Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5581

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Thursday vetoed a law passed by the legislature that would ban employers from Gov. Chris Christie closeupasking for the social media passwords of workers and applicants. Christie said that he would sign the bill if it were amended to exclude some of its more restrictive components.

New Jersey would have been the eighth state to stop businesses from snooping into their current or prospective employees’ Facebook and Twitter accounts, although the Jersey law would have gone several steps beyond the protections that other states have provided.

If the legislature removes provisions that ban employers from even asking about the existence of social media accounts, and if it adds language protecting employers’ ability to investigate workplace misconduct or data theft, Christie said he will sign it into law.

Christie’s preferred bill would still carry civil penalties of $1,000 for the first violation and $2,500 for subsequent ones, but not allow further private action to collect damages and attorney’s fees.

The bill that passed already allowed employers to ask to access accounts in the course of an investigation into harassment or discrimination.

The original bill passed 75-2, so the legislature could probably easily override the governor’s veto, although they may accede to his requests in the spirit of cooperation.
I agree with the bill. I think drug testing of applicants should also be banned. Am not so sure about criminal background checks.

What do you think?
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6767|PNW

It's situational. As an employer, I pretty much need to know if a junkie is operating my heavy machinery or if some guy's going to get red flagged by police if we're working at or near a school. What I don't care about is what people use their social media for, but I can see where companies at high risk of industrial espionage might.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5354|London, England
One of my friends from college got his dream job working for BMW USA and was fired a week later after they saw him post a photo of one of their prototypes on his facebook wall, even though it was completely covered by a tarp. I think they were within their rights to do so.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Mutantbear
Semi Constructive Criticism
+1,431|5960|London, England

Jay wrote:

One of my friends from college got his dream job working for BMW USA and was fired a week later after they saw him post a photo of one of their prototypes on his facebook wall, even though it was completely covered by a tarp. I think they were within their rights to do so.
I wish i knew your friend just so i could say that i know someone that stupid

Last edited by Mutantbear (2013-06-03 14:01:52)

_______________________________________________________________________________________________ https://i.imgur.com/Xj4f2.png
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5354|London, England

Mutantbear wrote:

Jay wrote:

One of my friends from college got his dream job working for BMW USA and was fired a week later after they saw him post a photo of one of their prototypes on his facebook wall, even though it was completely covered by a tarp. I think they were within their rights to do so.
I wish i knew your friend just so i could say that i know someone that stupid
Want his # so you can text him?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5581

Xd
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4250
anything valid to the job or the character of the applicant i am fine with.

previous violent arrests or history of severe illness (physical or mental): employers probably have a fair and reasonable need to know.

drugs testing? depends on the nature of the work, although i wouldn't say it's so tyrannical for a business to want law-abiding workers.
Canin
Conservative Roman Catholic
+280|6470|Foothills of S. Carolina

I see no reason a company should not be allowed to drug test its employees. As far as social networking goes, common sense would dictate not to put job sensitive information on a non secure site. course, common sense is not so common....
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6148|what

Drug checks, background checks, etc.

Obtaining police records if applicable. They certainly should not be given passwords to your social media accounts.

If you have social media it should be up to the employee to understand what the post is public and potentially damages the company, however.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6101|eXtreme to the maX
They can ask for whatever they want, you can exercise your freedom not to work there.

Apart from govt depts there probably shouldn't be any regulation.

Then again there's so much scope for bullying and blackmail there should be limits.

So I dunno, lol.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6685|Tampa Bay Florida
Thing is, what if you don;t have any social media accounts.  Precisely because you dont want someone else snooping around in it.  Does that mean youre less likely to get hired? 

I hate the 21st century
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6767|PNW

Spearhead wrote:

Thing is, what if you don;t have any social media accounts.  Precisely because you dont want someone else snooping around in it.  Does that mean youre less likely to get hired? 

I hate the 21st century
If you're working in a company that wants to monitor your social media, you should probably create an account and register it with HR to avoid fraud from ambitious or spiteful coworkers. Get your name and sit on it.

In fact, this is a good idea no matter what.

AussieReaper wrote:

Obtaining police records if applicable. They certainly should not be given passwords to your social media accounts.
Within limits. I mean, you wouldn't want to give them keys to your car, house and filing cabinet either, but Facebook can be a nasty source of thoughtless leaks.
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6148|what

But the passwords to?

Maybe give them the account details and let someone in the company follow you.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6767|PNW

Within limits. They should be able to monitor your facebook activity if they need to, but giving them your password is a bit of a heavy-handed approach. In a super high security environment, I can see giving them passwords to social media if there is no other way to monitor all of an account's activity, but Tim the greasy manager at Joe's Diner and other such employers can fuck right off.

I wouldn't want any from my employees. It's irritating enough dealing with all the withholdings without snooping around Facebook, and the security risk is pretty high on the employer's end too. Should your employees trust your company not to engage in identity theft?

Anyway, even if it's allowed it's not foolproof against willful espionage.
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4250

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Within limits. They should be able to monitor your facebook activity if they need to
hang on a minute... why? why is this being taken as a basic premise now? 10 years ago did you have to install a new phone-line in your house whenever you got a new job, so your boss could pick up a phone receiver at any moment and listen to your phone conversations with friend and family? 50 years ago did you have to forward all of your ingoing/outgoing mail correspondence through the company mail room?

so why is it is work colleagues or a boss "should be able to monitor your facebook"? facebook is just another way of socializing. there should be absolutely no reason whatsoever to be compelled to share it with work friends. i had very healthy work relationships with colleagues and co-workers, but i never gave any of them my facebook information. i just didn't want that level of work/life invasion. it is not unreasonable. some people like to leave work and go home.
jsnipy
...
+3,276|6518|...

