Shared publicly  - 
 
Here we go. Another shining example of the United States Government being luddites & completely out of touch with technology and personal property. This WILL result in discrimination, there is no question about that.

I propose that as elected public servants, every member of congress and other branches of government hand over all their Facebook & Twitter passwords to US and let us look in their priviate affairs. They are also "interviewing" for jobs when up for election and citizens of the United States. Fair is fair.

EDIT: Of course now we as Americans will need protection as currently employed people not to have our bosses ask for our Facebook passwords http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/218795-republican-preps-bill-to-ban-bosses-from-asking-for-facebook-passwords. "Hey give me your Facebook password so I can look at all your stuff and find something to fire you over."

I demand all of Congress' passwords right now.
366
Robert Quail's profile photoJessica Murphy's profile photoJosh Fisher's profile photoLarry Apperson's profile photo
200 comments
 
What the - I don't even. I need to dig into this to look @ who did what & see if I can't raise some hell w/ my congressman.
 
I do have to admit I find the American legal system hilarious and I think it's "fair & balanced" to say the US electoral system is slightly too commercial to be taken seriously.
 
Since congress works for and is paid with american taxpayers dollars..can we ask for their FB website access as well ?...just saying !!
 
Those [smart people] who truly want to keep their private lives private, probably don't have Facebook accounts. But yes, fair is fair. Congress should let all of us view their Facebook accounts. Just like they have to have the same insurance plan as the rest of us, and just like they can't partake in insider trading. Oh, wait a minute....
 
The House of Representatives shoots down any bill/law that benefits the people at the expense of corporations. So this isn't a surprise to anyone here in the states.
 
"Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-N.C.) is drafting legislation that would ban employers from asking for their workers' Facebook passwords, his office confirmed Wednesday." - Republican/Democrat doesn't matter to me -- not being out of your mind stupid insane does.

@PatrickMcHenry is his Twitter handle - go thank if you are so inclined. (For the record I don't agree with everything he is about, but I agree with this.)
 
Republican politicians love to tout that they stand behind a citizen's right to privacy, and their supporters love to eat it up. But when they're finally put to task about it, they always side with corporate interests.
 
The first step in remedying this situation is to vote all the bastards out. Then vote in a new crop of people who actually think.... I am so tired of all this crap.
 
Maybe we could save money and get better results by outsourcing congress to India or by using Chinese child labor.

Kidding, of course, but I do wonder if we would get better results by flushing out the old hats in Congress and replacing them with plain ol' people from all walks of life.... real businessmen, factory workers, students, housewives, homeless people, entrepreneurs, etc.
 
I was going to comment on this, but am afraid any future employers will require my google+ account and see this post.
 
Praps the simplest, and most useful method of comment is to say NO. I just don't choose to provide that information simply because you'd like it.
 
You realize that the FBI, NSA, CIA & the EI EI O. already use this info to track us. WHY would the Government want to regulate it? We are fully on the grid with our Notebooks, Tablets, smart phones. FULLY traceable.

But I will not work for a company that would REQUIRE this info. Close enough to retirement to be able to go back to farming if I had to.
 
I think its stupid to even ask for a password and username, to social networks
Adam A
+
2
3
2
 
f**k facebook anyway. They opened the door for employers to do this when selling aggregate profile info to corporations for marketing purposes. Why shouldn't they be allowed to access individual info as well for other purposes? That's what the big stink was in the first place! Duh...
 
No one is actually required to provide that information to an employer. It's as simple as saying, "No." Anyone that runs to government to solve a problem that doesn't exist is an idiot.
 
It was my understanding that the Republicans, of whom only one voted for the bill, thus defeating it, were against the proposed legislation, not against the principle it addressed. I haven't read the bill, but it has been pretty swiftly prepared. Perhaps a better drafted bill would be passed with a significant majority?
 
Would I also be entitled to receive the login info to the corporate networks, to make sure that there wasn't any corruption going on? I find it funny that almost all corporate IT policies will forbid sharing passwords and leaving terminals open, yet you have to give up your personal passwords to get a job.
 
