[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I guess then that begs the question, if having little experience of something invalidates your opinion, why is it that MP's are so often commenting on and making policies for people that they have absolutely no contact and experiences with? If the people running this country are going to pass judgement on things they have next to no experience of, I may as well myself. That's also like saying a straight person's opinion on gay marriage isn't as valid as they aren't gay themselves and so couldn't fully understand.

.

good point!

Originally Posted by Jack_

On the point of employers looking at your Facebook page to see who 'you really are', I refer you to a post I made a bit earlier in the thread about how I question whether social networking sites actually are an accurate representation of one's true self, character and personality, for better or worse. I'm not entirely convinced a few static images and lines of text on a web page can truly reflect what somebody is like as a person in real life, or, more importantly - an employee.

Exactly, go to uni for 3 years end up in thousands of pounds in debt, and not get a job because some twonk in IT saw pics you were tagged in you drunk at your cousins wedding?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I guess then that begs the question, if having little experience of something invalidates your opinion, why is it that MP's are so often commenting on and making policies for people that they have absolutely no contact and experiences with? If the people running this country are going to pass judgement on things they have next to no experience of, I may as well myself. That's also like saying a straight person's opinion on gay marriage isn't as valid as they aren't gay themselves and so couldn't fully understand.

I never said anyone has a right to a job, but hey, surely it's better for everyone to be in one, no? If we're just going to go about sacking people willy nilly and putting more power in the hands of employers, organisations and the market, especially when there's unemployment problems in this country, then as long as tax payers are happy footing the bill for their welfare support, I'm all for it. Sack people or refuse people jobs for posting questionable material on their personal online profiles all you want, but you're only going to give yourself more problems in the end.

On the point of employers looking at your Facebook page to see who 'you really are', I refer you to a post I made a bit earlier in the thread about how I question whether social networking sites actually are an accurate representation of one's true self, character and personality, for better or worse. I'm not entirely convinced a few static images and lines of text on a web page can truly reflect what somebody is like as a person in real life, or, more importantly - an employee.

Yeah, that's not the same thing. MPs have advisors, they don't go into something cold like you're doing here. You have a valid opinion. Unfortunately that opinion flags up that you really don't know too much about it, you're knee-jerking.

Of course it's better for everyone to be in a job. But I'm not going to employ a dedicated party boy if I've got a more serious, studious candidate. That's the bottom line. And as Omah said earlier, a Facebook page can also work for you, and if you're smart you'll understand that too.

You're going way over the top on this one Jack. All you have to do is set your privacy setting, but you think that's too much to ask. I'd like to have this conversation with you when you are older and have a bit more life experience, have had a few interviews and maybe even sat on an interview panel or two. Until then, you're just crusading about this without really knowing too much about it. So as I've said all I have to say on the subject, I'll leave it there.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Livia

Well actually, you not being an employer or someone who has been for many interviews recently is extremely relevant to the issue. Of course you can still have an opinion, but it'd be like you coming on here getting all outraged about changes to the MOT when you don't own a car.

So true .....

[Omah]

http://www.ias.org.uk/resources/fact.../workplace.pdf

A survey carried out in December 2007 for Norwich Union Healthcare found a third of employees admitting to having been to work with a hangover. 15% reported having been drunk at work. One in ten employees reported hangovers at work once a month, one in twenty once a week. Work problems resulting from hangovers or being drunk at work included difficulty concentrating; reduced productivity; tiredness and mistakes. The majority (77%) of employers interviewed for this survey identified alcohol as a major threat to employee wellbeing and a factor encouraging sickness absence.

Absenteeism from work through alcohol misuse costs the economy about Ł1.5bn
• It is generally acknowledged that people with alcohol-related problems have
increased rates of sickness absence from work.
• The value of lost output during sickness has long been regarded as one of the main costs to the economy of alcohol misuse.
• In 2001, across the whole UK workforce, over 176m working days were lost as a result of absenteeism. Between 6 per cent and 15 per cent of this aggregate figure can be attributed to alcohol-related sickness.
• In total, alcohol-related sickness absence is estimated to cost between Ł1.2bn and Ł1.8bn, with a middle estimate of approximately Ł1.5bn.

No employer wants the cost of hiring and then firing a known heavy/binge drinker .....

Forewarned is forearmed .....

[Kizzy]

A couple of party pics are enough to label someone a workshy, useless alcoholic now are they?

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

A couple of party pics are enough to label someone a workshy, useless alcoholic now are they?

Not necessarily, but if an applicant has spent the last year "partying" every weekend and posting the results on FB then I think it's fair to say that he or she may well have "lost" a few Monday mornings .....

I certainly did - and a few Tuesdays, too, but that was then (it only became public if you got arrested) and this is now (it's public as soon as it hits the wires or the waves) .....

So, if they can't shape up, they better ship out .....

[Jack_]

It's also worth noting that Facebook isn't necessarily as much of an accurate representation of people as they'd like us to believe and often we believe it is too. Social networking sites allow people to represent themselves in whatever way they wish, you can be whoever you want online. You control what's uploaded, if you don't like a picture - it doesn't go up. It's up to you what things you talk about, like, post etc. It's a very one-sided operation in the sense that we all have the ability to shape our online profiles in a way that we want to represent ourselves, and that is not necessarily a true reflection of one's character, for better or worse. So in one mind you may wish to represent yourself as this outgoing, borderline alcoholic party animal when in fact most of the time you're quite the opposite and are very career driven - but of course that doesn't necessarily make a very interesting profile does it. I question whether using social networking sites as means of seeing someone's 'true self' is a useful tool or not.

Originally Posted by Omah

Not necessarily, but if an applicant has spent the last year "partying" every weekend and posting the results on FB then I think it's fair to say that he or she may well have "lost" a few Monday mornings .....

I certainly did - and a few Tuesdays, too, but that was then (it only became public if you got arrested) and this is now (it's public as soon as it hits the wires or the waves) .....

So, if they can't shape up, they better ship out .....

I see - so one rule for you, and another rule for this generation because of social networking sites. And a few more assumptions about the correlation between drinking and work ethic, tied in with how you lost a 'few Monday mornings' as well. Perfect.

I do hope you enjoy footing part of the tax bill to subsidise these people's unemployment. Because when they're sacked, that's what they become.

[the truth]

I know of people who have either been sacked as a direct result of facebook postings or failed to get a particular job. its way more tnan 10% getting vetted too....the behaviour of people on there does expose the moral standards of some people and is more than enough to scare employers away

[Omah]

Originally Posted by the truth

I know of people who have either been sacked as a direct result of facebook postings or failed to get a particular job. its way more tnan 10% getting vetted too....the behaviour of people on there does expose the moral standards of some people and is more than enough to scare employers away

Yeah, people getting "batarsed" every weekend and then expecting the world to condone such behaviour and pay them buckets of money just for (mostly) turning up at the office/shop/factory, etc ..... well, not any more .....

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Omah

Yeah, people getting "batarsed" every weekend and then expecting the world to condone such behaviour and pay them buckets of money just for (mostly)turning up at the office/shop/factory, etc ..... well, not any more .....

Ah yes that's it, discredit some classic working class jobs in the process why don't you. As if they aren't already looked down upon already.

Why is it that people feel the need to go out and get wasted in the first place? Why are people seemingly so miserable that they feel the need to forget everything at the weekend by getting as intoxicated as possible? Perhaps if we as a society answer that question and provide a resolution to it, then we'd be in a much better state, no?

Here's a theory - perhaps the state of the economy, the increasing demonisation of the unemployed, low-skilled workers and the welfare dependant, as well as the rising gap between the rich and poor combined with those at the bottom of the social scale lacking the means to break out of the cycle - can explain antisocial behaviour and drug and alcohol problems? Maybe they're so ****ing fed up of being lambasted by those at the top that they rebel and/or turn to drink, drugs and crime as a coping method. Just an idea.

Or of course, maybe they're just feral alcoholic worthless degenerate rats that should be thrown to wolves...as the media would have you believe.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Ah yes that's it, discredit some classic working class jobs in the process why don't you. As if they aren't already looked down upon already.

Why is it that people feel the need to go out and get wasted in the first place? Why are people seemingly so miserable that they feel the need to forget everything at the weekend by getting as intoxicated as possible? Perhaps if we as a society answer that question and provide a resolution to it, then we'd be in a much better state, no?

Here's a theory - perhaps the state of the economy, the increasing demonisation of the unemployed, low-skilled workers and the welfare dependant, as well as the rising gap between the rich and poor combined with those at the bottom of the social scale lacking the means to break out of the cycle - can explain antisocial behaviour and drug and alcohol problems? Maybe they're so ****ing fed up of being lambasted by those at the top that they rebel and/or turn to drink, drugs and crime as a coping method. Just an idea.

Or of course, maybe they're just feral alcoholic worthless degenerate rats that should be thrown to wolves...as the media would have you believe.

self pity will get them nowhere..take a look at the paralympics, those legends can run swim and cycle at top speed with missing bodyparts, yet some people with bad attitudes cant even get up and educate themselves to get a job.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by the truth

self pity will get them nowhere..take a look at the paralympics, those legends can run swim and cycle at top speed with missing bodyparts, yet some people with bad attitudes cant even get up and educate themselves to get a job.

And how large is this 'some people' you speak of as a proportion of the population? 10%? 1%? Or more likely...0.1%?

In other words, a very small minority.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by the truth

self pity will get them nowhere..take a look at the paralympics, those legends can run swim and cycle at top speed with missing bodyparts, yet some people with bad attitudes cant even get up and educate themselves to get a job.

Yeah, chips on shoulders the size of barn doors, some on'em .....

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Omah

Yeah, people getting "batarsed" every weekend and then expecting the world to condone such behaviour and pay them buckets of money just for (mostly) turning up at the office/shop/factory, etc ..... well, not any more .....

Well you yourself have admitted to being 'batarsed' do you deserve to spend years on the dole regardless of your education, training and experience?
This whole thing is ludicrous.
Good job the 'Bullingdon club' lot didn't have a facebook isn't it?.....

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Well you yourself have admitted to being 'batarsed' do you deserve to spend years on the dole regardless of your education, training and experience?

Times change - steelworkers were once paid to drink pints of beer "on the job" - now there's no steel industry, works, jobs or drinking "on the job" .....

On the up-side, nearly all jobs in the UK today are simple, safe and clean - there's just not enough of them to go round, so those who want to work should conform to employers expectations and not expect to get a job because they've got a vocational degree .....

Good job the 'Bullingdon club' lot didn't have a facebook isn't it?.....

Exactly .....

To return to the topic :

Recruiters across the UK are warning too many young people are risking their career opportunities because of what they post on social network sites.

The Recruitment Society and The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) say most employers now search job candidates online.

Katerina Rudiger from the CIPD says it is important to check your privacy settings on sites like Facebook.

"We all have nights out but it is best not to advertise it," she said.

Don't boast it, don't post it .....

[AnnieK]

One of the biggest reasons that employers have turned to social media to screen candidates is due to the fact that they used to use normal referencing procedures where they would contact the previous employer for details of work ethic, sickness, attitude to colleagues etc etc (there was never a debate on the fairness of that). However in this litigious world we live in where people sue people, companies are now that scared of revealing any derogatory information that the standard reference now just confirms dates worked and job title. No useful information at all so employers are forced to look at other avenues to gain information about prospective employees before they spend Ł1000s on recruiting.

Jack you mentioned footing the bill for youth unemployment? Do you know how much sick days cost the economy on an annual basis - according to the CBI around Ł17 billion with Ł3billion being taken dishonestly. That figure is footed by companies who are already teetering on administration and liquidation in some circumstances with numerous jobs in the balance. Can you blame them for checking people out before they employ them?

[Ammi]

..I have mixed feelings about this..I’m not really affected in this way but I do have restrictions about Facebook, which for me means I choose not to have it at all...although I do believe in free speech, I also think that nothing is really totally free and you can put pics of nights out or whatever on facebook/internet...but you have to accept that there might be consequences in certain areas..whether that’s right or wrong doesn’t really matter because it’s a fact and the rest is just subjective...it doesn’t mean that you can’t do a perfectly good job in your employment, if you happen to like to have a Friday night on the town..but some employers may decide it reveals something about you..you can never stop people having opinions/making judgements, with or without the internet..., so that’s something that every person has to decide when they put information on Facebook...there are a lot of employments where it probably wouldn’t matter, but there are also some where it would....and that’s for you to know whether you think it could be judged for your chosen employment....

..I think if we accept all of the positives about the internet/facebook etc , of which there are many..we also have to accept that maybe there’ll be some negatives as well, not just the extreme 'sinister' ones but things like this..and if we want to be ‘totally free’ in what we say/do...well, they might just affect us....

[Me. I Am Salman]

I was reading some article the other week about how Twitter has changed over the years and it said something about the first person to be fired for a tweet they made was in 2006, so it's nothing new

[Jack_]

Ah, the wonders of not responding to arguments someone's presented you with, but happily quoting other people's responses to the same person. Funny eh

[Kizzy]

What do advisors know, what experience have they got? About as much as MP's.
It is wrong to make judgements on the work ethic of an individual due to pictures of them in their leisure time.
that is my main issue, i don't believe for one second that it can be used as a guage to assess good character.
It is what it is, a gross invasion into the private lives of individuals.
To take an employer to a tribunal you must have had 2yrs employment, if you were such a feckless party animal would that not have been evident in that time?

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It is wrong to make judgements on the work ethic of an individual due to pictures of them in their leisure time.
that is my main issue, i don't believe for one second that it can be used as a guage to assess good character.
It is what it is, a gross invasion into the private lives of individuals.

It's up to the individual to set their privacy settings - if they haven't got the common sense to do that (or find out how to do it) then they're not much use to any employer .....

If there's no "evidence" in the public domain, there's no problem - no pictures, no judgement .....

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Omah

It's up to the individual to set their privacy settings - if they haven't got the common sense to do that (or find out how to do it) then they're not much use to any employer .....

If there's no "evidence" in the public domain, there's no problem - no pictures, no judgement .....

That's not the issue though is it?
That has nothing whatsoever to do with the rights and wrongs of this practice.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

That's not the issue though is it?
That has nothing whatsoever to do with the rights and wrongs of this practice.

That is exactly the issue - people shouldn't publicly post what they don't want non-specific others to read.

[Jack_]

[AnnieK]

This has gotten out of hand and way beyond the realms of the debate really. An employer is not going to sack someone because of random pictures. It is merely to do with having two candidates applying for the same job, both have the exact same qualifications, experience and skills. Candidate a posts on an open Facebook profile that they have had a large weekend, got pissed, took drugs so can feel a sickie coming on on Monday. Hates his ****ing job anyway they are all wankers. Candidate B does exactly the same at the weekend but doesn't post on Facebook it has privacy settings switched on. Employer can't decide between the two candidates so has a bit of a surf. Comes across candidate as Facebook profile, alarm bells ring employs candidate b. Who can blame them??