This House believes that hiring and firing by employers should not be influenced by information found on social networking sites

No introduction at present. Why not write one?

This House believes that hiring and firing by employers should not be influenced by information found on social networking sites

Yes because... No because...

Social networks are social not professional

OH FUCK YOU!

This point is blind to the impact of social networking sites. The expansion and popularity of such sites means that a company clients or suppliers could see the information posted by the employee. This could have a detrimental effect to the reputation of the company and therefore employers have a vested interest in ensuring that their employees are acting appropriately on such social sites.

This House believes that hiring and firing by employers should not be influenced by information found on social networking sites

Yes because... No because...

It would not be acceptable offline

An employer would not have the right to dismiss a member of staff on the basis of social gatherings in a social setting. There would be outrage if an employer walking into the local alehouse overheard a friend’s conversation insulting the company and made a firing on that basis. This would be even more outrageous if the employer had deliberately searched for which alehouse the employee frequented and followed him there. This is analogous with social networking sites. It is between friends. For an employer to see the information they would have to have been spying on that employee deliberately looking to see what information they could gather. This is entirely wrong.

On the contrary, an employer has every right to fire their employee for bringing the company into disrepute in the public domain, be it on Facebook or in an alehouse. As with offline discussions which are indiscrete enough to be able to be overheard, the information passed on these sites is NOT private, and if an employer can see them it would be reasonable to assume that the information is available to rivals, prospective clients etc. as well. Would you really insist on the right of someone who publically discussed the failings of their employer not to be fired for indiscretion?
An employer has no requirement to continue the employment of anyone he believes to be causing a negative impact on the company.

This House believes that hiring and firing by employers should not be influenced by information found on social networking sites

Yes because... No because...

It informs the employer as the candidate’s real hobbies.

In the hiring process, 22% of employers now admit to using social networking sites as part of the screening process [[http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9114560/One_in_five_employers_uses_social_networks_in_hiring_process]]. Anyone can write lies regarding their hobbies and personal interests. Whilst on the application form the candidate may have written that they enjoy reading romance novels and fine cuisine, a social networking site could show a different picture, that of a promiscuous individual who regularly gets inebriated and eats kebabs. This gives the employer a more accurate outlook on what each candidate is like. This will only result in the most deserving of candidates being hired at the end of the process.

Information online is far too easy to misinterpret. You do not know the context of what a person writes, what kind of mood they are in, the situation, whether they are trying to be sarcastic or humorous.

For instance, you could say a disparaging remark about your workplace, but because you care about their future and don't want them to do badly because of their mistakes, not because you want to insult the company.

This House believes that hiring and firing by employers should not be influenced by information found on social networking sites

Yes because... No because...

Sharing commercial, confidential information on line is gross misconduct

In employment, you will often have signed a contract that has a clause regarding company information. Individuals may not feel that the information they share on social networking sites is confidential, but any information that only employees would know as to the businesses procedures would come under this belt. Therefore, if an employer found you sharing such information on line, to potentially the whole world, they could fire you on the basis of gross misconduct.

This House believes that hiring and firing by employers should not be influenced by information found on social networking sites

Yes because... No because...

It may bring the business into disrepute.

However, surely the damage has been done by that point? If the company name has been brought into disrepute, how would firing the person solve matters? The fired member o personnel would then inform everyone that they were sacked and it would increase the level of disrepute to the company. Instead, firms should not be able to sack employees on the basis of such events but give them a disciplinary. This then can allow the employee to learn that posting such things on the internet is not acceptable and that should it continue they will be fired.

An employer has the right to fire some for gross misconduct if they bring the company reputation into disrepute. This can cover a multitude of things such as insulting the managers and their ethics, insulting the company and its ethos and also complaining about working conditions. We cannot allow people to affect businesses in such a haphazard way. People should think before posting on social networking sites. They need to seethe implications of their actions. What better way to teach people this lesson than to fire them.

Debates > This House believes that hiring and firing by employers should not be influenced by information found on social networking sites
Category: