Shared publicly  - 
 
More evidence that "privacy" is a bourgeois pipe dream
13
17
Chris Messina's profile photoAndrew Borntrager's profile photoMichael Kirkland's profile photoTed Ewen's profile photo
27 comments
 
Hell no. If I am ever at a job interview and the interviewer asks to see my Facebook posts, I will just politely thank them for the opportunity and leave. Isn't that what references are for? They call old teachers/bosses, and find out how much your private life interfered or affected your professional one? Its not that I have a lot to hide: I don't drink or do drugs, but among other things I post about my political standpoint: something I want to keep as far from the workplace as possible.
 
I don't have a Facebook account, does that mean I can't get a job at a govt. agency or go to certain colleges? Ridiculous.
 
If an employer asked me that I'd simply say "I'll give you mine if you give me yours".
 
In the article it actually talks about having to "friend" a coach: this is the advantage of lists and circles. Post away, without them being any the wiser.
 
Yeah friending someone is one thing, but I would never get my login and password away for anything for any reason. I wouldn't let a perspective employer into my house or rifle through my bag either.
 
MAkes it easy to know who not to work for. Employment is a two way street.
 
This is illegal anywhere employers are prohibited from asking about your marital staus, number of children and so on. 
 
+Cindy Brown Right, discrimination based on those things can be illegal, but asking the question isn't. That's why countless applications have those questions printed on them with (optional) next to it. Even this FAQ you linked is vague on what is and isn't illegal and is erring on the side of caution, which obviously isn't the approach being taken elsewhere.
 
+Sean Bonner In many places having asked puts the onus on the employer to prove that they didn't use the information to discriminate. After all, why would they if that wasn't their intention?
 
+Michael Kirkland Sure, and it most likely is being used for that, but you think someone who wants to get hired somewhere is going to complain about that? It's a grey area on purpose, to guilt people into doing and saying things they have the right not to. This is the same tactic law enforcement officers use all the time...
 
+Sean Bonner Someone who doesn't get hired might decide to kick up a stink, and having asked the question opens a real can of worms. As it should.
 
My sister is on her university's sports team and everyone on the team is required to friend the coach and he actively monitors their posts. They can't say anything which could be considered negative about the team at all. Even something like "Man practice was so hard today"
 
I certainly wouldn't be giving them access to my private stuff. What I do off the job, out of the classrooms / training or anything else has nothing to do with the employer or university! If they are able to make it a requirement, especially after the fact (of enrollment, acceptance, etc), then I would either give them an alternate account and/or put them in their own group/circle and limit the posts that they can see. My private life is just that PRIVATE!
 
+Cindy Brown Yes, but I don't think any of them use G+, haha. Besides, they'd probably get in trouble when the coach inevitably found out about it.
 
+Sammy Pettinichi :-) More to the point, though, I find that creepy. If I was the parent of one of those kids, I would raise holy hell. It smacks of predatory behavior to me. Let me put it this way: imagine a catholic priest making similar demands of his altar boys :-P
 
Well you could go the other way and play all of the Zynga and other games that require you to bug the hell out of your friends for bits and pieces. Hammer the coach every day with the maximum number of requests from the maximum number of games you can do without impacting your studies. Especially for most of those games you would be just sending the requests to carpet bomb the coach's feed and your feed effectively hiding any real content they might post :D Even with the new feed control settings it would still be possible to do that and annoy the hell out of the coach, and multiple that by the entire team(s) that the coach is responsible for.
 
And since almost all of these games have an in-game chat, they can, as a group, pick the game that is going to be their means of chatting. This neither circumvents the requirements friending the coach to monitor comms, but, it gives them an outlet to talk openly.
 
As a parent, I would still be very disturbed by something like that, and not allow the coach to friend my child like that. It sounds completely unethical.
 
+Cindy Brown Yeah, it is creepy and invasive. But what can parents do? The students are adults and if they choose to follow the rule then parents complaining isn't going to change things. The students need to complain. I was shocked when I heard about it at my sister's school but her and her friends who were there really didn't think it was all that big of a deal.
 
Sorry; somewhere along the line I had it in my head these were high school teams, not college.

Still creepy but I suppose if they're not objecting, there's nothing to be done.

Teach the next generation to object!! ;)
Add a comment...