SC is a RTW state, so yeah, if the employer asks you for something like that you can always refuse, and if you are fired you'll have a pretty decent claim. Not sure how well that sort of thing would go down in non-RTW states (I am blanking on what they call themselves at the moment). The main thing here to me is that there are so many people so desperate for work today, how many of them would gladly turn over their Facebook passwords just to help themselves get the job? I have to wonder what a potential employer would say to me when I told them that I was not on Facebook. Would they think I was lying to get out of turning over my password and not give me the job? Also, why does an employer need your password -- wherein they have the potential to impersonate you or otherwise use private and protected information -- rather than a link to your feed? If a potential boss is so hopped up to see what I do on a social network, then they can follow me on Twitter like everyone else. (I use "everyone else" here loosely.) Regarding not sharing too much on social networks, one of my wife's friends had a friend (yeah I know, how many degrees) who had their Facebook feed used against them in a custody hearing. The attorney for his ex-wife used pictures and statuses from his Facebook to argue that he was not a fit parent due to partying, drinking, being out late, etc. A lot of truth to being a low sharer.
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 7:39:26 AM UTC-4, cwpreston wrote: > Conversely, when I was getting my MBA it was stressed from orientation to > graduation to watch what you share on social network sites due to > employability issues. I've seen employees terminated from pictures posted > on Facebook, and reprimands brought about by comments they've made. While I > wouldn't share my password with an employer (if they will ask for that as a > term of employment they'll assume more control over me than I'm willing to > grant) there's wisdom in limiting the sharing of some of your life events. > > > On Apr 24, 2013, at 1:26 AM, "[email protected] <javascript:>" < > [email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > > The Libertarian in me tends to prefer the government not restricting > what employers and employees agree to contract to do. I don't see many > employers asking for this, anyway. I've been to a couple of HR hiring > seminars and they discourage visiting a candidate's public facebook page or > even googling them in case you find out protected class stuff that they > might try to use against you if you don't hire them. > > Bottom line, it's like if they ask you to retar a roof; if you don't want > to do it, you don't have to work there. If enough people do that, the > marketplace will react, and they'll stop asking. > > Ron > > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone > > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Luke Jaconetti <[email protected] <javascript:>> > Date: 04/23/2013 5:24 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: [email protected] <javascript:> > Subject: [The Unique Geek] Re: CISPA: Amendment to US cyber attack law > banning employers from asking for Facebook passwords is blocked > > > Saw this on Drudge, this is pure insanity. This to me is tantamount to > letting en employer demand your ATM card and PIN as a term of employment. > > On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 3:07:02 PM UTC-4, cwpreston wrote: > >> >> >> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2313367/CISPA-Amendment-US-cyber-attack-law-banning-employers-asking-Facebook-passwords-blocked.html >> >> U.S. employees set to be forced to give bosses their Facebook PASSWORDS >> >> - A last minute alteration to CISPA was defeated in a Congress vote >> - It would have protected user's social media passwords from employers >> - The late amendment was put forward by Democrat Ed Perlmutter >> >> By Steve >> Nolan<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=&authornamef=Steve+Nolan> >> >> *PUBLISHED:* 04:00 EST, 23 April 2013 | *UPDATED:* 05:46 EST, 23 April >> 2013 >> >> An attempt to ban US bosses from asking employees to hand over their >> Facebook login details has been blocked by Congress. >> >> A last minute alteration to the controversial Cyber Intelligence Sharing >> and Protection Act (CISPA) that would have prevented employers demanding >> that prospective employees disclose social media passwords as a condition >> of employment was voted down in the house of representatives. >> >> The proposal, put forward by Democrat Ed Perlmutter was defeated by a >> 224-189 majority, according to the Huffington Post. >> >> [image: Invasion of privacy? An amendment to a new US bill on cyber >> attacks aimed at preventing employers asking prospective employees for >> their Facebook login has been rejected] >> >> Invasion of privacy? An amendment to a new US bill on cyber attacks aimed >> at preventing employers asking prospective employees for their Facebook >> login has been rejected >> >> [image: Checking up: CISPA does