15 of 32

No

Write now Print Email Article Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites Contact this writer

Social networking websites such as MySpace, YouTube and Facebook are a great innovation that allow people to express their personalities to a select group of people they trust and share common interests with. Indeed, the great strength of the Internet itself lies in its ability to connect people of like mind across cities and continents. However, some of this information may be visible to outside parties such as employers. If the employer runs a major corporate law firm and the employee spends Saturdays at the Lordi heavy-metal rock festival the employee may well be fired on Monday morning. Should the employee be fired for his music tastes, Viking-inspired face paint and dubious fashion sense alone? This is a clear question of whether people are entitled to privacy in their private life so long as its does not materially effect their ability to perform their day job. The clear answer is yes.

Employers enter into contracts of work with employees based on their skills to perform given tasks, their track record in past employment and the personality they present in the workplace. These are reasonable criteria that go to the employee's professional conduct. Whether they have a pet dog named Coco or sixty-four acquaintances in Switzerland is none of the employer's business. Indeed, in some jurisdictions it may be illegal to hire or reject someone when prejudiced by such trivia. When an employer calls for applications, applicants supply a cv and perhaps a short piece on why they have the required skills for the job. If an employer wants a reference, he or she can pick up the phone. Trawling through an applicant's private page is not simply unnecessary, but it is an invasion of privacy and a waste of time. It demonstrates not just a lack of respect for an applicant's privacy, but a lack of trust in their own words. If the employer picks up any sense that an applicant is not quite right, he or she is perfectly entitled to reject the applicant with the old chestnut of not being a good 'cultural fit'. Prima facie, an employer should take the applicant's credentials at face value (subject to appropriate reference checks).

Once the employee is hired, it remains incumbent on the employer to respect his or her privacy. Provided the employee carries on their work in a professional manner, meets all appropriate performance benchmarks and behaves courteously to staff and clients, there is no call for employers to view social networking sites of the employee. The exception comes when the employee chooses to use these sites against company policy. It is this act of computer misuse that should be the basis for firing, not the content of the page itself.

Social networking websites should not be used as an ordinary part of the hiring and firing process by employers. While people signing up for such sites need to be careful what they choose to reveal about themselves due to the risk of identity fraud, they should not have to worry that their innocent, legal and private pastimes will damage their future job prospects. There are many grey areas in the modern world that require regulation and intervention by public institutions. However there must be some residue place where people are free to express themselves without the risk of censure from those who do not share their interests.
In the context of employees and their employers, social networking sites such as MySpace, YouTube and Facebook are such a place.

Learn more about this author, Andrew Newman.
Click here to send author comments or questions.

more options

hide

Add your voice

Know something about Should employers be allowed to use MySpace, YouTube and Facebook accounts as a basis for hiring or firing employees??
We want to hear your view. Write now!