Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Izawwlgood » Fri Oct 31, 2008 8:33 pm UTC

GreaterSteven wrote:And I'm assuming you agree it's not ridiculous to want to add somebody you've just met on facebook.


I routinely remove people from facebook who I'm not on 'better then acquaintance' terms with. I'm not saying everyone should, but the notion that facebook should be used in a particular way is kind of silly. I know people who have 1300000 friends, I just find that particularly stupid. I treat facebook as a means for keeping up with people I care about, not as a means for seeing what someone I met once five years ago at a party is doing now.

But 'What should facebooks purpose be?' is not really the question at hand.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Fri Oct 31, 2008 9:34 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:but the notion that facebook should be used in a particular way is kind of silly.


Yes. Yes it is.

Including the notion that facebook should be used to present a "professional" version of you for employers' sakes, rather than whatever you want because it's your own damn facebook.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Intercept » Fri Oct 31, 2008 9:41 pm UTC

So don't add your boss when you have a job and set it to private when you're applying. Problem solved.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

GreaterSteven
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:23 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby GreaterSteven » Fri Oct 31, 2008 10:29 pm UTC

I routinely remove people from facebook who I'm not on 'better then acquaintance' terms with. I'm not saying everyone should, but the notion that facebook should be used in a particular way is kind of silly. I know people who have 1300000 friends, I just find that particularly stupid. I treat facebook as a means for keeping up with people I care about, not as a means for seeing what someone I met once five years ago at a party is doing now.

But 'What should facebooks purpose be?' is not really the question at hand.


I have like, 150 friends added on facebook.

What I think is silly is not adding somebody you just met and are interested in pursuing a friendship with just because you don't really know them yet.

That's like going off to college and not talking to people because you already have high school friends and you don't know anybody there.

User avatar
Maseiken
The Candylawyer
Posts: 2827
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 11:13 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Maseiken » Fri Oct 31, 2008 11:07 pm UTC

Down here in Australia we have a show called The New Inventors, awhile ago on this show I saw a woman who had developed a Social Networking site that linked directly into your phone (It was mainly iPhone based. Hence you could make it say "I'm in a meeting" so people wouldn't call unless it was REALLY friggin' important. Or it could say "I'm really sick" so people wouldn't invite you out places but they might call to check up on you. or it could say "Call me right now with a fake Emergency!" if you're on a Blind Date with a Homicidal Maniac.

Anywho, the main point of this system was that it could present diferent status' to different people. So in this guys case, to all the people at work (who he has on his system to make communication easier) His Boss would've seen a message saying "Oh man, I thing I just coughed up a chunk of Lung!" and all his Pals would've seen a message saying "SICKIE WOO".

*sigh* it's times like THIS I want the Thinkgeek Rotary phone Handset so I can kick it Old-school in deference to things like "Face-Space" and "Mybook" and "Flicktwer".
"GRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOWR!!!!"
(Translation: "Objection!")

Maseiken had the ball at the top of the key...

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Izawwlgood » Sat Nov 01, 2008 6:31 am UTC

Nougs, it really seems that you aren't listening to the myriad of people who have chimed in with comments about information in a public forum being out of your hands.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:03 am UTC

Intercept wrote:So don't add your boss when you have a job and set it to private when you're applying. Problem solved.

Well, again, adding your boss to facebook and setting a status is exactly like telling your boss that status. I'm not disputing that, although this particular case should maybe have played out differently depending on the company's actual sick day policy.

Izawwlgood wrote:Nougs, it really seems that you aren't listening to the myriad of people who have chimed in with comments about information in a public forum being out of your hands.

"Out of your hands" does not automatically mean "in a potential employers' hands," though. I have a livejournal that does have some public entries; that doesn't mean an employer should be able to use a post about losing my cell phone and needing friends' numbers again or another showcasing my recent tattoo as a factor in whether they hire me.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby EsotericWombat » Sat Nov 01, 2008 3:22 pm UTC

It doesn't fucking matter that it's in a public forum. We happen to have laws about discriminatory hiring practices. Unfortunately, the people who are protected by them only get added one at a time (a group called the Human Rights Campaign actually fucking had to debate whether or not to throw its support for a bill that would add support for transpersons). What I'm saying, and what I believe Nougat is saying, is that instead of expanding these protections piecemeal, we should be protecting EVERYONE.

