Age Discrimination Claims Are Not Limited to Full-Time Employees
The practice of searching applicants’ social media accounts for background information is drawing increasing scrutiny and in some cases can increase the risk of liability. When deciding whether to check applicants’ social media content for background-check purposes, consider these questions:
1. What information are you looking for and why? It’s unlawful to consider an applicant’s gender, race, national origin, sexual orientation, age, disability or religion when making hiring decisions. Social media may reveal all that information.
2. Is the information relevant to the hiring decision? Social media posts often contain information that warrants rejection of a candidate. But a lot of the information may be questionable in terms of making a decision. How will you fairly evaluate that information?
3. Is the information reliable? It is possible to discover important and truthful information about an applicant using social media checks, but it is also likely to be a very unreliable process. Traditional background checks are generally reliable because they rely on courts, schools and past employers. By contrast, social media sources may contain false, doctored and biased information.
Social media posts can easily be forged. Photographs and other information are easily manipulated and distorted with today’s technology.
If seemingly negative information is revealed during a social media check, give the candidate an opportunity to offer an explanation or dispute the information. The applicant’s explanation could reveal maturity and honesty, or it could show evasiveness and dishonesty.
If you would like more information about this topic or have general legal questions, please feel free to contact me at (973)949-3770 or via email at plamont@peterlamontesq.com Offices in: New Jersey New York, Colorado & Puerto Rico and affiliated offices throughout the country.
© 2010-2015, Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont & Associates. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between the firm and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.