It must be realized that whoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolutely master of all industry commerce
Dav Bob
+
2
3
2
 
Again what is the problem? Does anyone here really think it says Dav Bob on my birth certificate? Or that my religious beliefs are based around various dairy products. The only thing that anyone can get from your online activities is exactly what you allow them to. If you don't want people to know then don't do it online. The are countless ways to surf the net anonymously, from proxies to browsers to just being careful what you click on. I would happily give a prospective employer a facebook login and password if it secured me a job. It wouldn't be the facebook I use on a day to day basis but it would satisfy their curiosity about me.
 
This is just unbelievable....but wait, no, it's really not anymore. I would like to believe that this would be unconstitutional, but what do I know. But I agree, if they are going to allow employers to do this, then we should be able to look at their Facebook accounts. Seems fair?
 
This is rediculous. They are basically forcing themselves into your personal lives.
Before technology, they didn't need to know this stuff.., why now?
 
There may be no "requirement", but at least in here in Georgia, an employer can fire someone for any reason not specifically covered by a statute (union organizing would be protected, for instance). So if an employer asks for the password to be handed over, and they refuse, the employee can be fired. This issue really took off, though, with the job interview process. Evidently more employers are asking for passwords during the interview process.
Philip G
+
9
10
9
 
+Lynette Young Here we go. Another shining example of the United States Government being luddites & completely out of touch with technology and personal property.

This is a prime example of the government keeping out of private matters. This is good. It is a employee vs corporate matter. The employee needs to learn to say no, themself. Eventually, things will even out - using a law is a bad approach. More laws is almost always the wrong approach.
 
The true meaning of "Big Brother"... the govt giving permission for employers to look at your social media.. LOL. The cat will be out of the bag if that happens.... Oh and don't think you can erase or delete it.. even if you "do" it isn't gone.... Don't put something out there you don't want thrown back in your face folks...Have a fantastic day.... trying to erase your info.. I know you are going to try .....
 
Jobs and personal property are two different things.
They don't need my Facebook password to know about me.
 
If you are applying for a job and they ask for your information try this: No. If they demand it or they will not hire you that is discrimination and a violation of personal individual liberties and you can sue them. Easy as that.
PJ C
 
congress sucks
 
Just this month, a court decided that a man did not have to provide the password to his encrypted data because it violates his 5th amendment right (the right not incriminate oneself as a child pornographer in this case). I can't imagine this being upheld in court if someone was fired for not providing that information. I would never, under any circumstances, hand that info over and my Fb profile is the most mundane, boredom hole on earth.
 
Looks like I won't be using FB or Google+. This is the only answer if it's allowed.
 
Here's a thought.... don't put anything stupid on the Facebook, G+, Twitter, or ANYWHERE on the internet. Sure, it's an invasion of privacy, but if you don't put anything incriminating on there to begin with there will never be an issue. Time for us to take some responsibility and start thinking ahead about the potential consequences of our actions/decisions. This is not a hard problem to solve people.
 
Do we really need /another/ law for this? Couldn't those employers be sued for breach of contract (eg, the Facebook terms of use) which specifically mentions sharing your passwords and "impersonating" other people. Additionally, if the employer were privy to the fact that the candidate were members of a protected group (e.g. over a certain age, etc.) they may be subject to claims of discrimination.
 
Welcome to the Corporate States of Wall Street....
Where you are completely free to do as you are told
 
Well if that's the case I demand FB and Twitter log on's for prospective employers as well. If they are entitled to my private information -- I am entitled to theirs...
 
+Chase Millard although I agree that people should be more responsible about what they put online, I simply can't understand how a government allows employers to ask future employees for access to their facebook account. If you keep this going they'll even ask about your personal life (how many times do you have sex, how many partners, etc.)
 
fucked Facebook !!! also fucked him rules and innovations !!!
 
I'd never give up my passwords since I don't technically have a facebook account.
 
The Perlmutter amendment was simply an attempt to delay reform of the FCC - it really wasn't about privacy. The McHenry bill looks a lot more promising because a companion bill is being drafted in the Senate by Blumenthal (a Democrat). If the House can pass McHenry's bill and the Senate Blumenthal's, there is actually a shot at something real coming out of conference, as opposed to the usual pattern of the House passing a bill and the Reid refusing to hear it simply because the House is controlled by Republicans.
 
