Home Menu

Site Navigation


Notices

Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics.

Register to reply Log in to reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 29-01-2013, 11:43 PM #11
Jack_ Jack_ is offline
oh fack off
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: England
Posts: 47,434

Favourites (more):
Survivor 40: Tony
IAC2019: Ian Wright


Jack_ Jack_ is offline
oh fack off
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: England
Posts: 47,434

Favourites (more):
Survivor 40: Tony
IAC2019: Ian Wright


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Livia View Post
I take it from all you've said that you're not actually an employer, and haven't been for that many job interviews recently.

I don't know anything about getting people to hack into accounts to get information. That's not what we're discussing here and it is, as far as I know, illegal.

It's an employers market. If an employer has to choose between a load of applicants then those applicants will be judged on a whole host of things: what they wear, what they say, their personal grooming, how they present themselves, how they sit in the in interview, eye contact, what's on their CV... and what's publicly available to view on their Facebook page.

If you were going to pay someone to work for you, I think you'd probably want to employ someone who is most likely to turn up on Monday morning and not have the rest of the staff pick up the slack when they're inevitably too hung over to come to work. That would be my assumption if there were lots of drunken pictures and silly comments available for the whole world to access. If you're going to demand freedom of speech, don't expect not to be judged on it.
Not entirely sure what relevance that has to my argument or indeed how it would devalue it in any way regardless of the answer.

And again, yet more assumptions. Just because someone goes out at the weekend and gets absolutely batfaced it does not necessarily have any correlation with their work related performance. People are perfectly able to separate the two and have been doing for many years, just because social networking sites have now come along and given employers yet another avenue by which to judge, outcast and make assumptions on you that doesn't suddenly mean that someone can't have wild weekends yet be Employee of the Month. It's all assumptions and it's grossly unfair.

If and when an employee turned up to work hungover, drunk, or their performance began to slip, then perhaps their personal life could be brought to task and disciplinary action could be handed out, just as before. Second-guessing what potential employees might do, or sacking people for having a good time on their weekend off is just of order.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Omah View Post
huffingtonpost.co.uk - January 25, 2013



With so many applicants for jobs, posting any of the above (even with privacy control) is foolhardy in the extreme.

Don't you just love youth unemployment and things which make it worse
Jack_ is offline  
Register to reply Log in to reply

Bookmark/share this topic

Tags
career, harming, media, prospects, social, warning


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
 

About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

"Big Brother and UK Television Forum. Est. 2001"

 

© 2023
no new posts