There is no reason why fair housing laws, equal oppertunity employment law, and all other laws following that same formula shouldn't protect against discrimination against ANYTHING not relevant to whatever it is the person is seeking (employment, housing, etc).
Image

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Intercept » Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:45 pm UTC

Two Things:

1) The discriminatory laws are for things that can't be helped, like gender, age, race, orientation, etc. You choose to get drunk as hell.

2) Knowing someone likes to get wasted, does affect their job performance. If nothing else it gives you an idea of the kind of judgment that person has, which is in an important factor when hiring an employee.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:17 pm UTC

Intercept wrote:1) The discriminatory laws are for things that can't be helped, like gender, age, race, orientation, etc. You choose to get drunk as hell.

Currently, yes. But again, I am SAYING these should be expanded to contain anything that is not relevant to the job.


Intercept wrote:2) Knowing someone likes to get wasted, does affect their job performance. If nothing else it gives you an idea of the kind of judgment that person has, which is in an important factor when hiring an employee.

I can't remember ever filling out an application that asked whether or not I like to get wasted, which is a pretty good indication that it's actually not that important a factor.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby EsotericWombat » Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:23 pm UTC

What I'm saying is that companies don't get to tell us how we live our lives. If I can do the job, it shouldn't matter if I like to tie one on now and again if there's no history of it affecting my performance, or in fact even if there's a video on the internet of me fucking someone dressed as a giraffe.

We should not have to answer for our private lives when we seek employment.

FUCK.

THAT.

SHIT.
Image

GreaterSteven
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:23 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby GreaterSteven » Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:09 pm UTC

Intercept wrote:2) Knowing someone likes to get wasted, does affect their job performance. If nothing else it gives you an idea of the kind of judgment that person has, which is in an important factor when hiring an employee.


Judgement?

I don't drink, personally, but I have plenty of friends who drink. I don't think it really reflects on their judgement. Even when they get shit faced.

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Intercept » Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:33 pm UTC

I have nothing against people getting completely shit faced. The problem is, most people don't do it in a controlled environment, which is poor judgment. Hell, letting people take pictures of it and put it on facebook and leaving it tagged are poor judgment if you're looking for work. And again Noug, assuming all other things are equal, you'd have to be an idiot to hire someone who gets completely wasted occasionally over a sober person. Or you'd have to work at a brewery.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby EsotericWombat » Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:39 pm UTC

Or you'd have to be someone who isn't a douchetruck and checked up on things and noticed that there was no record of the one person's habits effecting their performance (all other things being equal, as per your frame) and find a different way to make the decision.
Image

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:58 pm UTC

Does this picture of me imply in any way shape or form that I am not suitable for a job?

blarrred.jpg
blarrred.jpg (31.26 KiB) Viewed 1971 times
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Hawknc » Sat Nov 01, 2008 11:59 pm UTC

I think that would depend very much on the job...

User avatar
Sandry
My cheese is pants?
Posts: 1894
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 3:36 am UTC
Location: Boston area
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Sandry » Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:02 am UTC

Pretty sure Nougat's not looking to be the next Joe the Plumber, and I think almost anything else would be inappropriate. :P
He does not spout ever more, new stupidities. He "diversifies his wrongness portfolio."
(My pronouns are She/Her/Hers)

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby EsotericWombat » Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:10 am UTC

"No way we can hire this guy. Motherfucker is BLURRY"
Image

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Hawknc » Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:11 am UTC

"Lacks ability to focus"

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Izawwlgood » Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:31 am UTC

Again, the kid wasn't fired because he was drunk, he was fired because he got caught lying to his employer about it. I don't think this argument is about whether or not we should protect peoples rights to drink and post about it on facebook. I think the argument is about whether or not an employer should be able to use public information about a potential employee or even a current employee as grounds for termination. And I think the answer is yes.

Protecting someone on things like gender, or race, or religion can be protected and still have these laws in place. Frankly, if a company has a strict 'moral' code, and says "all employees must maintain standard x" and you post pictures in a forum that shows you clearly violating standard x, you should be shit out of luck. If you want a job that doesn't care what you do, there are plenty out there. But, again, this isn't really the argument at hand, because the kid wasn't fired for drinking.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:46 am UTC

I think the argument is about whether or not an employer should be able to use public information about a potential employee or even a current employee as grounds for termination. And I think the answer is yes.


