KEY POINTS:
Earlier this week I covered the increasingly common phenomenon of people being fired because of their Facebook postings. Employers are also using Facebook at the other end of the employment relationship, as a means of culling unsuitable candidates.
As this blog points out, people who post naked photos of themselves, or stories of sexual or drunken exploits, are less likely to be hired, because employers will have concerns that their lifestyle and lack of judgment will spill over into the workplace.
And according to a recent survey, over 22% of surveyed employers search social networking sites to screen candidates (up from 11% in 2006).
Interestingly, employers were not just concerned about alcohol or drug use, or inappropriate photos. They also used the information posted to identify those with poor communication skills, and inaccurately stated qualifications. Bad mouthing of former employers and colleagues was also identified as a concern in a large number of cases.
In other words, employers are not just using these sites to avoid hiring someone who has done something inappropriate - they are using them more comprehensively, as if the sites were designed to be an additional part of the recruitment process. Anything they can get on an employee via such a site is taken into account, even things as mundane as bad grammar. This can catch out a lot of people, because most don't take the sort of care with the wording of their posts that they might in a cover letter to a potential employer.
No doubt recruitment agencies will start checking candidates' posts now, before they recommend someone with a posting that might embarrass the agency. After all, they are supposed to put forward only suitable candidates.
Let the poster beware ...
Greg Cain
Greg Cain is an employment lawyer at Minter Ellison Rudd Watts.
