Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/138053
Employee Screening By contrast, an eye-popping 79 percent of respondents are not using social media sites for background screening, and have no plans to do so in the next year. Only a paltry 14 percent are leveraging social media in this regard, and a mere 7 percent are planning to follow suit next year. Why such apathetic responses to the bounty of data that resides on a candidate's Facebook and other sites? The culprits—by and large—appears to be security and regulatory compliance. Many federal and state laws are on the books with sharp teeth aimed at discriminatory hiring practices that are based on race, creed, color, ancestry, nationality, medical condition, disability, marital status, gender, sexual preference, and age. Ditto the number of rules governing personal privacy. As Greg Dubecky succinctly sums up the issue, "While the prospect of using social media as a screening tool is tempting to employers, it seems that most have determined it may not be worth all the trouble." Too Hot to Handle Dubecky is the president of Corporate Screening Services, Inc., a Middleburg, Ohio-based background screening provider. Despite the potential benefits of tapping social media to learn about a job candidate's propensity to perform well, Dubecky says "We rarely receive inquiries from current or potential clients about conducting social media searches." His company is not alone in this regard. Steven C. Millwee, president and CEO of SecurTest Inc., an Athens, Ga.-based background screening provider, says employers "rarely consider" social media content in their background screening—for good reason, he adds. "Except in highly sensitive positions, such as a federal security clearance, the background screening provider and employer have [38] HRO TODAY MAGAZINE | JUNE 2013 several insurmountable hurdles before considering social media content." These obstacles run the gamut, raising such probing questions as: • Can the content be validated as having been actually written by the job candidate? • How do we know the subject profile on a social media site truly is the candidate under review? • What relevance does the content versus the candidate have to the position at hand? The relative newness of social media in the context of background screening has resulted in best practices being written at the present time. Confusion reigns triumphant. For example, many companies are unsure whether or not to permit a comprehensive review of the screening information by the candidate. "Will the candidate be allowed, for instance, to review the material the employer considers relevant to exclude the candidate from employment, in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act?" Millwee says. If the employer provides full disclosure to the candidate, the report may indicate that the subject belongs to a protected group, which can lead to allegations of discrimination if the candidate is not hired. "Though you may be able to point to other factors—the person hired was more qualified, for instance—you still may have a smoking gun in your hand," explains Millwee. Aside from the legal issues, there is another possible reason why social media and screening are seen as incompatible, despite the perceived benefits. "Sites like Facebook and Twitter have made it easier for users to lock down their profiles from public view,"