And I very strongly believe no. So I guess we're at an impasse.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
mercurythief
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:21 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby mercurythief » Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:50 am UTC

If I was considering someone for employment I absolutely would look up that person on Myspace/Facebook/Google. Things like blogging about how much their old company sucks would certainly make me reject them, and although pictures of the person partying wouldn't influence my decision too much, if it came down to a person with such pictures, and one without, I would pick the person without the pictures every time. Employers are often looking for people who can represent the company both at and outside of work. It's detrimental to the company for its employees to be seen negatively by the public - whether that's at a bar, or on Facebook.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:16 am UTC

mercurythief wrote:Employers are often looking for people who can represent the company both at and outside of work.


Yeah, but here's the thing. Most jobs aren't about representing the company. Most jobs are about doing a specific set of tasks for that company. Sometimes those tasks may include representing the company to other business or to customers. Very few jobs that aren't high-profile enough that you're already practically a public figure can be helped or hindered by some sort of outrageous personal conduct.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby EsotericWombat » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:25 am UTC

@mercurythief:

FUCK that mentality. I can't be clear enough about this.

Your employer doesn't own you. Anything that you do that doesn't effect the eight hours of your day that you spend at your job is none of their FUCKING business, and that should be encoded into law.

The fact that people's facebooks, myspaces, and blogs are being rummaged through for this shit creates an incentive for all of us to be less interesting. This becomes more true the more social networking and businesses' use thereof becomes more ubiquitous. It's easy to see how this has the potential to make our society quantifiably less enjoyable.

These days, the greatest dangers to free expression come from corporate enterprise. Central to democracy as we practice it is the idea, as expressed by Jefferson, that the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are inalienable. That doesn't mean that only private enterprise gets to fuck with them, it means that no one does. And while yes, in theory, one has the ability to find other work, the more these practices are propagated and the less feasible it becomes to conduct oneself without concern of them, the more it becomes a de facto violation of our basic rights. And that shit needs to stop.
Image

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Intercept » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:43 am UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:Or you'd have to be someone who isn't a douchetruck and checked up on things and noticed that there was no record of the one person's habits effecting their performance (all other things being equal, as per your frame) and find a different way to make the decision.


So how do you plan on getting this information? I mean, you can't ask them for their worst qualities just so you can decide whether to hire them. Also, apparently using information that is public domain is also off limits according to some, so you're not left with much.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Intercept » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:50 am UTC

Wombat: You seem to think there is a very black/white distinction for how things affect your job. They either do or they don't. That's false. If I know someone likes to get shitfaced, they may skip work for a hangover, which even if it is in the rules as acceptable, is not optimal. Or worse, they use all of their sick days with an actual sickness and then come to work with a hangover because they exercised poor judgment the night before.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

GreaterSteven
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:23 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby GreaterSteven » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:53 am UTC

Intercept wrote:So how do you plan on getting this information? I mean, you can't ask them for their worst qualities just so you can decide whether to hire them. Also, apparently using information that is public domain is also off limits according to some, so you're not left with much.



Call aforementioned references? That were asked for and provided?

User avatar
mercurythief
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:21 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby mercurythief » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:55 am UTC

Nougatrocity wrote:
mercurythief wrote:Employers are often looking for people who can represent the company both at and outside of work.


Yeah, but here's the thing. Most jobs aren't about representing the company. Most jobs are about doing a specific set of tasks for that company. Sometimes those tasks may include representing the company to other business or to customers. Very few jobs that aren't high-profile enough that you're already practically a public figure can be helped or hindered by some sort of outrageous personal conduct.


I don't have any hard numbers, so I won't say anything about 'most jobs', but here's how I would feel if I owned a business: if an employee is in public, and can be associated with my business in any way, I want them to act professionally. The employee doesn't need to be a public figure to be associated with the company - they could be wearing a company shirt/it could come up in a conversation they're having/they could directly post it on Facebook, Myspace, or their blog/etc. If a customer somehow associates bad behavior with the company, that could be a lost sale. Public perception of a company is also an issue when the company needs to go to the city to purchase land, or get a permit or something. If a politician is making the decision, a company that is loved by the public is much more likely to get what it wants.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:10 am UTC

Public perception is far more influenced by actual dealings with the company, and information about other experiences with the company, than what that company's employee's do in their off time.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
mercurythief
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:21 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby mercurythief » Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:27 am UTC

Nougatrocity wrote:Public perception is far more influenced by actual dealings with the company, and information about other experiences with the company, than what that company's employee's do in their off time.


