Mashable posted an article documenting how employers use social media to screen candidates for jobs. The link is here: How Social Media is Used for Potential Employment
I'll let you read it if you haven't yet but keep this window open...
Back? Ok cool.
It's funny that this article was published in the midst of worldwide protests where people are practicing civil disobedience for a variety of reasons but namely due to the economic crisis the globe is facing. In the United States alone, unemployment is at a staggering 9 percent rate. Spain, where the "Occupy..." epidemic reportedly originated from, has more than twice that with a national 21 percent unemployment rate. And other countries are and have historically been even worse off. However, I'm going to focus strictly on America's dilemma.
Nearly one of every 10 Americans does not have a job. This means they have trouble paying their bills on time, they have trouble having food to eat, they have trouble keeping up with their health while the bank and land owners they owe money to wouldn't even have to recognize words like 'hunger' and 'bad health' in their vocabulary. While a majority of Americans have been starving, the rich and wealthy have been getting mass amounts of government aid; aid that could have and should have been used to aid serious societal issues like education or the lack of health care. Everyday living has become a gamble for many Americans while the 1% win consistently.
This metaphoric slap in the face is what started the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, which has spurred people nationwide to demand dialogue occur and action taken to benefit the downtrodden and desperate masses of America. But then I read the article above and thought to myself: just how many of those people protesting were denied employment not because of bailouts for the rich but because they posted pictures of a wild night out with friends on Facebook?
Just what does what I do on Facebook or Twitter or whatever other streams of social media have to do with how well I'll perform at a job? I've asked myself this many a times since learning that human resource departments use social media as a method of researching potential candidates. It’s worse than I thought, however, as a near 70% of employers denied someone because of the content on their personal pages is ridiculous. I agree that there should be some restraint exercised as we can easily see on some hot mess nonsense that people post. However, whenever anyone applies for a job we are submitting our credentials related to the job. We're not sending you to our Cancun getaway photos because it has nothing to do with the job. Essentially every application is a movie and instead of watching it, HR reps are looking at blooper reels left in the editing room and saying "Oh man! Another trashy Adam Sandler movie." (sorry, I’ve never been a fan of his and that “Jack and Jill” movie looks like hot garbage) And what's worse is that 47% of employers do this before actually meeting the person while another 27% do this after only meeting the person once.
They need to be paying attention to what's in front of them i.e. resume, cover letter, me during an over-the-phone or in-person interview and whatever else is asked of in the job description. What happens on personal time does not and should not affect the way you're seen as a potential member of their staff. And to be quite honest, future employers are silly for using social media to screen people because they’re essentially,trying to ween out the crazies but the sites already do that for them through their rules and regulations. And if the candidate does do something extreme there'd be no applicant in the first place because they'd probably be in jail for whatever crime they committed. And even if they aren’t, criminal records are trackable… by virtually anyone.
One can make the argument that employers should have access so they can see the "whole you". Ok but then who's to say that personal biases don't come into play? Maybe they looked at my Twitter and saw that I retweeted Barack Obama and they're a hardcore Republican. Maybe I like to go blog about burger joints in my city and they're a vegan and animal rights activist? Personal experiences and biases come into play whenever you meet anyone. Why should that stop me from getting a position?
And even if we're going the "they need to see the whole you" reasoning, you have to know that it's silly because no one ever sees the complete picture of yourself, except you. Who you are around your parents is not who you are when you're watching the football with your boys. Point blank, stop looking at what I'm not presenting to you.
--
The problem with this method of employee selection is two-fold: 1- you're judging a potential candidate by choices of lifestyles, not their qualifications which is what counts for the job. 2- you're a peeping tom. Let's delve into the first.
What difference does it make to you if I prefer to get baked or bake cookies in my spare time? As long as I'm not showing up to the interview or, if I'm lucky enough, the job inebriated and present myself in a professional matter my other life doesn't affect you or the company. There's plenty of people at your job right now who do things that you would find questionable. Does that make them any less of a good member of your team? No. It just means that they do something that you are not comfortable doing. Common sense would show that the alcohol business thrives on working class people who get smashed on Friday night, Saturday night and Sunday night and show up ready to work on Monday. And if I decide to talk about it amongst my peers through social media, it really is nobody I work with's business. If it’s not illegal, then beat it. When you apply for a job, you're not applying to make friends but to perform tasks that you feel you're qualified to accomplish, which brings me to point number two.
We, as a people, have become incredibly voyeuristic. In the span of less than 20 years, we've given ourselves access to anybody anywhere at any time through the Internet. And while this has been great in expanding our knowledge of the world as studies show that we're becoming a smarter and more peaceful world, that access shouldn't be abused by potential employers in the name of trying to find the right fit. Human resource representatives shouldn't act like Grandma from 227, hanging out electronic windows and taking note at everything happening with candidates that doesn’t affect them directly. They need to realize remember that the right fit for a position will present themselves as such in person and possess said qualities. Their credentials will speak volumes all their own and what they do in their life and share on their own personal corner of the web shouldn't be apart of that criteria, especially if it was never presented as such or relevant to the position.
If I choose to party like a rockstar and present that to friends and associates on my Twitter or Tumblr page, that's where it should stay: with my friends and associates; not as a factor in my getting a job.
Peace and Love…
1 comments:
V. Waise,
Thank you for the interesting look at the new trend in employment recruiting. You definitely raised very strong arguments in the area of personal privacy versus professional life and qualifications to perform the job for which the potential candidate is applying. This, in my opinion, violates the “Equal Employment Opportunity Act (EEOA)”, based on the fact that discrimination is taking place under the pretenses of so called “Screening”. For that reason, I do not believe is fair for employers to use social media for the purpose of screening applicants for the current positions, as personal lifestyle does NOT have anything to do with professional qualifications, and even less with actual on-the-job performance (keeping in mind that Qualifications and Performance are two completely different things).
However, I do have to say, that from the “employer stand point” it makes perfect sense; and can be almost tempting at the risk of playing on the edge of violating privacy guidelines for the sake of their company’s culture.
It is a known fact that social media has saturated the work place almost everywhere, so companies are faced with the choice of “join or struggle and eventually perish”. Since that is true for most companies, as an employer trying to keep the reputation and image for his/her company, now it becomes not only a matter of building a brand but also fight to maintain it. And what could be more devastating than having to fight the public relations from leaks within your own organization. – That’s a nightmare.
So I can see where the interest on having the opportunity to screen out the potential nightmare-employee come into play. Then again, studies have shown that a staggering 50% of applicants “who get hired” are not actually fit or qualified to perform the tasks for which they were hired. That means Lost money and company resources.
All in all I say this… “People, use common sense when you are both online and offline”. Just because there is a so-called freedom of expression does not mean it will not come back to bite you in the rear. There are so many people who carelessly post foolish things online, especially women who think that showing skin will somehow make them more popular without repercussion (with their 500+ social “virtual acquaintances”, because they are not friends). – The universal law is this… You NEVER get a second chance to make a first impression, and that first impression is how people FOREVER identify with you.
For every action there is a reaction.
Peace and love.
//Giovanni
Post a Comment