Is it OK for HR departments to "stalk" employees on Facebook, Myspace, and Twitter?

People fail to realize that even though you're not at work, you should still behave in a respectable manner. Examples that jump to mind are specific to law enforcement, where some people take pictures of themselves in various poses and show these pictures to the world -- you simply can not act like that and expect to be respected by "clients".

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with going the extra step to ensure the person you're potentially going to employ (who will represent the company, directly and / or indirectly) is not a jackass

Perhaps we could call it due diligence on behalf of HR? Hiring the best person for the job, which would include their representation of the company outside of company hours. Could we perhaps also say that people with self-respect would refrain from posting potentially harmful material on the web in the first place?

 

I'm someone who sports a relatively common name.

Do you get a chance to address any misinformation before the hiring decision is made, or is the potential employer careful enough not to attribute someone else's foolishness to you when they Google your name and no photos are associated with the results?

In the past I have signed warrants for bad checks on behalf of an employer and have been asked if I were the so-and-so with outstanding warrants for bad checks written at other local businesses.

A few years ago, I bought a home in a VERY small town, and come to find out, there's someone here with the same first and last names. We receive each other's mail, and she received my mortgage payment book before I did. She lives four blocks over and a couple blocks down. I finally rented a post office box near work because the mail switch happens regularly.

 

Law enforcement is one of those special cases. Normal organizations in the private sector have no business knowing what I think outside of office hours and as long as those thoughts are not classified as criminal or libelous.

As a consultant I do not subject myself to organizations, other than government, which insist upon knowing what I do outside of work. As a privacy professional I am only too aware of the depths some organizations will stoop.

Good thing most of my accounts are pseudonyms. Some accounts are strictly for information gathering or investigative type activities and there is no way that information is ever going to be released. The accounts that can be traced back to me are benign but my private / business email is off limits without a court order.

I know. The world is changing.

 

Your stepson should realize he can "untag" himself from pictures.

I see things like Facebook as a communication tool. There was email... then instant messaging, then text, and now Facebook. I use it all the time to communicate with my high school students. They'll send me questions about assignments or ask what we did that day if they were out. It's a nice tool. It's just a shame some folks don't realize its potential.

-Matt

 

What if someone with your name is poorly behaved?

I bought my home in a very small town without realizing (didn't check first) someone with the same first and last name lived four blocks away--she received my mortgage payment book before I did in spite of having gone to the Post Office to introduce myself, and others have reported extreme rudeness on her part when they thought they were calling me but called her instead.

 

Hey, still love this thread! It doesn't seem there will be any resolution that everyone can live with. Having been in the I.T./I.S. biz since 1969 I rue the current lack of privacy, mainly due to my beloved computer/tech systems.

On the other hand (as our President likes to say) H.R. departments have every obligation to search for public information on activities of potential employees, at least IMHO. If you were in H.R. and did not perform such searches, thus didn't find something possibly of a criminal or at least grossly inappropriate nature about your candidate that could have prevented a potential lawsuit because of your new hire's bad behavior on the job -- then you, as H.R., are at fault. This then puts the company at risk. It is no different than doing a credit, reference and "quick" background check. People put their best foot, and resume, forward when applying for a job. Wouldn't you like to know that your applicant exhibits poor judgment, or worse, criminal behavior, before the fact? I would. Think of someone applying to work with children but you find pictures and comments on public sites showing your applicant with obscene material about or with minors.

Wouldn't you like to know that a future resident physician posts public information and pictures on a site, showing him/her drunk, smoking weed, in disturbing sexual situations, condoning hateful or disrespectful behavior to others? I would. Such things indicate bad judgment, immature behavior and stupidity, at best, possible criminal acts at worse. Not traits I'd want for my doctor.

I'm not a Luddite by any means, but yes, the world is changing, not always for the best.

 

It's also potentially a gross invasion of privacy due to rogue app developers:
http://www.komando.com/tips/index.aspx?id=7069&page=1

 

Fascinating... I'll find that book and read it. Sharing personal information is an understandable (even required) part of manipulating one's perceived social context, which serves as an invaluable dissonance reduction strategy. Thanks for calling this to my attention...