Historically, employers have learned about potential hires through applications, questionnaires, interviews, references and background checks.
That is changing, however, as more companies are beginning to use social media outlets to vet candidates. But while such sites can provide a lot of information about a candidate, it is important to understand the legal ramifications of researching a candidate online, says Jennifer Raymond, a partner with The Stolar Partnership.
“Employers are reporting that they’re making all sorts of employment-related decisions based on social media,” says Raymond. “But most employers don’t have targeted, written policies addressing what they’re doing with, and how they’re collecting, social media information.”
Smart Business spoke with Raymond about what is permissible when using social networking sites and credit checks to screen applicants, how to keep up to date with hiring practices and how to minimize legal risks.
What are the pros and cons of using social networking sites during the hiring process?
The pro is that you get information that you wouldn’t otherwise get from an interview or a resume. The con is that you get information you wouldn’t otherwise get from an interview or a resume.
You can find inaccuracies in a resume and information regarding a candidate’s judgment by screening social networking sites. But you also might learn information that is protected and wouldn’t normally be accessible to you as an employer, such as a person’s religious beliefs or someone’s health conditions.
You might also find information about someone who drinks alcohol or smokes cigarettes. However, some states, such as Illinois, have laws protecting legal recreational activities, and you can’t make a hiring decision based on that type of information.
What steps should employers take to minimize the legal risks associated with using social networking sites to screen potential employees?
Employers should have written policies governing the screening process that include, among other things, exactly which sites will be searched and who will be doing the searching. It’s critical to develop policies that include examples of what is, and what is not, permissible hiring criteria, acceptable conduct and appropriate information to consider in making hiring determinations. All personnel who will be participating in interviews or participating in hiring decisions should be trained on these policies.
These guidelines must be applied to every candidate. Employers may want to avoid sites such as Facebook because of the risk of finding protected information that a candidate might say was used impermissibly in making a hiring determination. Employers may wish to limit their search to professional sites such as LinkedIn, where they can verify resume information, as opposed to finding out personal, and possibly protected, information about candidates. And whoever is conducting the screening should never misrepresent his or her identity to gain unauthorized access to a candidate’s social networking information, such as by ‘friending’ the candidate or creating a fictitious profile.
Can an employer also reference a candidate’s credit report when making hiring decisions?
This area is in flux due to the downturn in the economy. It has become more of an issue because, for example, the credit score of someone who was laid off could have changed because of unemployment.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and a number of states have been cracking down on an employer’s use of credit reports to make hiring decisions. And while looking at a credit report itself is not discriminatory, it can have a disparate impact on specific categories of people that are protected, such as African-American or female candidates, who may have lower credit scores based on social circumstances.
Not only has the EEOC been increasing its enforcement, but four states have enacted laws to prohibit employers from using credit reports in making hiring decisions, except in certain situations. And Missouri is considering legislation that would curtail the use of credit screenings in hiring decisions. There is even federal legislation that’s been introduced that would amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act and prohibit the use of credit reports, except in certain situations. A good rule of thumb is that if the position requires the candidate to handle money or other financially sensitive information, or if it’s a managerial or executive level position that involves signatory power, then it may be permissible to look at credit report information and use it to make determinations. However, for rank-and-file employees, making decisions on the basis of credit information can be very risky. And it’s going to become even more risky as other states, and potentially the federal government, pass this type of legislation.
If a candidate claims discrimination during the hiring process, how can a company protect itself against a lawsuit?
You’re not going to be able to stop someone from suing you, but you can demonstrate to the courts that you have written policies, that you’ve trained supervisors and decision-makers to follow them and that you have a documented screening process for candidates. This preparation will go a long way toward defeating claims that may be brought by a disgruntled candidate who feels that he or she was treated unfairly.
How can employers make sure they stay up to date with legal hiring practices?
There are human resources publications and websites that post updated information, such as the EEOC and the Department of Labor. But the best way to stay up to date and protect your company is to conduct a regular audit of your written employment policies — including hiring policies — and use the services of a qualified employment lawyer who can make sure you are in compliance.
Jennifer Raymond is a partner with The Stolar Partnership. Reach her at (314) 231-2800 or [email protected].
