House Repubolicans don't believe in privacy

[Kulindahr]

I decided this deserved its own thread.

We've heard that employers have been demanding people's personal Facebook passwords as a condition of employment, and that a teacher got fired for refusing to provide hers. Well, a bill was introduced in Congress to make an effort to fix that, and guess what? House Republicans voted it down.

It fits with their pro-fascismcorporation stance; they figure corporations are more important than people, so corporations should be able to not just know everything about you, but be able to butt into your private life and manipulate it!

Read more HERE.

[loki81]

I'm glad it's legal for potential employers to ask for my facebook password.

makes it easy to rule them out before getting sucked in.

[maxpowr9]

It's why I closed my facebook and linkedin accounts. Don't need people being nosy.

[Kulindahr]

I'm glad it's legal for potential employers to ask for my facebook password.

makes it easy to rule them out before getting sucked in.

That would chill the employers a bit, if people just started standing up, saying, "This interview is over", and heading out when the interviewer demanded a password -- and then, just before leaving the office, adding, "You'll be hearing from their attorney".

Really, I think that's all that's necessary: Facebook should just announce that from now on, any company asking for a personal account password will be sued for attempting to illegally obtain proprietary information.

[Stardreamer]

It is a violation of your terms of service agreement with Facebook to give your password to anyone.

[Ninja108]

Why I don't use facebook anymore..there is no privacy

[Benvolio]

Can we agree that the employer should not be held liable for the acts of the employees? If a male employee is too friendly with females, he should be punished but not the employer? Of course we can agree that the employer should not be liable for racist comments to other employees, right? Well no, the liberals are firm believers that trial attorneys and their clients should collect big money from the employer for even trivial offenses of other employees. And of course, they should be punished for hiring illegal aliens with no way of determining who is legal and who is not.
It is then wrong to deny employers reasonable means of learning about their employees and prospects?

[chrisrobin]

Can we agree that the employer should not be held liable for the acts of the employees? If a male employee is too friendly with females, he should be punished but not the employer? Of course we can agree that the employer should not be liable for racist comments to other employees, right? Well no, the liberals are firm believers that trial attorneys and their clients should collect big money from the employer for even trivial offenses of other employees. And of course, they should be punished for hiring illegal aliens with no way of determining who is legal and who is not.
It is then wrong to deny employers reasonable means of learning about their employees and prospects?

............................

[LuvFindsAndyHardy]

Can we agree that the employer should not be held liable for the acts of the employees? If a male employee is too friendly with females, he should be punished but not the employer? Of course we can agree that the employer should not be liable for racist comments to other employees, right? Well no, the liberals are firm believers that trial attorneys and their clients should collect big money from the employer for even trivial offenses of other employees. And of course, they should be punished for hiring illegal aliens with no way of determining who is legal and who is not.
It is then wrong to deny employers reasonable means of learning about their employees and prospects?

You're behaving as though access to a potential employee's facebook account will automatically and ACTUALLY find anything actionable. It's a false argument. If the employers want to really perform "due dilligence" and PAY for a background check, let them.

[mitchymo]

This highlights a lack of common sense. It is against Facebook policy for users to give out their personal information, as such, it is inappropriate for an employer to ask for it. Simple as.

[Kulindahr]

Can we agree that the employer should not be held liable for the acts of the employees? If a male employee is too friendly with females, he should be punished but not the employer? Of course we can agree that the employer should not be liable for racist comments to other employees, right? Well no, the liberals are firm believers that trial attorneys and their clients should collect big money from the employer for even trivial offenses of other employees. And of course, they should be punished for hiring illegal aliens with no way of determining who is legal and who is not.

It depends on whether the employee is acting as part of his responsibilities to the employer.

Okay, I'm convinced you're not a lawyer of any sort -- even a lawyer sitting in a cubicle shuffling paper for real lawyers would know it's possibly to tell if someone is legal.

It is then wrong to deny employers reasonable means of learning about their employees and prospects?

Since when is requiring someone to violate a contract "reasonable"?

