Author Archives: pat

Job seekers getting asked for Facebook passwords

By MANUEL VALDES and SHANNON MCFARLAND | Associated Press – Tue, Mar 20, 2012

SEATTLE (AP) — When Justin Bassett interviewed for a new job, he expected the usual questions about experience and references. So he was astonished when the interviewer asked for something else: his Facebook username and password.

Bassett, a New York City statistician, had just finished answering a few character questions when the interviewer turned to her computer to search for his Facebook page. But she couldn’t see his private profile. She turned back and asked him to hand over his login information.

Bassett refused and withdrew his application, saying he didn’t want to work for a company that would seek such personal information. But as the job market steadily improves, other job candidates are confronting the same question from prospective employers, and some of them cannot afford to say no.

In their efforts to vet applicants, some companies and government agencies are going beyond merely glancing at a person’s social networking profiles and instead asking to log in as the user to have a look around.

“It’s akin to requiring someone’s house keys,” said Orin Kerr, a George Washington University law professor and former federal prosecutor who calls it “an egregious privacy violation.”

Questions have been raised about the legality of the practice, which is also the focus of proposed legislation in Illinois and Maryland that would forbid public agencies from asking for access to social networks.

Since the rise of social networking, it has become common for managers to review publically available Facebook profiles, Twitter accounts and other sites to learn more about job candidates. But many users, especially on Facebook, have their profiles set to private, making them available only to selected people or certain networks.

Companies that don’t ask for passwords have taken other steps — such as asking applicants to friend human resource managers or to log in to a company computer during an interview. Once employed, some workers have been required to sign non-disparagement agreements that ban them from talking negatively about an employer on social media.

Asking for a candidate’s password is more prevalent among public agencies, especially those seeking to fill law enforcement positions such as police officers or 911 dispatchers.

Back in 2010, Robert Collins was returning to his job as a security guard at the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services after taking a leave following his mother’s death. During a reinstatement interview, he was asked for his login and password, purportedly so the agency could check for any gang affiliations. He was stunned by the request but complied.

“I needed my job to feed my family. I had to,” he recalled,

After the ACLU complained about the practice, the agency amended its policy, asking instead for job applicants to log in during interviews.

“To me, that’s still invasive. I can appreciate the desire to learn more about the applicant, but it’s still a violation of people’s personal privacy,” said Collins, whose case inspired Maryland’s legislation.

Until last year, the city of Bozeman, Mont., had a long-standing policy of asking job applicants for passwords to their email addresses, social-networking websites and other online accounts.

And since 2006, the McLean County, Ill., sheriff’s office has been one of several Illinois sheriff’s departments that ask applicants to sign into social media sites to be screened.

Chief Deputy Rusty Thomas defended the practice, saying applicants have a right to refuse. But no one has ever done so. Thomas said that “speaks well of the people we have apply.”

When asked what sort of material would jeopardize job prospects, Thomas said “it depends on the situation” but could include “inappropriate pictures or relationships with people who are underage, illegal behavior.”

In Spotsylvania County, Va., the sheriff’s department asks applicants to friend background investigators for jobs at the 911 dispatch center and for law enforcement positions.

“In the past, we’ve talked to friends and neighbors, but a lot of times we found that applicants interact more through social media sites than they do with real friends,” said Capt. Mike Harvey. “Their virtual friends will know more about them than a person living 30 yards away from them.”

Harvey said investigators look for any “derogatory” behavior that could damage the agency’s reputation.

E. Chandlee Bryan, a career coach and co-author of the book “The Twitter Job Search Guide,” said job seekers should always be aware of what’s on their social media sites and assume someone is going to look at it.

Bryan said she is troubled by companies asking for logins, but she feels it’s not a violation if an employer asks to see a Facebook profile through a friend request. And she’s not troubled by non-disparagement agreements.

“I think that when you work for a company, they are essentially supporting you in exchange for your work. I think if you’re dissatisfied, you should go to them and not on a social media site,” she said.

More companies are also using third-party applications to scour Facebook profiles, Bryan said. One app called BeKnown can sometimes access personal profiles, short of wall messages, if a job seeker allows it.

Sears is one of the companies using apps. An applicant has the option of logging into the Sears job site through Facebook by allowing a third-party application to draw information from the profile, such as friend lists.

Sears Holdings Inc. spokeswoman Kim Freely said using a Facebook profile to apply allows Sears to be updated on the applicant’s work history.

The company assumes “that people keep their social profiles updated to the minute, which allows us to consider them for other jobs in the future or for ones that they may not realize are available currently,” she said.

Giving out Facebook login information violates the social network’s terms of service. But those terms have no real legal weight, and experts say the legality of asking for such information remains murky.

The Department of Justice regards it as a federal crime to enter a social networking site in violation of the terms of service, but during recent congressional testimony, the agency said such violations would not be prosecuted.

But Lori Andrews, law professor at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law specializing in Internet privacy, is concerned about the pressure placed on applicants, even if they voluntarily provide access to social sites.

“Volunteering is coercion if you need a job,” Andrews said.

Neither Facebook nor Twitter responded to repeated requests for comment.

In New York, Bassett considered himself lucky that he was able to turn down the consulting gig at a lobbying firm.

“I think asking for account login credentials is regressive,” he said. “If you need to put food on the table for your three kids, you can’t afford to stand up for your belief.”

___

McFarland reported from Springfield, Ill.

Senators urge VA to trademark ‘GI Bill’ to curb alleged abuse by for-profit schools

By , March 7, 2012, FoxNews.com

More than a dozen senators are calling on the Department of Veterans Affairs to trademark the phrase “GI Bill,” claiming that for-profit schools are abusing the term in a “deceptive” effort to lure service members and their healthy government benefits.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who has been on a tear against for-profits colleges, sent a letter along with 13 other Democratic senators calling on Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki to “exert control” over how the term GI Bill is used, just as the government does with programs like Social Security and Medicare.

The senators expressed “deep concern” about how these schools were recruiting veterans, accusing them of overpromising benefits and charging “exorbitant fees.” Harkin’s office said some recruiters were using the phrase GI Bill on their websites to “wrongly imply” that the benefits can only be used at those institutions.

“Since 1944 the phrase ‘GI Bill’ has been a symbol of our nation’s obligation to give back to those who serve. Any attempt to mislead veterans into using these hard-earned benefits for substandard or overpriced programs should not be tolerated,” the senators wrote.

The letter was the latest salvo in a campaign being waged by Harkin and the panel he chairs — the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions — against certain corners of the for-profit college industry in the wake of the Post-Sept. 11 GI Bill.

A report last month from committee Democrats showed about half of the military’s tuition assistance dollars was going toward for-profit colleges. Harkin’s office has claimed the schools are spending heavily on recruitment and marketing, but in some cases offering veterans questionable services. Another report in late 2010 looked at 20 such education companies, and claimed the amount of VA and Defense Department benefits they received soared from $67 million in 2006 to $521 million in 2010.

For-profit educational leaders counter that the schools provide America’s veterans with opportunities at success that fit their needs.

“Today, almost 200,000 veterans achieve access to post-secondary education opportunities through private sector colleges and universities,” Steve Gunderson, president of The Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities, said in a statement. “The flexibility and focus of our academic delivery often fits the family and academic needs of these veterans.”

For-profit colleges cover everything from technical schools to online universities and have become a booming industry.  Bridgepoint Education, one of the companies cited by Harkin’s panel for the amount of military tuition money it receives, said in a statement that service members “should be rewarded with educational opportunity.”

“As an organization, Bridgepoint Education remains fully committed to supporting all opportunities for members of the military and their families to earn a college education and to seek the bright future that education offers,” the statement reads.

“We want to do all we can to give every veteran the maximum information about the use of their GI benefits,” added Gunderson, “and to preserve the opportunity for each veteran to make an informed choice that best serves their educational needs.”

A spokesman for the Department of Veterans Affairs said the department is reviewing the latest letter and “developing a response.”

Spokesman Joshua Taylor, though, acknowledged the department is working with Congress as it considers “changes in this area.” He offered words of warning to for-profit schools, saying veterans should be protected and “armed with enough information to make the right choice and prevent profit-driven institutions from taking advantage of them solely for their GI Bill benefits — without providing a quality education in return.”

“Veterans should not be aggressively recruited by institutions principally because of financial motives,” he said in an email to FoxNews.com. “The department understands the demand, especially among veterans, for non-traditional forms of education. But we also believe that protecting the rights of those who’ve served in uniform — by ensuring their chosen schools intend to offer them the best education possible — is of the highest importance.”

Democrats on Harkin’s committee have led the charge against for-profit schools. Asked for comment on the latest effort, a spokesman for ranking Republican Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., said Enzi would like to see the investigation broadened, beyond just for-profit schools.

“He thinks there should be a wider study to (look at) higher education as a whole — why are costs rising so much?” spokesman Joe Brenckle said.

Harkin, in a written statement, said the government needs to take “basic steps” to make sure veterans attending any school, “for-profit or not,” are getting a quality education that can lead to a job.

Harkin spokeswoman Justine Sessions said the senator is trying to make sure that the military benefits are going toward “high-quality educational institutions” and that service members are going to schools with proven records of success.

“He’s not trying to prohibit the entire for-profit industry from getting these benefits,” she said.

Harkin and other senators in December convinced the Defense Department to delay the implementation of a new agreement with colleges and universities governing eligibility for tuition assistance dollars.

Citing his concerns with for-profit schools, Harkin urged the department to make sure schools that receive the money offer “important academic and student support services.”

The concern with the use of the term “GI Bill” stems from a slew of websites tied to for-profit schools which, according to Harkin’s office, purport to be an “official portal” to GI Bill benefits.

In the latest letter, the senators urged the Department of Veterans Affairs to file a trademark application — if granted, they said the department could then have control over who could use the phrase, and make sure it is used “to inform veterans about education benefits in an impartial and comprehensive manner.”

“At the same time, a federal trademark would prevent the phrase ‘GI Bill’ from being used in misleading or dishonest marketing campaigns,” they wrote.