+Philip Gabbert I don't entirely agree that this is a good thing. If this story is true, Congress isn't saying that more laws are bad and that we're on our own to fight off this questionable practice. It's giving credence to the coercion, so now when someone says "no" to the demand, it'll be treated more commonly as "hiding something" like it is with drug testing.
 
Why is my digital content not afforded the same protection as the digital content associated with the music and movie industries?
 
Alexander - I strongly disagree. This has the potential to have a chilling effect on your 1st amendment rights. Drug testing confirms that you are not doing something illegal that can affect their business or safety. Different when it comes to voicing your opinions. Further, their looking at your profile circumvents privacy settings for other people who did not consent to having their information viewed by your potential employer.
 
Chase Millard - did I honestly hear you right? Your happy for your employer to monitor your private life I hear you say? Are you really whiter than white? Who is after all? I'm certainly not, and I don't intend to be in the future either!

This isn't just about criminality by an individual! These spans into all sorts of areas. Whom do you hang with? Whom do you associate with now, that perhaps you used to hang with when you were younger and more stupid? What do you get up to when not at work? Where are you when your not at work? Were you really poorly when you took that day off? What about that photo of you doing a one off silly thing that isn't representative of who you typically are? The list goes on and on!!

The concept of any employer having access to monitor anybody's private life is incredulous to the nth degree. Why don't we just give our personal diary's to them too?

People are by their very nature judgemental generally. But many people and organisations will obviously take this a step further and disciminate against all manner of things.

Then there is the potential for such organisations logging into your account and posting messages posing as the employee.

Gobsmacked! Chase, since you have nothing to hide, do us a favour and send us your facebook username and password will you?
 
the same people who refuse to use facebook obviously don't have the same issue with posting via google's network ;)
 
Change.org is a place to create petitions. I for one am not willing to start such a petition, but I would happily sign it. If one is created that demanded all those in congress to give up there personal info, I will sign, as will tens of thousands of other Americans. I agree that if we have to give up our info to apply for a job, then they should have to give up there info to become members of congress. It should also state that this release of info is retro-active for those already in office. I apologize before hand about not being willing to create this petition, but I for one am not that stupid, or naïve to think they will not retaliate.
 
If they ask for your FB password ask for thiers ( both the corprate FB one and the one of the person asking the question). If THEY don't, tell them that they are not fit to have you work for them. If you give them your FB pasword during the inetrview, what do you think they will ask for if you are hired? Do we need to start brining lawyers to the interviews? This is in line with grouops that have ways to get around discriminatory parctices they already egage in like not asking your age directly, getting around disability questions, and the like. If they want to look at your FB page they are more than welcome. If they fear what you might say about them, maybe they should rethink the way they are behaving as businesses and individuals.
 
+Alexander Rogge I can see where you view it that way. But at the same time, it isn't saying that so it's all point-of-view (non-denial is acceptance?). I just don't view things that way. Any employee that's asked this question should immediately start questioning the company's privacy policy, employee respect, and the company's own password policy. I also think people should broadcast which companies are following this practice---it raises series ethical questions that must be addressed.
 
That is quite a blow to FB. Doubt an employer could mandate Google access. It would be like them mandating mail screens, internet tracking, etc etc.
Google was smart on how they integrated their products. They didn't do it for these reasons, but it protects the individual... I hope.
 
I believe that is a grand idea. Are they not suppose to be transparent anyway? Reminds me of the king walking among his people, before that he had no idea how bad they had it. Or how cruel his employees truly were. I think they should live as us for awhile. Just another Joe or Jane. Get a feel for what they have no clue about.
 
+Mark Brookes... First of all, I never said I am happy about it. I am simply deciding to do what is within my ability to control.... and that is to limit the information I put on the internet. Second, what is this "whiter than white" comment all about??? Are your stereotyping me based on the color of my skin??? If I were to say something like that about any other race I would be drug through the mud for making a racist comment. Third, I will go back to my initial point... if you have not put anything incriminating on the internet to begin with than there is nothing to worry about. I agree that it's a complete and utter violation for employers to ask for this information, but you gotta be smart about what you put out there for the world to see.
 
