Organizational Policy That Infringes on the Personal

¶ … organizational policy that infringes on the personal liberty of employees. Be specific in terms of what liberties are infringed upon and how. Then explain the benefits of the policy to the organization in spite of the costs to employees in terms of their personal liberty.

Organizational policies infringing upon liberty

In today's competitive job market, workers are often desperate to do whatever is necessary to get hired. However, some employers are taking advantage of this desperation in their 'vetting' of workers. It is well-known that employers may 'Google' a prospective employee's name before hiring. It is also common for an employer to access the public Facebook (or other social media) profile of the employee to screen him or her for possible personal problems or indiscretions before hiring. However, some employers are going a step farther. "Some have demanded applicants hand over their passwords so they can view individual's restricted profiles" (Stern 2012). This means that even content that the user has posted privately -- including those marked only for trusted family and friends -- could be accessed by the employer, as a condition of being considered for employment. According to the ACLU, who was defending a man required to give his password as a condition of his job application: "It's an invasion of privacy for private employers to insist on looking at people's private Facebook pages as a condition of employment or consideration in an application process" (Stern 2012).

Imagine if, in the pre-online era, a prospective employer asked to see an employee's personal photo albums, diary, and other personal memorabilia as part of the hiring process. It should also be noted that these demands are not just made of candidates with high-security jobs whose private actions might be expected to be put under scrutiny if they could be potentially risky to national security. Even colleges are asking that prospective applicants give the admissions staff their passwords and the job interview in the suit brought forth by the ACLU was for a journalism job.

Even Facebook's own privacy officer was distressed at this development, pointing out that it not only compromised the privacy of the job-seeker, but also that of his or her friends, who may have shared private information with the owner of the profile page with the expectation that it was to remain confidential. "This practice undermines the privacy expectations and the security of both the user and the user's friends. It also potentially exposes the employer who seeks this access to unanticipated legal liability" (Stern 2012).