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Within limits. They should be able to monitor your facebook activity if they need to, but giving them your password is a bit of a heavy-handed approach.
If your material is not open to the world does you employer force you to be its friend
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4250
i would totally say no. it's part of the insidious creeping effect of facebook. not only do they think it's okay to invade every aspect of your social life, but now the 'networking' aspect has basically become a data-mining/snooping free-for-all for employers and businesses alike. it's stupid. and people are becoming so blithely passive and accepting of facebook's self-appointed 'role' as well. like nobody said anything when facebook harvested all of its users phone contacts, back around the era of the second iphone app. just like that: whether they used facebook and had corresponding accounts or not, facebook fetched all of your mobile phone contacts' names and numbers. boom. thanks for the info. and people actually think this shit is normal.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6685|Tampa Bay Florida
Secret Service guarding Sarah Palin "I was checking her out, if you know what I mean"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne … n-out.html

I thought the Secret Service was supposed to hire smart people

Does anyone else see how this could become an Orwellian dystopia?  "Sorry, no jobs for people with xyz political beliefs".  I mean fuck social media.  Put up 1 or 2 pictures and use it to keep in touch.  But for the love of god do not post your entire life on there.  It will be there, forever, even if you delete your account.  Stay off the grid.

Last edited by Spearhead (2013-06-04 04:55:10)

Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6685|Tampa Bay Florida

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Within limits. They should be able to monitor your facebook activity if they need to, but giving them your password is a bit of a heavy-handed approach. In a super high security environment, I can see giving them passwords to social media if there is no other way to monitor all of an account's activity, but Tim the greasy manager at Joe's Diner and other such employers can fuck right off.

I wouldn't want any from my employees. It's irritating enough dealing with all the withholdings without snooping around Facebook, and the security risk is pretty high on the employer's end too. Should your employees trust your company not to engage in identity theft?

Anyway, even if it's allowed it's not foolproof against willful espionage.
My worst fear is that kids growing up today (post-9/11 generation) will have absolutely no perspective about what for decades or centuries was considered normal privacy etiquette.  Its the same kind of reasoning that leads to "well I have nothing to hide so why worry?"  My fear is that even if you have a facebook/social media account, your employer/overseers/neo-feudal lords will look at it and say "hey, John Doe hasn't been posting updates and pictures and doesn't have many friends (ON FACEBOOK).  Whats wrong with him?"  Then John Doe is singled out for suspicion, for no reason other than wanting to protect his privacy.

I'm sure Kafka is turning in his grave right now.

edit- In my opinion, unless you are working in the national security industry or some other high level field where the risks of espionage need to be taken very seriously, it should be illegal for employers to even ask you about social media.  Its.  None.  Of.  Their.  Fucking.  Business.  If you can do the job, great.  If you say stupid shit on in the internet and the company gets bad publicity for it, then that employee was already a dumbfuck and wasnt going to stay around anyway.

We are in an era of passive surveillance.  Not proactive, like the times before, but passive.  The tiger in the corner is just watching most of the time, but he is still there, and he will strike when he needs to.

Last edited by Spearhead (2013-06-04 05:08:37)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6767|PNW

I did say that password sharing was a heavy-handed approach. If pushed through, I'm sure companies like Facebook will change (or reiterate) their policies to countermand it if a company actually decides to take advantage of it. And if they do take advantage of it, we can all welcome them to the top 100 worst places to work list.
jsnipy
...
+3,276|6518|...

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

welcome them to the top 100 worst places to work list.
which means nothing to them really
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6685|Tampa Bay Florida


Right.  Nothing wrong with that guy.  Just a normal well adjusted capitalist.  Nothing could possibly be going on here that should worry us.
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4250
dear internet,

please stop using 'orwellian' analogies to denote anything you ethically disagree with. please stop turning kafka's name into a short-hand adjective. it doesn't make you look clever, and it doesn't make you look well-read in anything except empty cliché.

regards,
people who actually read books.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6685|Tampa Bay Florida
Orwellian = surveillance state

The Trial = A man who is constantly under suspicion and harassment by unaccountable and authorities for no discernible reason

Yep, I'd say that was pretty relevant to the argument I was making.  I am not a violent person uzique but you are by far the most punchable person on bf2s.  You could have just been a man and explained the reasoning behind your insult, but no, I guess I don't deserve that kind of basic intellectual treatment.  For the record I've barely ever mentioned Orwell or Kafka here before this thread.  Fuck off you prick.

Last edited by Spearhead (2013-06-04 05:26:55)

Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4250
everyone mentions orwell in stupid political debates. everyone describes things as 'kafka-esque' to denote 'bureaucratic' in the pejorative.

it's lazy. why are you sprinkling lazy literary clichés into your posts? people only do that to give their posts a thin veneer of erudition.

just drop it. "kafka turning in his grave". kafka's books were actually supposed to be grimly funny. kafka would be laughing. if you'd read his books past the wikipedia synopsis, you'd know this. i guess it's fine to engage in 'intellectual debate' nowadays though using wikipedia and sparknote summaries. cause who actually needs to read in order to benefit from a literary reference, right.

also you're too stupid to figure out your right from left to punch me. redneck yokel.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-06-04 05:29:59)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard