Readers with neck problems are advised to skip this post because it is sure to have your head shaking.
Officials who run the city of Bozeman, Montana -- perhaps setting a new standard for privacy invasion in the name of public safety -- are insisting that job applicants cough up their usernames and passwords for any social networking sites or online forums in which they participate. Reason: background checks.
From a report on Montana's News Station:
The requirement is included on a waiver statement applicants must sign, giving the City permission to conduct an investigation into the person's "background, references, character, past employment, education, credit history, criminal or police records."
"Please list any and all, current personal or business websites, web pages or memberships on any Internet-based chat rooms, social clubs or forums, to include, but not limited to: Facebook, Google, Yahoo, YouTube.com, MySpace, etc.," the City form states. There are then three lines where applicants can list the Web sites, their user names and log-in information and their passwords.
Beyond the pale, you say? Not according to Bozeman city attorney Greg Sullivan, who defended the policy after assuring the television station that "the city takes privacy rights very seriously." (Understanding them is another matter.)
"So, we have positions ranging from fire and police, which require people of high integrity for those positions, all the way down to the lifeguards and the folks that work in city hall here. So we do those types of investigations to make sure the people that we hire have the highest moral character and are a good fit for the City," Sullivan said.
The good citizens of Montana apparently do not share Sullivan's point of view. An online poll taken by the television station showed 98% of respondents -- 98%! -- believe the policy to be an invasion of privacy, although there is no indication of how many people expressed a view and we all know that online polls are pretty much useless. Nevertheless, you don't see 98% on one of them every day.
Privacy isn't the only issue. As this blog entry on NewWest.net notes, providing your username and password to another person violates the terms of services of some sites. For example, Facebook's ToS reads: "You will not share your password, let anyone else access your account, or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your account."
And a comment posted at Boing-Boing raises more legal questions:
In an interview, they couldn't ask me about my religion, my marital status, my politics, and various other prohibited categories. That's black-letter federal law that every employer knows, especially employers with in-house government-paid lawyers.
My Facebook page alone has all that information and more, most of it conveniently gathered together in a little box.
I know the bar for discrimination lawsuits is pretty high, but wouldn't any rejected applicant have a real leg up given that there's no way the city could claim it didn't know it was demanding information it wasn't entitled to know?
Of course, perhaps there's a simple explanation for what otherwise appears to be an inexplicable case bureaucratic overreaching: Maybe the request for usernames and passwords is simply a pre-employment test? If you're dumb enough to comply, you're not qualified for the job.
(Update, June 22: City abandons policy.)
Welcome regulars and passersby. Here are a few more recent Buzzblog items. And, if you'd like to receive Buzzblog via e-mail newsletter, here's where to sign up.
2009's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries.
5 online "marketing opportunities" hospitals are missing.
Don't know when to go? RunPee.com fills the void.
Google ran out of bandwidth? ... No, we're talking failure to communicate.
4chan users trigger DDoS attack ... against 4chan?
What does security software have to do with swine flu?
Snopes.com gets an "A" from fellow fact-checkers.
Reason No. 2 to resist filing a complaint with the FCC.
Tweeting with "Star Trek" actor sparks kitchen fire?
40% of geeks surveyed admit to working ... how many hours?
The Leader in Network Knowledge
Tyranny stinks.
Are these those continuing freedoms that all the terrorists hate us for?
Yes it Does
I don't think it was ever about the freedoms, more about foreign policies and the desire to spread a really weird version of democracy.
How do they propose to...
How do they propose to know that the applicant has provided all the details? Does Bozeman city hall intend to spend even more money wringing out the internet to find the customer care site with a forum (almost all do) that X applicant signed up for to download the drivers for their latest upgrade or game? Most frequent internet users couldn't remember all the places they'd logged into in their lives under penalty of death, much less sacking. Also, why not just have some dummy sites you've created and give those to the town hall? If you're going to the trouble to fill in a job app, why not create a twitter identity while you're at it? What happens after you're employed, and another one comes out? Would I have to give details of this comment being left if I apply?
How do they propose to...
Most background checks are outsourced to third parties. And most of those third parties, if they are worth their salt, have departments who specialize in web service searches to find out if they can match your information to whatever you may have posted to an online website.
But I have to agree with the article... I smell discrimination lawsuits galore.
A disgrace
Greg Sullivan is a absolute disgrace to his (apparent) Irish heritage. Of course, he is an attorney, which goes a considerable way towards explaining his lack of appreciation of ethical nuances. I'm heartened to see that the good people of the fine state of Montana are at odds with his invasive, totalitarian worldview.
Don't Slam Attorneys
I am an attorney and agree that this is completely invasive. We do not all "lack ethical nuances" but thank you for stereotyping.
I like how "not limited to"
I like how "not limited to" those sites means it's any internet activity. If this were still the days of AOL you'd have to give up your main account password since that can be used for chats and posts.
Scary
Wow, that is absolutely positively scary! Must suck to live in CA!
RT
www.anonymity.tk
That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Can they ask you for your account ID for Facebook, Myspace, ect... with the intent of doing a background check? Sure.
But the PASSWORD?!?!?! WTF do they need to actually LOG IN TO YOUR ACCOUNT for? Seriously? That's RULE #1 for Internet age is NEVER REVEAL YOUR USERNAME/PASSWORD TO ANYONE!
They can do a fine background check with just the ID, they have no legal right to ask you for your password. That's like saying, "Yeah, we'll hire you for this job right after you provide us with a key to your home and the combination to your safe. We have the right to check out your underwear drawer to make sure you're a tiddy whitey kind of guy, that's the only people we hire."
Would you let them have a key to your diary to get a job? NO.
Would you let them have the username/password to your online banking? NO.
Are you using the same password for your online banking as at least one of those other sites? Chances are yes.
Attorneys will be slammed
Until they put (a lot of) effort into cleaning up their own profession. You know who the sleazeballs are more than any of us, fix it. If not, live with the consequences.
Post new comment