Presidential Candidates and Pre-Existing Conditions

I've been thinking lately about the candidates and pre-existing conditions that they and their family members may have. Do Americans as employers want to be forced, possibly against our will and\or belief system, to provide medical care for a disabled daughter, or a wife with a chronic condition?

Purely a business decision, of course -- I'm sure they'll understand.

Hope springs Eternal...

...either that, or it died this morning at 10:29.

Last week, I found something of a rarity: a job on Craiglist that sounded just like me, offered a decent wage, was in the heart of one of my very favorite places (downtown PDX) and would draw on my education, subject interests and inherent abilities in what sounded like an exciting place. They even referred to their site and gave a valid (not craigslist anonymyzed) email address to contact. I got busy googling them and customizing my cover letter. This was the most excited I'd been in a while to apply for a non-library job.

The speed with which I received a rejection letter was simply stunning. Interesting, my experience and skills do not apparently match their needs. Hmmmmm. If this is true, they did a really lousy job of articulating those needs. Per their site, they wanted:

• College degree and minimum of 2 years work experience
Yeah, I'm all wrong here. I have 2 degrees and 30 years work experience.

• Excellent written and verbal communication skills (in person and on phone)
I guess all those reference interviews and tech support questions I've answered don't quite count.

• Proficient in Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Access, Publisher)
I'm fully proficient with Office; I just prefer not to use any Microsuck products if I can help it.

• Interest in and familiarity with contemporary literature, arts, pop culture, current events
Okay, I can see where my multiple years of experience doing reference and collection development in the fields of computers, journalism, languages and literature sort of ruled me out. What the hell do I know about any of these? No doubt the nail in the coffin was my BA in English and the stuff I've published, edited, designed and helped others publish.

• Meticulous organization and record keeping abilities
A librarian?! Organized? Never!

• High level of professionalism, discretion and sense of responsibility
• Self-directed, fast learner with capacity for problem-solving and follow through
A person who has started entrepreneurial ventures more than once is obviously some sort of slagabout, as is one who left their family for a year to get that pesky MLS. Slacker!

• Well-versed in online and traditional research methods
• Technologically savvy and comfortable with websites & e-newsletters
Again, if a graduate of the tech support trenches who has answered thousands of questions via the Internet and various subscription databases, was part of Stanislaus County's first wave of staff to be trained in virtual reference and then in turn trained other librarians to do same, designed several sites and basically hand coded a successful poetry e-zine who is currently studying CSS for the sole purpose of improving their and others' sites doesn't count as tech savvy, again -- what does? Hey guys: UNIX command line much?

Have to Agree With the "Rude" Part

Canadian Woman Gets Fired via Facebook

I read recently that we all have public lives, personal lives, and private lives. This and the prior article I posted about a UK teen getting fired for indicating on her Facebook status is just that much more reason to keep these things separate.

Love this quote from the supervisor: "Her former boss, Susanne Woerhie, defended the Facebook firing by saying that she had tried to call Bell after she skipped the staff meeting but couldn't reach her.

'I just wanted to have it dealt with that evening,' Woerhie told the Kelowna Daily Courier. 'I didn't want to deal with it at the shop when other people were around.'"

How lame.

Facebook Reconsidered

I've been hearing a lot lately about Facebook and its possible use by employers as a way to find information on a candidate that would be a deal breaker in hiring that person. On one hand, it's a given that as part of the screening process employers would dig up whatever they could as long as the search is cost effective. By the same token, candidates should do likewise to the employer. Come on, it's not a good idea, no matter how desperate the economy seems, to take a job with an organization that is clearly a bad fit. Personally I'd want to know everything I could before I accepted an offer.

Some make the counter argument that a person has control over their profile and the information posted in it and employers could only see what was there if they had specific approval to do so. However a recent news article about a teenage girl in the UK lost her job for posting a status update saying that her job was boring leads me to think that Facebook may very well make otherwise private information available to employers for a fee. Considering that until very recently they also claimed copyright to posted content, it doesn't seem all that farfetched.

However, were I the employer, I would be wary of information gleaned through such sources. There is no control over such sites that ensures the accuracy of the information contained therein. At least with a job application there are enough permissions and authorizations granted that if he lies on the application that is sufficient grounds even years in the future to warrant termination. I have accounts on social networking sites MySpace and Facebook, but not under my actual name, and the email address associated with them has nothing to do with the email address I use for professional purposes. Add to that the fact that there are several other people with my actual name on Facebook and Google -- but they aren't me. Sure you can pull up a name, but if it isn't the person you're considering, what good is the information? It just means that much loss of productivity by the HR department.

Another angle to consider is a candidate's right to have a social life examined. While it's certainly possible to post pictures of legal activities such as gun ownership and consumption of alcohol, these are still things that might cause an employer to look askance at you as an employee. And really, isn't the competition stiff enough already? Why give an employer the ammo to shoot you with?

I guess it boils down to a matter of discretion and awareness of online security. I would recommend that people use online email addresses and aliases that do not reflect their name or geographic location. Have a separate email address that is used exclusively for job searches. Have a social life but be smart about what you post. Realize that information can be retrieved even after you think you've deleted it. Be aware that even though we feel anonymous and omnipotent behind our monitors, the fact of the matter is that everything can be retrieved. Do what you can to make sure it doesn't come back to haunt you.

And don't, for God's sake, log in and post at work. Assume that your employer can see anything on your screen. is there really stuff so compelling on FB that it can't wait until you get home?

I still plan to use Facebook because it's been rather fun to connect with old friends, classmates and coworkers and to find people with similar interests. But even with my precautions, I plan to use a high degree of discretion.

Facebook gives employers clues to intelligence, personality
Why employers should reconsider Facebook fishing
How employers look at MySpace and Facebook pages
Employers leverage cloud computing to invade your Facebook privacy
Can Your Myspace Or Facebook Page Cost You A Job?