That's true in most cases, but not always so. Consider a company that writes software for banks - they don't really have dealings with the average citizen, though that citizen may have a say in whether or not to sell a public park to that company

EsotericWombat wrote:Your employer doesn't own you. Anything that you do that doesn't effect the eight hours of your day that you spend at your job is none of their FUCKING business, and that should be encoded into law.


Of course they don't own you, but anything that you do that affects them is their business. Searching through current employees' Facebook pages is probably counter-productive, and I doubt many employers do that on a regular basis. However, if a found a blog post by you, an employee, ranting about how much my company sucks, I would very quickly discuss with you the meaning of at-will employment.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:41 am UTC

mercurythief wrote:Of course they don't own you, but anything that you do that affects them is their business. Searching through current employees' Facebook pages is probably counter-productive, and I doubt many employers do that on a regular basis. However, if a found a blog post by you, an employee, ranting about how much my company sucks, I would very quickly discuss with you the meaning of at-will employment.


Well, there's an obvious collision of personal and professional interest in the case of saying that your employer sucks.

Even then, it's still possible, therapeutic, and often NECESSARY to complain about one's job. And it can actually be done without specifying who you work for, in which case your professional interests are not compromised.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby EsotericWombat » Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:41 am UTC

Well if I were actively defaming the company or its products/services, that would be one thing. But if I blogged about how my boss was giving me shit and you made with a similar confrontation, you could fuck right the hell off. Times ten.

And if I were a politician in a position to do your company any favors and I heard that you were having those sorts of discussions about stuff you found on the internet, you would never get a fucking thing from me.
Image

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Izawwlgood » Sun Nov 02, 2008 10:00 am UTC

I don't think you guys get it, or have had much exposure to companies that do think this way. I can tell you that a number of my friends work for companies that would fire them outright if they posted photos of them acting inappropriately. A number of professions that I can think of absolutely demand a certain type of behavior, or at least standards, that must be obeyed when both on and off the job.

The attitude that they have about it seems to be if you want to work somewhere that doesn't require this dedication, then go work there.

So, no, don't fuck that shit, own up and decide what's more important to you, the amount of drunken photos you post online, or working what could potentially be a kick ass job/career builder.


and that said, that STILL isn't what the OP is about.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sun Nov 02, 2008 10:40 am UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:I don't think you guys get it, or have had much exposure to companies that do think this way. I can tell you that a number of my friends work for companies that would fire them outright if they posted photos of them acting inappropriately. A number of professions that I can think of absolutely demand a certain type of behavior, or at least standards, that must be obeyed when both on and off the job.

We do get it. We get it very much. And we've been saying for pages that it's bullshit, and that the law should reflect that it's bullshit, by making such hiring/firing decisions illegal.

Can you fill us in on some of these professions where your effectiveness is affected by public knowledge of your personal life?

and that said, that STILL isn't what the OP is about.

Yyyeah...again, for pages, we've been saying the discussion has drifted to the issue at large, not this specific instance.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Izawwlgood » Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:32 pm UTC

Nougatrocity wrote:Can you fill us in on some of these professions where your effectiveness is affected by public knowledge of your personal life?


It's not about effectiveness, it's about your employers right to maintain an image for their client base. No, of course I can't think of anything that would be affected by your private life, and I mean that fairly universally. But you worry about protecting the rights of the individual to be as perverse and loud about it as possible, and I support that, but think with that territory comes the right of the employer to hire who they want in their workforce. It IS different from discrimination based on race, gender, religion, although frankly, when it comes down to it, if an employer wants to fire you for those reasons, there are plenty of ways for them to do it legally. That doesn't make the latter practice okay, but for the sake of discussion, wow, didn't Affirmative Action solve ALL the problems?

I think getting riled up and sue happy about the 'rights' of the employee/employer is a sure fire way to clog the legal system and prevent actual instances of 'discrimination' from being brought to trail. Refusing to hire someone because they are black is a far cry different from refusing to hire someone because they where reckless with public space and didn't put forth the 'image' required of their position. You can build a counter argument pretty easily, but if an organization wants to maintain a standard, and that standard is upheld by applicant A, but not applicant B, they are perfectly within their right to hire applicant A over B.