+Pedro Paulo, I am right there with you. This is a slippery slope. But there are already laws in place that govern the type of questions that can be asked in interviews. Unfortunately, the government decided that Facebook access requests are not off limits. Sad... but true.
 
What's next? The password to my email account? The password to my credit card account? The password to my bank account?
 
Excellent reason to delete my FB account. Thanks, but I don't need a corporation, or the gov't's nose THAT far up my butt! I have already posted notice on my FB page that it will go away tomorrow when they plan to FORCE us to use their "new" [read nosier] format. Call me old school, but I'm still quite comfy calling and meeting my friends, and I don't NEED FB to succeed socially [or in business for that matter].
 
Personal intrusion, and indirect control over the Internet...People will be more wary about what they place on FB...
 
omg facebook. oh no, my lifes over
 
We don't need a law against it. The places asking for it have no right to do so and people shouldn't be so stupid as to acquiesce to their requests.....
 
I believe the simple solution is to explain to the employer that by contract with FACEBOOK you are obligated to keep your password information secret. If you reveal that information to the employer, it is also your obligation to inform FACEBOOK of your agreement violation. Under that agreement FACEBOOK is obligated to shut down your account. Check and Mate....
 
+Aj Creery The information on facebook's servers is privately owned. The internet is public, data on servers connected to the internet isn't. Otherwise, everything on your computer is public.
 
Can't wait to be told what social network I will be allowed to take part in by the government....
 
This will have to go to the Supreme Court, who will ultimately send this back to Congress along with a spanking and a note telling them to get off their butts and do their jobs right. We saw the same thing happen recently with warrantless GPS tracking. Unfortunately, some citizen is going to have to go through a lot of discomfort for the case to make it all the way to them for us to get some reasonable action taken.
 
HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY READ THE AMENDMENT?
I've commented on this on my post (https://plus.google.com/113998757823214420296/posts/SJWjYgpqYCz). This amendment doesn't actually do what you think it does. It doesn't prevent employers from asking for your password. It doesn't give the FCC any additional powers that it doesn't already have to regulate whether an employer can ask for the passwords of applicants or employees.

It is not ok for politicians to understand the internet; likewise, it is not ok that citizens to not understand their government!
 
I think it should go further...American should have to give their banking credential to potential employer....you know, just to be sure that that your spending habit is in line with the company ethics!

May be a campain to shame companies that do such things is in order

+Aj Creery That doesn't mean they should have access to your passwords.
 
My answer: I don't know my Facebook password. 1Password handles that for me. And Facebook sends me an SMS when I log in from an unrecognized machine.
 
+Johnie Lee It clarifies that this is under the FCC's authority. The only logical reason to vote against the bill is if you don't want the FCC to change the current situation. Since this wasn't passed, there's grounds to fight the FCC should they make a change.
 
I know it's probably "no", but technically speaking, shouldn't the fifth amendment protect you against that?
 
The concept of the internet is public, but the "space" you "take up" is not public. It's a bit like being out driving around can be construed as being connected to the internet, but when you step into a business establishmnt (i.e. a mall, a shop etc) it is no longer a public space. If the internet and everythign connected to it is public, then it actually makes it okay for employers to ask you for your password to your FB account.

on another note, there should be a rule that prevents congress from attaching pointless riders to bills... a bill should be succinct and on topic, not saddled with all kinds of idiotic amendments that have nothing to do with the main topic of the bill... like the dumb amendment to allow the carrying of concealed weapons at national parks to the consumer credit protection bill a li'l while ago...
 
It's an unnecessary law in that civil litigation is the deterrent.
 
Most of us are employed "at will" and use the employer's property-- that pretty much trumps everything else.
 
+Johnie Lee By voting against an ammendment which starts "Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this
Act shall be construed to limit or restrict the ability of
the Federal Communications Commission to adopt a rule..."You are effectively saying that yes there is something in the act that can be interpreted to limit the FCC's ability to adopt a rule.
Translate
 
How would anyone know whose account goes with whose if someone was using an alias? I don't see that this law would ever be logical from any standpoint. Otherwise, all our text messages and personal email accounts should be turned over to our employers too. These are similar methods of communication, after all. Actually, we should just turn over our minds and let them know everything we have ever said or have done in our lives. :D
 
Really? This eye for an eye, fair is fair kind of childishness doesn't do anything to progress the cause of internet privacy. In fact it hamstrings it entirely. Good job.
 
Well, Congress needs to be on board, because it allows politicians to attach un-attractive riders onto bills then turn around and blast their opponents for political gain. i find the lack of this "germaneness rule" appalling at the national level.
 
Facebook? Is that the new competitor to iPhoto?
 
+Aj Creery Yes, the website is public, but anything that requires you to have a password to access is obviously not public. If you can't grasp such a simple concept, then I don't know that you can be helped. It's like figuring out how to explain to someone that 1+1=2. If you can't understand that, how do we help you?

Edit: Furthermore, I would have hoped you would realize that by the simple fact that vendors are paying for that information implies that it is not public. Why on earth would a vendor pay for information that is publicly available?
 
A STRONGER MOTIVATION TO RESIST THE TEMPTATION TO USE AT WORK,DEAN
 
Or people could just read the terms of service and the Lori Drew case, and say 'I decline to commit a felony by violating Facebook's Terms of Service in giving you my password'.
 
+Brendan McNerney , Florida is a right-to-hire/right-to-fire state. You can attempt to sue anyone for nearly anything but you would have a very uphill legal battle in FL if you tried to sue an employer about this. From another poster it looks like GA is the same way. They can fire/not hire you for ANY reason, including your online statements, unless that reason is explicitly protected by law (race, religion, ethnicity and some other statuses are specifically protected so you can't be fired [legally] for those reasons). Without a change to the law that means you can be fired/passed over legally in those states if you don't give them a facebook password. Hell, they can fire you if they don't like the people on your "friends" list, etc.
 
+Mike Cherry I'm also in a right to work state, but those suits are easier to win than you imply. All you have to do is ask with what frequency someone is fired for something they posted on facebook. Never? Clearly my client is being discriminated against.
 
There's an easy way to appease the idiots.. make a "professional" facebook page and give them THAT password.. just dont link it to your personal one. Then they have no reason to ask anymore, because you gave them what they've asked for.
 
Want my Facebook login info? Sure. Just give me your email login info.
 
Because on any given day, there are a number of these "no duh" amendments that add no value. Congress passes a number of symbolic bills that have no basis on actual rule making. For example, there was a bill passed to honor the Eagle as an "inspiring symbol" or a bill

It is important to keep these symbolic, toothless froth from actual bills from important bills, such as this FCC Reform Act. The 112th Congress came in with an express interest to prevent these types of symbolic resolutions because they can be divisive and impede the progress of congress (Politicians were using symbolic bills to appease their Tea Party constituents)

See: http://www.centralfloridafuture.com/symbolic-bills-impede-progress-1.2604224#.T3SH3exWoaA
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/pointless-constitutional-symbolism-in-the-112th-congress/

As I said, It is no longer ok for citizens to not know how the government works.
 
The article states that this was attached to an FCC overhaul bill. If it were presented on it's own, I would hope that this would pass without a whisper of contest.Cheers to the congressmen that proposed this legislation and here's to hoping that he puts this up for a vote as a stand-alone bill.
 
+Lynette Young agreed. This will completely become a key tool in any discriminating employer's toolbox.
 
+Johnie Lee How can you expect citizens to have a full understanding when even the government doesn't know?
 
LESBIANS ,THEMSELVES ARE EVERY BIT AS BIGOTED!
DEAN
 
If anything this is the demise of facebook. If employers will be asking for the social media log in details then, employees will start shutting down their social media accounts.
 
+Kevin Burger Agreed! It's because the voting public doesn't understand government that they vote people into position that are not qualified for the job.
Jay Tee
+
2
3
2
 
Hmmm......I don't even bother with Facebook anymore but I am just curious why people even bother to fight them? We all know it's pointless to fight with politicians that "only" see power, fame and money. Why not just create two Facebook accounts. One for private use and one for giving out to employer? You can say whatever you want on your private account and post nothing in your "for-hiring" account. They'll never know you have a private account. If they ask, just tell them "That's the only account I have. I am not a social media fan. I like Physical Interaction better." Simple and straight forward solution to all these "I wanna intrude your privacy as much as law permits" employers.
 
