objecting to.

I'm aware of that, and did comment on it. But the only reason that's being done is that Facebook provides a level an granularity of privacy screening that was unavailable in previous social media platforms (in the past it was typically all-or-nothing, so most people defaulted to all), so employers who believe it's important to spy on their employees' and potential employees' private lives have no option but to ask for login information. I'm eagerly awaiting the results of the first lawsuits when (not "if", but definitely "when) employers misuse private information.

Part of the problem is that there is an entire generation growing up who have never really known a time without an Internet, and have had an online presence as soon as they were old enough to use a computer. For them, the line between their private and public lives has become increasingly blurred, and they are much less well equipped to deal with, or often even recognize, the sort of unreasonable demands by authority figures that we're seeing here.

 

[crimresearch]

I'm aware of that, and did comment on it. But the only reason that's being done is that Facebook provides a level an granularity of privacy screening that was unavailable in previous social media platforms (in the past it was typically all-or-nothing, so most people defaulted to all), so employers who believe it's important to spy on their employees' and potential employees' private lives have no option but to ask for login information. I'm eagerly awaiting the results of the first lawsuits when (not "if", but definitely "when) employers misuse private information.

Part of the problem is that there is an entire generation growing up who have never really known a time without an Internet, and have had an online presence as soon as they were old enough to use a computer. For them, the line between their private and public lives has become increasingly blurred, and they are much less well equipped to deal with, or often even recognize, the sort of unreasonable demands by authority figures that we're seeing here.

That isn't how FB works. (And this has been gone over several times in this thread).

If a prospective employer 'needs' to see your account, they can ask you to log yourself in, to make all layers accessible to them for viewing.
No log in information is needed, the account holder merely needs to allow viewing access. If they want to see your private messages, then you can show them your private messages, etc.
(Why anyone would agree to even that is another issue, but the prospective employer can ask).

Providing a password *to* them gives them an additional capability... to create/delete content under your name.

There is no legitimate need for that, and according to FB, it is a violation of the user agreement.
And as mentioned above, there is certainly no need for someone to have all the passwords of hundreds of applicants who will never even be offered the job.

 

[luchog]

If a prospective employer 'needs' to see your account, they can ask you to log yourself in, to make all layers accessible to them for viewing.
No log in information is needed, the account holder merely needs to allow viewing access. If they want to see your private messages, then you can show them your private messages, etc.
(Why anyone would agree to even that is another issue, but the prospective employer can ask).

Providing a password *to* them gives them an additional capability... to create/delete content under your name.

The problem is that you are assuming that prospective employers are technically savvy enough to understand how the system works. My experience is that few people at the management level, even in tech companies, have that level of knowledge and ability (back in the '80s and early '90s, they would be the sort of people referred to by the tech-savvy as "twelve-o'clock flashers"). All they're going to know is that it's possible for employees/applicants to restrict access to certain information on their accounts; and that they want to see that information. It's far easier to simply demand a password, than have someone knowledgeable enough babysit the employee/applicant to ensure that he's providing all of the information they want. And management is not known for choosing any option that makes more work for themselves.

The only reason that the password issue has not been a problem until now, is that none of the previous social media venues had anywhere near the level of adoption and activity that Facebook does. Very few people, comparatively speaking, would have an active account on Livejournal, Myspace, or a personal blog; and posts would be fairly infrequent. On top of that, managers would be highly unlikely to have such an account themselves. Now, a huge majority of people are likely to have Facebook accounts, and post to them regularly; including the managers making such demands.

 

[Xulld]

In another forum I said this: If a company asks for my facebook password during an interview, Id say can I have the corporate face book accounts password? When they say the company does not have a facebook page, I will then say, "whadya know, neither do I"

 

[crimresearch]

The problem is that you are assuming that prospective employers are technically savvy enough to understand how the system works. My experience is that few people at the management level, even in tech companies, have that level of knowledge and ability (back in the '80s and early '90s, they would be the sort of people referred to by the tech-savvy as "twelve-o'clock flashers"). All they're going to know is that it's possible for employees/applicants to restrict access to certain information on their accounts; and that they want to see that information. It's far easier to simply demand a password, than have someone knowledgeable enough babysit the employee/applicant to ensure that he's providing all of the information they want. And management is not known for choosing any option that makes more work for themselves.

The only reason that the password issue has not been a problem until now, is that none of the previous social media venues had anywhere near the level of adoption and activity that Facebook does. Very few people, comparatively speaking, would have an active account on Livejournal, Myspace, or a personal blog; and posts would be fairly infrequent. On top of that, managers would be highly unlikely to have such an account themselves. Now, a huge majority of people are likely to have Facebook accounts, and post to them regularly; including the managers making such demands.

Well. I would guess that most managers, or people with HR access would know how to use someone's password to send a message, edit content etc. but they wouldn't neccessarily know how to find the settings and get into layered information, like friend's secure stuff.
The former is enough for me to say 'No'.

 

[crimresearch]

In another forum I said this: If a company asks for my facebook password during an interview, Id say can I have the corporate face book accounts password? When they say the company does not have a facebook page, I will then say, "whadya know, neither do I"

This had made me rethink having an account under my real name...

 

[luchog]

This had made me rethink having an account under my real name...

I've never had any publicly visible account under my given name, except LinkedIn of course, for just this reason. My private life is not the business of any employer.