I just want to be clear that I personally don't work at one of these companies, so the point is sort of moot. I don't think they should be barred from 'doing what they do'. So, here, a short and very anecdotal list of people who were told to either clean their myspace/facebook pages up or be careful with what got put up.
A friend of mine is a private school teacher. She was told to maintain the standard of professionalism on and off work, and that parents of students will do 'loose background checks', so before officially being announced, was 'encouraged to regulate her online presence' or something vague like that.
A number of friends who work in finance (which honestly, i couldn't tell you what exactly they do) received similar instructions upon hiring. A friend who work for the city (An aldermans assistant I think?). A guy finishing a degree or certificate to become a 'mediation counselor'. One guy working for a film production studio in LA. One guy working for border patrol in some awful city in southern Texas.

In fact, the last instance, I know for certain he almost got into a good amount of trouble for having a facebook account! He had parred down the content heavily, no images beyond a smiling mug shot and some general info about him, removing all past college photos, and heavily cleaning up his page, someone posted on his wall that they should get shit faced and crazy, or something fairly innocuous.

I guess the point is, no, I don't think your work life is affected by your home life decisions, and you should be free to do what you want, but there are things that might get you fired in some work places, and you SHOULD use your best judgment about the matter. Does it suck? Maybe. Should be bend over backwards and make sure employers get what they deserve for firing this idiot who got drunk and lied to his boss? I don't think so.

I think the burden of proof is also on you guys to some extent. Can you provide reasoning for which a publicly traded, or even privately owned company, should be forced to accept their employees for who and what they are, no matter how potentially damaging a body may be to the 'image' of the company?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
RealGrouchy
Nobody Misses Me As Much As Meaux.
Posts: 6704
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 7:17 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby RealGrouchy » Sun Nov 02, 2008 3:58 pm UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:What I'm saying is that companies don't get to tell us how we live our lives. If I can do the job, it shouldn't matter if I like to tie one on now and again if there's no history of it affecting my performance, or in fact even if there's a video on the internet of me fucking someone dressed as a giraffe.

We should not have to answer for our private lives when we seek employment.
First of all, this guy already had the job. He was fired for lying to his already boss, not a potential boss. This is a detail that most of the recent posts seem to gloss over.

Second, no, an employer doesn't normally have any sway on your personal life, but if your conscious decisions in your personal life affect your ability to work in your professional life, then they can fire you. Not for the fact that you made your own decision in your personal life, but that, ultimately, you made decisions that affected your ability to do your job.

As an extreme case, if, say, you are a postal worker (whose job involves lots of walking) and you decided on the weekend to take a dare to cut off your foot, you probably won't get much sympathy from the union when the boss fires you.

Or as Izawwlgood put it:
So, no, don't fuck that shit, own up and decide what's more important to you, the amount of drunken photos you post online, or working what could potentially be a kick ass job/career builder.


Nougatrocity wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:I don't think you guys get it, or have had much exposure to companies that do think this way. I can tell you that a number of my friends work for companies that would fire them outright if they posted photos of them acting inappropriately. A number of professions that I can think of absolutely demand a certain type of behavior, or at least standards, that must be obeyed when both on and off the job.
We do get it. We get it very much. And we've been saying for pages that it's bullshit, and that the law should reflect that it's bullshit, by making such hiring/firing decisions illegal.
It's a free country, Nougat, and that includes the freedom to hire/fire who I want when I want (so long as I'm not discriminating based on race/gender/etc.). You can't have it both ways.

Nougatrocity wrote:
I think the argument is about whether or not an employer should be able to use public information about a potential employee or even a current employee as grounds for termination. And I think the answer is yes.
And I very strongly believe no. So I guess we're at an impasse.
Except you need to do that to verify that people aren't lying to you. I had a guy apply for a job who claimed he had done some "Freelance writing" for the Toronto Star. So I looked online on the newspaper archives that go back to 1986. Apparently, the guy had one letter to the editor published. This told me that the guy was a liar and was inflating his resume.

In the current situation, the guy told his already-boss that he was sick, when really he was just hungover.

EsotericWombat wrote:Your employer doesn't own you. Anything that you do that doesn't effect the eight hours of your day that you spend at your job is none of their FUCKING business, and that should be encoded into law.
And who are you to say that people don't post stuff to their MyFace page that shows their behaviour during the time you are at work? Maybe they have posted photos of sensitive information from previous employers?