[Stardreamer]

Can we agree that the employer should not be held liable for the acts of the employees? If a male employee is too friendly with females, he should be punished but not the employer? Of course we can agree that the employer should not be liable for racist comments to other employees, right? Well no, the liberals are firm believers that trial attorneys and their clients should collect big money from the employer for even trivial offenses of other employees. And of course, they should be punished for hiring illegal aliens with no way of determining who is legal and who is not.
It is then wrong to deny employers reasonable means of learning about their employees and prospects?

The employer is asking the prospective employee to violate a contract (terms of service agreement) as a condition of employment. A contract intended to protect the security of the network. The real question should be why would the employer trust an employee who has so little respect for the agreements he enters into?

[Just_Believe18]

The Republican Party has no integrity in their policies. They protect the rights of gun owners when it comes to civil liberties... That's pretty much it... How do you expect me to support or vote for such a party's candidate?

This should have passed in Congress.

[TheFireGod]

Considering that Facebook itself is a corporation, so where's the outrage that its policies are being broken by other corporations?

[CowboyBob]

The Patriot Act pretty much pretty much flushed privacy and personal liberties down the toilet anyway.

[Joshua_me]

My point in starting the "Employers Asking for Facebook Passwords" was to help illustrate what is slowly evolving in America. It's right up there with the new "strip search you for unpaid parking tickets" the SCOTUS just voted for...

(Five to Four, along party lines, of course...)

It's nothing short of horrifying.

The fact is, if I gave my potential employer my Facebook password all he would be able to see is that I kept in touch with some high school and college friends and also that I chat and share G-rated pics with my co-workers and family.

There's nothing *too gay or incriminating* on there. (I'm not an idiot)

But, that's not the point.

If I'm applying for a job, I will supply you with my SS#. That way, you can find out all you need to know about me, including criminal checks and the like and anything else pertaining to *business*.

Mine, or anyone else's personal life is no concern of anyone's but my own.

This USED to be common sense.

[Benvolio]

If an employee misbehaves, the employer gets sued, in part because it failed to discover the kind of person the prospective employee was. After the fact it is easy for the plaintiff's lawyer to say, what you should have done was this and such. The info was right there if you had looked. It was right there on his facebook, but you didn't bother to look. We want punitive damages to teach employers a lesson.

[palemale]

If an employee misbehaves, the employer gets sued, in part because it failed to discover the kind of person the prospective employee was. After the fact it is easy for the plaintiff's lawyer to say, what you should have done was this and such. The info was right there if you had looked. It was right there on his facebook, but you didn't bother to look. We want punitive damages to teach employers a lesson.

If federal legislation or regulation forbids employers from asking for employees' passwords, don't you agree that, under the law, employers would be immune from liability for failing to access an employee's facebook page? I agree with Kuli, I don't think you are a lawyer.

[Kulindahr]

If an employee misbehaves, the employer gets sued, in part because it failed to discover the kind of person the prospective employee was. After the fact it is easy for the plaintiff's lawyer to say, what you should have done was this and such. The info was right there if you had looked. It was right there on his facebook, but you didn't bother to look. We want punitive damages to teach employers a lesson.

1. An employer can only be sued for the actions of the employee if said employee was acting on the employer's behalf and at his behest.

2. Any info a plaintiff's lawyer can find can also be found by the prospective employer without any password.


You about as much a lawyer as I is a oil geologist.

[mitchymo]

as I is a oil geologist.

Are you, or are you not, Borat?

[Kulindahr]

Are you, or are you not, Borat?

I'ze been known t'be rushin'.

[Stardreamer]

If an employee misbehaves, the employer gets sued, in part because it failed to discover the kind of person the prospective employee was. After the fact it is easy for the plaintiff's lawyer to say, what you should have done was this and such. The info was right there if you had looked. It was right there on his facebook, but you didn't bother to look. We want punitive damages to teach employers a lesson.

Well why stop there, lets ask for the key to their safety deposit boxes while your at it, lots of incriminating evidence could be there. the house key, car trunk key, JustUsBoys account password, where do you draw the line?

[hermanding]

One company even asked for the prospective employee's email sign on and password.

[Stardreamer]

One company even asked for the prospective employee's email sign on and password.

Most End User License Agreements require protecting your password. No company should be asking for it, it violates the security of the network and is grounds for banning you.