nothing to address concerns that US >> employers can legitimately ask employees for social media login details as >> a condition of employment (file picture)] >> >> Checking up: CISPA does nothing to address concerns that US employers can >> legitimately ask employees for social media login details as a condition of >> employment (file picture) >> >> Handing over passwords could legally be a condition of acquiring or >> keeping a job, said WebProNews. >> >> Perlmutter said of his amendment before it was defeated: 'It helps the >> individual protect his right to privacy and it doesn't allow the employer >> to impersonate that particular employee when other people are interacting >> with that person across social media platforms. >> >> >> >> He warned of an invasion of privacy and the potential of employers to >> 'impersonate' employees online. >> >> The Democrat initially proposed the password privacy measure as part of >> the Federal Communications Commission Process Reform Act of 2012 and warned >> that social media users have a reasonable expectation of privacy. >> [image: Blocked: The amendment to CISPA was put forward by Democrat Ed >> Permutter who says that social media users have an expectation of privacy] >> >> Blocked: The amendment to CISPA was put forward by Democrat Ed Permutter >> who says that social media users have an expectation of privacy >> >> In a statement he added: 'They have an expectation that their right to >> free speech and religion will be respected when they use social media >> outlets. >> >> 'No American should have to provide their confidential personal passwords >> as a condition of employment.' >> >> Perlmutter faced criticism from bill sponsor Mike Rogers who claimed that >> he was trying to kill the act. >> >> He said that the issue should be addressed in separate legislation. >> >> But previous attempts to counteract the increasing trend of employers >> asking for prospective employees social networking login details have >> failed. >> >> The Password Protection Act 2012 was introduced to Senators and >> Congressman but was not passed. >> >> The overall act would allow the US Government and private companies such >> as Facebook to share information with one another should they come under >> cyber attack. >> >> But critics of the contentious bill, which initially failed when it was >> rejected by Senators last year, say that it would bypass privacy laws and >> allow companies to hand over users' information to the Government. >> >> They claim that it would prevent companies who hand over people's >> personal details from facing legal action and effectively justify social >> media spying. >> >> But CISPA recieved support from both Democrats and Republicans in the >> House of Representatives. >> >> [image: Reassurance: Facebook told its US users earlier this month that >> it has no intention of sharing sensitive personal information] >> >> Reassurance: Facebook told its US users earlier this month that it has no >> intention of sharing sensitive personal information >> >> Although the Act was ratified by the House of Representatives, there is a >> good chance that it could yet fall through. >> >> CISPA was also approved by Congress in April 2012, but was rejected by >> the Senate. The White House even threatened to veto the act at the time. >> >> Republicans Mike Rogers and Dutch Ruppersberger have once again put CISPA >> forward as they say that it is vital that companies have the ability to >> stop threats materialising in light of an increase in the number of foreign >> cyber attacks from countries like China. >> >> Facebook initially came out in support of CISPA, but its name has since >> disappeared from a list of firms fully supporting the bill this time around. >> >> [image: Under threat: CISPA is aimed at allowing companies to share >> information to thwart potential cyber attacks] >> >> Under threat: CISPA is aimed at allowing companies to share information >> to thwart potential cyber attacks >> >> And the social networking site vice president of US Public Policy Joel >> Kaplan reassured users that Facebook has no intention of sharing sensitive >> personal information with the Government. >> >> He said: 'The overriding goal of any cybersecurity bill should be to >> protect the security of networks and private data, and we take any concerns >> about how legislation might negatively impact Internet users’ privacy >> seriously.' >> >> But other big name companies including IBM, Intel, McAfee and Time Warner >> Cable are in favour of CISPA. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Share this article: >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Unique Geek" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> > . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "The Unique Geek" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> > . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Unique Geek" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/theuniquegeek?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