Damn Democrats. Always bowing down to corporate interests. Wonder how much money zuckerberg donates to the DNC every year
 
the goverment is the biggest theif in the amercian histroy.
 
Yeah, I think my move to Australia will have to happen a little sooner. I am soo done with this country and the way things are becoming. It's all going to shit.
 
+Dan Shaffer its against FB policy... For one they want money for said info. What you have said makes no sense unless you are saying he got screwed over.
 
What's the big deal. So a potential employer asks you for your Facebook credentials. You have two choices: 1) give it to them. or 2) don't work there.
Why do we need laws to protect people from making bad decisions (aka 2)?
 
WOOooooooa there folks

read the bill first. That ISN'T what the bill says in its 9 lines.

+Johnie Lee does a WONDERFUL write up here : https://plus.google.com/113998757823214420296/posts/SJWjYgpqYCz

its an motion to add an elastic clause to allow the FCC retroactively to have the ability to make its own rules on this, outside of of a session of congress.

The FCC.... think about that. Do you want THEM determining if your employer can solitice for your passwords? Or would your rather the standing laws determine such. - this only creates a loop hole to manipulate a smaller selection of people to negatively impact privacy.

I support its being struck down.
 
+Deacon Bradley - because it isn't always that easy. If you need a job it becomes very hard to say "no" and the request can become coercive.

There's also the point (which I'm sure someone has brought up) that there are certain questions they aren't even allowed to ask on an interview: about marital status, religion, sexual orientation, etc. Many of these details will be available on ones FB page. I'm 100% fine with forcing prospective employers to respect a certain amount of applicants' privacy and not take advantage of a weak economy to force an intrusive ingress into their lives.
 
It infringes on privacy. Come on Deacon, you have got to see that.
 
I'm with +Leonard Suskin and others who are saying "doesn't this reveal a lot of protected information/violate already-standing privacy law?" I predict we haven't seen the last of this issue....not by a long shot. Someone's going to sue.
 
To be fair, the law is redundant. It is ALREADY ILLEGAL for a company to force you to divulge your: marital status, age, and a bunch of other personal information. Requiring your Facebook login is forcing you divulge this information.

If you are asked in an interview to divulge your Facebook password, bring out a tape recorder and state "If you see my Facebook page it will identify my sexual orientation, marital status, age, and other private information that it is illegal for you to request. Are you certain that is a requirement for being hired here?"
 
facebook is dead, short live facebook!!!
 
I dropped out of FB after 4 years of going on at least once a day and I'm feeling much happier already. I refuse to live a cyber life. Plus I got really tired of people preaching and people's kids pics lol. I get to see who my real buddies are as well. Plus I'm the most POLITICALLY INCORRECT person you might ever run across and FB doesn't like it when you speak your mind..
 
+Myrddin Emrys - true, but that's a hard thing to do if you're looking for a job and desperate for one. In an earlier discussion about this very issue I admitted that I likely would give my FB password if I were out of work. I have two children, I have expenses, and can't afford to be out of a job for all that long. That's why I think a clear legal protection is warranted.
 
+Philip Gabbert - you said This is a prime example of the government keeping out of private matters. This is good. It is a employee vs corporate matter. The employee needs to learn to say no, themself. Eventually, things will even out - using a law is a bad approach. More laws is almost always the wrong approach.

Where do you draw the line? As people have stated, it at least gives a back-door to ask about prohibitted reasons for not hiring. Employers are already regulated - in terms of workplace safety, a workplace free of sexual harassment, equal opportunity and compensation in terms of race or gender. Do you really want to sweep away these protections in the hopes that "things will even out"? Because history tells us that they don't even out on their own; that even with regulations in place companies will take dangerous shortcuts, will underpay women, will make decisions on gender or race.
 
