Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Facebook Privacy Republicans The Courts Your Rights Online Politics

House Kills Effort To Stop Workplace Requests For Facebook Passwords 275

Posted by timothy
from the password-so-strong-you-yourself-don't-know-it dept.
An anonymous reader writes "House Republicans today defeated an amendment introduced yesterday that would have banned employers demanding access to Facebook accounts. While the practice isn't widespread, it has caused a big brouhaha after reports surfaced that some organizations were requiring workers to hand over Facebook passwords as a condition of keeping their current job or getting hired for a new one."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

House Kills Effort To Stop Workplace Requests For Facebook Passwords

Comments Filter:
  • Make the point moot. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) on Thursday March 29, 2012 @09:32AM (#39508461)
    Walk out of interviews where you're asked for these details, then post online so people in the sector know not to even apply there.

    Ironic "Boycott Facebook login details requests at interviews" Facebook group anyone? We made Rage Against the Machine Christmas No. 1... Surely we can apply this logic to something which actually matters.
  • Re:Catch-22 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Sponge Bath (413667) on Thursday March 29, 2012 @09:40AM (#39508529)

    Who is Congress' employer?

    The campaign contributors, aka the same corporations that ask for passwords to your personal accounts.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 29, 2012 @09:58AM (#39508771)

    Teacher Aide fired in Michigan. [wsbt.com]

    “in the absence of you voluntarily granting Lewis Cass ISD administration access to you[r] Facebook page, we will assume the worst and act accordingly."

  • Re:From the text. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Nidi62 (1525137) on Thursday March 29, 2012 @10:40AM (#39509395)

    "Moderate Republicans?" Is that a Republican who thinks contraception is permissible by married women with the consent of their husband? Or one who would allow a Muslim to convert to Christianity rather than killing them outright? Heal gays rather than hang them? Use conventional munitions against Iran rather than nuking them outright?

    In the party that put forward Sarah Palin in 2008 and packed Congress with Tea Party freshmen in 2010, just what exactly makes one a "moderate?"

    I know you're trolling, but I'll feed you anyway. A moderate Republican is someone who doesn't think the government has a right to tell you who you can marry, or whether or not you can ahve an abortion. A moderate Republican is someone who is willing to pay taxes, but wants to keep most of their money that they earned without the governmetn telling us what to do with it (like forcing us to purchase health insurance). A moderate Republican is someone who doesn't go out looking to start wars, but is willing to respond to agression and fight a war if necessary to protect our country and our allies. A moderate Republican is someone who wants a strong, efficient government that is only as big as it has to be, that doesn't try to legislate morality. A moderate Republican believes that the Second Amendment is important, but it doesn't mean that we all need automatic weapons with 100-round drum magazines. A moderate Republican thinks that separation of chruch and state means separation of religion not just from government, but from politics in general(and this includes atheism, as many bring that to the point of religion as well). Otherwise all you get are irrational arguments and debates. And I am a moderate Republican.

  • by TheCarp (96830) <sjc@noSPAM.carpanet.net> on Thursday March 29, 2012 @10:48AM (#39509575) Homepage

    I wonder how federal hacking laws would apply. As you point out, its a clear violation of the TOS, it is, in fact, explicitly unauthorized access.

    Ooh... so since the user who agreed to the TOS and the employer are acting together for this unauthorized access to happen, would that be conspiracy?

  • by Ihmhi (1206036) <i_have_mental_health_issues@yahoo.com> on Thursday March 29, 2012 @10:53AM (#39509681)

    My "if I could change the world" fix is this:

    1) Create standard formatting rules for a bill. X page size, maximum X words per page, etc. (To prevent any of that squeezing of the margins etc.)

    2) For every X measurement (say every page) a bill is long, that is one day that it cannot be voted on. So a 3 page bill cannot be voted on until 3 days later.

    3) Only one bill can be in the queue at a time for each house.

    4) On the leadup to a bill being put in the queue for debate, it can (as usual) be amended, changed, debated, etc. Once that bill is "locked in" and put up for vote, it sits around and cannot be change. A bill being entered into the queue has to be voted on, so it prevents politicians from creating a thousand page bill or something to abuse their power.

    5) Failure of a bill to pass will render any and all provisions in it unable to be placed in a subsequent bill for a period of at least one year.

    My system would generally encourage people to think about bills and make them as concise as possible. It'd rein in a lot of corruption, too. Add in some potential for citizen commentary during that period and you've got a real winner.

    Sad that it doesn't look terribly likely to happen. Maybe I'll get lucky and a Slashdotter will get in Congress or the House.

    Oh, and if you can find any flaws with my little plan, please share 'em. I enjoy thinking things through.

  • by sexconker (1179573) on Thursday March 29, 2012 @11:52AM (#39510757)

    I'd prefer to see this plan executed successfully before trying it myself, thanks.

    Why?
    Just take a day off of your current job to do a circuit of interviews at random places.
    Then sue the ones that took the bait.

    You're not jeopardizing your employment by doing that. And hell, you may actually be offered a job better than your current one.

  • by Terwin (412356) on Thursday March 29, 2012 @11:54AM (#39510805)

    And, as well as a crime, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act also provides a civil cause of action for anyone who "suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of this section" (note that conspiracy is also covered under the same section, so the civil cause of action would seem to be available if the damage was caused by a conspiracy to gain unauthorized access that didn't actually lead to unauthorized access, such as retaliation -- by refusal to consider for a job or, even more clearly, dismissal from one -- for failure to provide a password contrary to an agreement with the computer's owner.)

    Ianal but that sounds a lot like if a potential employer asks for your facebook password you should:
    1) inform them that they have just asked you to commit a federal crime
    and 2) if you refuse and they retaliate(such as turning you down for the position) you can sue them.

    Seems to me that the best way to nip this behavior in the bud is to make sure as many people as possible know that if an interviewer asks you for a password, you refuse and then don't get the job, you can sue.

    The first time one of these gets to court, the legal department of every company in the nation will come down on HR like a ton of bricks to make sure it never happens again...

  • by cayenne8 (626475) on Thursday March 29, 2012 @01:11PM (#39512073) Homepage Journal

    Also, my FaceBook includes information that is protected under a few employment acts. It includes things like race, sexual preference, age, and religious affiliation. By asking, they are breaking employment law.

    Actually, it is perfectly legal for them to ask you about those things....however, it is illegal for them to discriminate against you on those things.

    It is VERY difficult to prove that is what they used as criteria to not hire you....and if they don't ask them, even more difficult, hence, they generally don't ask questions about that type of thing.

  • by ThatsNotPudding (1045640) on Thursday March 29, 2012 @01:34PM (#39512433)
    The real seats of power in Congress are the Committe Chairmanships, currently assigned by the party leadership in majority, usually by seniority. Wanna shake up the system? Random drawings for Committee leadership seats at the beginning of every new Congress and after every major break. I'd go one more and have the drawings done from all Congresspersons, not segregated by party, as the worst thing that happened in US politics was the ossification of just two parties that are now quasi-branches of FedGov. Of course, the only way this would happen would be after the revolution when all the current porkbarrelers are, uh 'brusquely excused' from power.

When the weight of the paperwork equals the weight of the plane, the plane will fly. -- Donald Douglas

Working...