Minnesota Law Review

Note, It Can Do More Than Protect Your Credit Score: Regulating Social Media

A growing number of employers are factoring job candidates’ social media profiles into their hiring decisions. Employers value social media pre-employment screening because it provides access to previously unobtainable applicant information. However, job candidates are wary of social media pre-employment screening due to concerns over the trustworthiness and authenticity of information obtained from the Internet. It should come as no surprise, then, that there is sharp disagreement over the legality of social media pre-employment screening. Early efforts to regulate social media pre-employment screening focused on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Fourth Amendment. These efforts were largely unsatisfactory because they failed to ensure accuracy and relevancy during the social media pre-employment screening process.

Thanks in large part to the emergence of third parties that offer to conduct social media pre-employment screening for employers, a new regulatory solution responsive to applicants’ privacy interests is now available. The Note recommends that the Fair Credit Reporting Act should be amended to require all employers interested in using social media to evaluate job candidates to use third-party screening companies. By doing so, social media pre-employment screening will be subject to the fairness constraints of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, including its notice and consent requirements. Finally, the Note argues that the Federal Trade Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission should be the primary parties responsible for monitoring employers’ social media pre-employment screening and its compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

 

:: View PDF

News & Events

  • Follow MLR on Twitter!

    The Minnesota Law Review is proud to announce that we are now on Twitter. Follow us @MinnesotaLawRev for information and updates concerning the petition period and deadlines, the opening and closing of article submissions, our 2014 Symposium: Offenders in the Community, and all other news concerning our authors and publications. [...]

  • Vol. 97 Lead Piece Cited in Al Jazeera Opinion Piece

    A recent Al Jazeera opinion piece that criticizes the Supreme Court’s Daimler decision cites to Volume 97′s lead piece, How Business Fares in the Supreme Court. You can read the Al Jazeera piece here.

  • Masthead for Volume 99 Board

    The masthead for the Board of Volume 99 of the Minnesota Law Review is now available. You can view the masthead here.

  • Above the Law Post Highlights MLR‘s Jump in Journal Rankings

    A recent post on Above the Law highlights the fact that the Minnesota Law Review was ranked 11th in the most recent 2013 edition of the Washington & Lee Law Review Rankings. You can read the post here.

  • Vol. 97 Lead Piece Cited on Slate

    A recent Slate article on the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the “Moldy Washing Machine” cases, or overturn class certification of those cases in some circuits, cites to the Volume 97 Lead Piece, How Business Fares in the Supreme Court. You can read the article here.

Newsletter

cforms contact form by delicious:days