I propose that all elected officials make public their savings accounts, here and overseas, I also request that all personal pictures, photo albums be made available regardless of how sensitive they might be. And lastly, menstrual cycles should be made public knowledge as well as the type of under garment they wear and where they shop at.
 
Stupid congress refusing (at least in this case) to pass blatantly unconstitutional laws.
 
can have mine.... I have to create an account first though... Doh!
 
If you don't like a condition of employment, it would seem you are free to seek employment elsewhere. Are we grownups? Do we have the right to contract with other parties for goods and services? Or should the government tell us what we can and cannot agree to with our employers and other parties?
 
Will this really be the demise of social media? I see it catapulting online profiles further into the mainstream.

Seems almost like social media shakedowns are on the verge of becoming another standard type of background check. To this end, I could see employers favouring people with an agreeable Facebook profile over users who have none at all.

It's sort of like the background checks in use now: What if a company did a criminal background check on you and the police said ``that [social security number, or social insurance number] doesn't exist...I guess if they robbed a back, we know about it, eh <chuckle>''?
 
+Daniel Kuhn I think the fact that the condition of employment contravenes basic privacy laws is the issue. Flesh this out to every employer practicing this, what kind of society would we then have...Grownup or not, employment elsewhere would not be an option.
 
i don't know what you are talking about
 
In response to this, FaceBook made it an explicit violation of their ToS to divulge your password. Not sure how much that'll help.
 
Or just tell them that you don't have an account, duh
 
+Savannah Watts That would be tricky, if it's under your name and/or public email address.

My FB account is a bland, public face one. While I would refuse to hand over password access to it, and I don't friend anyone I don't actually know, I do expect it to be searched by potential employers and/or co workers. That's why it is there. Gives them something to look at & not look any further.
 
And, sadly, where the USA stupidly leads, the UK will inevitably slavishly follow.
 
+Leonard Suskin I think any attempt by Facebook to enforce a no-password-sharing-allowed rule would put them in a bad spot, but I guess now it's a matter of employers asking users to violate a contract in order to get a job. This has gotta be illegal....right?
 
A new world order is coming just wait it is going to get worse.
 
While I don't think anyone should request anyone's facebook password, I don't think congress should be legislating it either. If an employer asks for it during the hiring process, you should refuse and they should have the right to not hire you if they choose. If the majority refused it employers would have to withdraw it as a request.
That's all! Millions saved in legislation and litigation!
 
Make a fake account that has one post saying, "If you are an employer and are reading this, fuck off, I don't want to work for your shitty company anyway!".
 
I smelled a rat. What kind of employer could be so dumb as to request their Facebook password to potential employees?

So I went to the source, and here's what I found:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2012/03/20/job_seekers_getting_asked_for_facebook_passwords/?page=full

"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."

"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."

Now it makes much more sense. How typical.
 
What happened to the space between "I endorse the behavior" and "Government should criminalize it"?
 
+Omri Asta what if you were chosen as a prospective employee at company Z. Further, what if you were fully qualified for the job (the top candidate) in a way that company Z would clearly recognize in an interview. Suppose you have a disability or medical condition that has no bearing on your ability to do the job. Let's say that during your interview, the employer learns of this disability. If they just ended the interview and didn't hire you, and you could prove it, you'd probably be able to ask the government to look into a potentially discriminatory hiring practice. If they ended the interview by saying ``Now all we need is your Facebook credentials and we'll be done,'' and you disagreed...well, I guess they had a right not to hire you even though the question was ridiculous.
 
So, now I need to keep two accounts... One for the employer and one for everyone else
 
+Chris Taylor I honestly believe they have the right to do so and that it's their loss. I'm kind of a Ron Paul believer...Besides, I wouldn't want to work at a company that discriminates like that to begin with...
 
Hmmm...so how do all the indignant folks who offered their manifestos on this post feel now about this event being a) a political tactic to piggy-back an unpopular act with another that had a chance of passing; or b) a waiting game to see if state's rights provide direction about the FB password issue?
 
you can simply deny them excess, thats your privacy
 
no its not like that....$$
 
I would just deactivate my account if I was asked to hand over my password.
 