Wombat wrote:These days, the greatest dangers to free expression come from corporate enterprise. Central to democracy as we practice it is the idea, as expressed by Jefferson, that the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are inalienable. That doesn't mean that only private enterprise gets to fuck with them, it means that no one does. .. it becomes a de facto violation of our basic rights.
Oh, ffs. Not the constitution-applies-to-corporations bullshit again. Listen, if corporations are going to manipulate their employees and potential employees into not expressing themselves, they're going to do it whether or not society lets them look at MySpace pages. As a side example: in France (and this is based on what someone told me, so take it with a grain of salt), when it was made illegal to ask people to put their race/gender on their job applications, employers simply started asking for a headshot.

And even if an employer is allowed to hire someone without first filtering them, do you really think an employee will last long in a corporate culture that wants to control employee's outside lives? Come on! If you go into a job interview worrying that they're going to use your personal time against your professional experience, then maybe your resume is too weak, or you need to pick somewhere else to work (Microsoft vs. Google, for example), or you are (ironically) simply fucking paranoid and untrustworthy of potential employers.

GreaterSteven wrote:
Intercept wrote:So how do you plan on getting this information?
Call aforementioned references? That were asked for and provided?
I've never done so, but I know many people who have made up references, or who have asked their friends to pretend to be references. Maybe it's fine if you worked for a big company with a phone exchange, but it's very easy to fake references. Hell, facespace is useful for picking out false references by corroborating phone numbers!

mercurythief wrote:I don't have any hard numbers, so I won't say anything about 'most jobs', but here's how I would feel if I owned a business: if an employee is in public, and can be associated with my business in any way, I want them to act professionally.
Just to be clear, I disagree with this sentiment. They can do what they want in their own time so long as it doesn't affect their time working for me and it doesn't disclose any company secrets/etc.

nougat wrote:Even then, it's still possible, therapeutic, and often NECESSARY to complain about one's job. And it can actually be done without specifying who you work for, in which case your professional interests are not compromised.
No argument here, especially about the second part. Though I'd suggest it to be a very bad idea to talk in public about your current employer. You know, don't bite the hand that feeds you. Also, if you can't approach your boss and talk to them directly (alternately, confront them) about how you feel about your work situation, then--again--you should probably consider employment elsewhere.

I'm quite happy with my current job, though, so I have no cause for complaint. I've been at companies that have totally sucked from start to finish, too (Iron Horse Security - you bunch of incompetent scumbag scammers) and, well, "no comment" ( :wink: )

Sorry, I have to go now, so I don't have time to re-read what I wrote. Hopefully it makes sense.

- RG>
Jack Saladin wrote:etc., lock'd
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:At least he has the decency to REMOVE THE GAP BETWEEN HIS QUOTES....
Sungura wrote:I don't really miss him. At all. He was pretty grouchy.

User avatar
Intercept
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC
Location: An blue governed Missouri.

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Intercept » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:10 pm UTC

GreaterSteven wrote:
Intercept wrote:So how do you plan on getting this information? I mean, you can't ask them for their worst qualities just so you can decide whether to hire them. Also, apparently using information that is public domain is also off limits according to some, so you're not left with much.



Call aforementioned references? That were asked for and provided?


I said assuming all things provided were equal, that would include references. Also, what if their last job was 2 years ago? What if they just started getting wasted in that time? References aren't an end all be all for several reasons.
"I've always supported pudding, even when it was politically unpopular to do so."-Bill Nye Video

GreaterSteven
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:23 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby GreaterSteven » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:31 pm UTC

I said assuming all things provided were equal, that would include references. Also, what if their last job was 2 years ago? What if they just started getting wasted in that time? References aren't an end all be all for several reasons.


Ask the employee about it, or again, ask to add their facebook, if it really matters to you who you pick out of Person A and Person B who (all other things being equal) are both completely fucking capable of doing the job, as it's evident from the lack of complaints that Person B's drinking has not affected his performance.

But as far as I'm concerned, they're both equal, and it's flip of a coin.

User avatar
Freakish
Posts: 909
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:47 am UTC
Location: Northern Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby Freakish » Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:37 pm UTC

I wouldn't want it done to me, but if I was an employer I would definitely google the names who ever applied for the job. Some people are going to have personal lives that effect their professional.
Freakish Inc. We completely understand the public’s concern about futuristic robots feeding on the human population

GreaterSteven
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 1:23 am UTC

Re: Caught out on Facebook - Another One

Postby GreaterSteven » Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:49 pm UTC

Freakish wrote:I wouldn't want it done to me, but if I was an employer I would definitely google the names who ever applied for the job. Some people are going to have personal lives that effect their professional.


I don't even have to point out a contradiction. You gone done it for me.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests