Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
I think it's fair. It's not like it can't work in your favor.
Don't use your real damn name on the internet.
lol when someone pieces together all my internet personas I'm so screwed.
I think other than social media, things said online would be hard to pin down. No one is going to know my PW:Name and contre are one in the same. Unless I was stupid enough to reveal my name to you all.
It's not only fair but it's essential, but not for the reason you may think...Is it fair for employers to judge a person by what they say on the Internet?
I've heard it said that some employers will look up people's names on the Internet to find out more about them before they hire them. Is this fair? Is this a good way to determine if that person will make a fit in the company?
It's not only fair but it's essential, but not for the reason you may think...
Forget, for a moment, about a potential employer judging you on your internet usage. Let's assume you have already been offered a job by them and that you accepted. If your internet usage can be identified by them, then it's likely it can be identified by many other people too. And it may become obvious that you work for them. So - whether you like it or not - you and your internet activities could be seen by others as representing their company.
So forget about whether you're a good match for the company. They're asking themselves, "Do we want to tie this candidate's reputation to our company reputation?" Do you have a history that could be seen as damaging their reputation? Do you have the potential to screw them over, even innocently and unwittingly?
It's all about money. Your future and your potential contribution to the company is tiny compared to the damage you might do to their reputation and the business they might lose because of it.
Recruiters don't get fired for saying no to candidates (as long as they do it legally), but they do get fired for making damaging hires.
Yup. Take a close look at employment contracts nowadays for sackable offences and, in addition to the normal "serious professional misconduct" clause, you'll probably find a clause that mentions something like "behavior likely to bring the company into disrepute."While that sounds fine in theory, it makes a mockery of the concept that employers don't exercise authoritarian control over their employees. Now not only must all of your off work time conform to company expectations, all of your prework time does as well. So essentially the whole of a person's life is dominated by present and future employers, right down to social activities.
And people think the government is the only thing that can take a person's liberty.
It's not a good way, but in many cases it's the only way apart from your resume. Think about it from the employer's perspective. You are about to spend tens of thousands of dollars on someone you've never met before. Would you not want to learn as much about him as you can? And suppose you see someone who appears to be insensitive or rude, would you want to hire him?
If the candidate has been nice and civil, but happens to have a different political opinion from the boss, it's not right for the employer to discriminate based on that. On the other hand, if the boss does that, he's more than likely a jerk, and you wouldn't want to work for him anyway...
Like the wishes of the employers equal justification Great stuff... It is like one answers "Is it okay that asteroids hit earth" with "Well, there is this force called gravity you know" Oh... really? Too bad that wasn't the question.
Employers are people - remember? And the desires of people are not the same as the the concept of justice, morality, potential of reality, right and wrong and so on. Remember that to?
Oh the grandness of ideology and its constant latent advocacy.