What if your boss asked you and you said no? I mean, that's private, personal information, and has nothing to do with work. How could they justify making you give them your password? How could they even justify asking? That's like your boss demanding the key to your mailbox, so he can rifle through your stuff. There's no way that isn't already protected by some sort of privacy law, Americans are crazy about that sort of thing. 
 
I agree that our social (media) lives shouldn't be a descerning factor of employment. BUT, the employer does have an obligation to protect its company and image. That being said, I wouldn't see why someone applying wouldn't be willing to at least allow an HR rep to look over their posts, but not give up the passwords. If there's something in your social media life that could or may get you fired, maybe you shouldn't apply in the first place and straighten up your act.
 
thats bull......ok j/k can i come with you!!!? lol ive never been in space before.
Erik S
 
Reminds me of Nazi Germany.
 
You're confusing the US government with a very conservative and pro-business Republican congress.
 
Hello, have 2 facebook accounts.
And of course 2 gmail accounts.
 
They can have my login when they give me their bank accounts and routing numbers. Until then, screw them. They fire me, then I hope they like courtrooms.
 
Big Brother is in our bedroom and on our jobs . There is no escaping big brother .Soon the luminaries will be in complete control .
 
and all is right with the world???? wake up kids!!thanks Lynette.
 
Great, we just just lost more of our rights... way to go congress!
 
So employers will continue to use FaceBook and other social networks as a free version of E-Verify. . . . Well they get nothing from me unless they have a court order and speak to my lawyer.
 
PS. My current place of employ already spies upon its employess by way of social networks which is why I use a nome de plume. Sad you've gotta do that tho.
 
What happens to human rights and democracy teachers in USA. Your are teaching your example to all the world and wants them to follow, while you can't apply your own rules in USA.
 
Which facebook account, whynot make one just for employers?
 
hahaah fucking america. Your politicians are stupid cunts and it's hilarious to watch you go down as slaves when you're calling it 'the best country in the world' with 'god bless america'.

God CLEARLY hates you if you believe that shit.

Have a LOVELY day! =D
 
You know what, I was totally ticked off until I actually read the wording:

“Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this Act shall be construed to limit or restrict the ability of the Federal Communications Commission to adopt a rule or to amend an existing rule to protect online privacy, including requirements in such rule that prohibit licensees or regulated entities from mandating that job applicants or employees disclose confidential passwords to social networking websites.”

That's a total sham! I absolutely support denying the ability to ask for passwords, but if that's what Perlmutter wanted then why didn't he say that?

Besides, I cannot imagine an employer asking for my password to anything. If they did I would choose not to work there. If they're that bold in an interview who knows what do to you later.
 
If you truly need a job be a dam adult and give up the FB. Our parents and grandparents did just fine without it....
 
Time to create a fake account, make myself look like the perfect employee, and then gladly hand them my password.
 
The day a prospective employer asks to violate my privacy by demanding my facebook or other online credentials is the day I research the employer and corporation and publish EVERYTHING about them on my facebook and every other online resource I have access too. All streets travel in both directions.
 
I'll just delete myself if that's how they want to play. Your move Facebook your move.
 
It's standard IT policy at every business, that employees are responsible for their own logins/passwords, and are not to give them out to anybody. Giving up passwords goes against standard/universal IT policy. In most places, it is a fire-able offense.
 
That's all right, sooner or later anonymous or one of the other hacker groups will probably start handing over all the pollies DB details so we can all take a look see at their private stuff.
 
second that, if it is a law to be passed allowing for all intent and purpose, wiretapping your fb account, then no one should be immune, if congress etc... want to keep their jobs, and they work for the american people then WE have the right to demand their passwords to their personal accounts
 
If a company asks for this info before you're hired, then you say "no, good luck finding someone" - why would you give a stranger passwords to anything???

However, if you're having a tought time getting employment, this would certainly be a terrible situation. 
 
Bigger issue: "At Will" law. Until that changes then these issues will never be in the favor of employees.
 
Just politely ask the nosy bastards to send you a "friend request" and then filter what you send them.
 
My only issue with the Google products is that I'm not comfortable with their privacy issues. In fact, I'm thinking about dropping my gmail account as a result.