Addressing Hiring Biases with Social Media Screening

Some years ago, a media story made the rounds about an employer who had demanded job candidates provide their social media passwords so the hiring team could peruse what they were posting, who they were interacting with, photos, etc. While the original story later turned out to be “fake news,” the result was much discussion online and off about whether—and how—employers should consider job candidates’ social media information during the talent acquisition process.

Social media may seem to offer a great source of information about potential job candidates, and it certainly can, but it can also offer a source of risk that could call into question your hiring practices—even leading to biases that could land you in legal hot water and keep you from considering high-quality applicants.

The greatest risk to employers is the potential for discrimination claims. Federal, state and local laws prohibit discrimination based on a wide range of personal characteristics (e.g., race, sex, sexual orientation, etc.) that may be readily discerned on social media.

In addition, many states have laws prohibiting employers from taking adverse action against employees for things they’re doing while off-duty. So, if you’re an employer in California, for instance, not choosing to interview a candidate because they had multiple party photos online, could get you in trouble. 

There are other risks, as well, related to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the National Labor Relations Act, and more. 

Important advice here: tread carefully.

Here we look at some important best practices to help minimize risks related to hiring biases that could emerge through social media screening.

While Erik Hansen, a management consultant at the Right People Group, a London-based IT recruiter, says that “social media can provide valuable insights into a candidate’s character and qualifications—there is always the potential for bias in the process.” To help guard against this, he says, “it is important to have clear rules and policies in place.” Best practices, he says, “include ensuring that all decision-makers are trained in unconscious bias, maintaining strict confidentiality around candidates’ social media profiles, and using a consistent rubric for evaluating all candidates.”  

It’s not just your HR staff members who need to understand when and how social media information can or should be used to screen candidates. Anyone involved in the hiring process and, in truth, everyone in the organization should also understand your policies related to the use of social media in hiring decisions.

Something as seemingly innocent as an employee telling a hiring manager they happened to look at a candidate’s Facebook page and saw that they were members of some religiously, socially, or politically affiliated organization could raise the specter of bias if that candidate didn’t get an interview or a job offer. 

It is a good practice to make sure that everyone, who will be involved in the hiring process, is trained on the importance of maintaining strict confidentiality, using a consistent screening tool and questions to review candidates, and how to recognize and avoid unconscious bias. This training should also include direction on how to use—or not use—social media or other information found online as a screening tool during the hiring process. 

If you plan to use social media as an input to the hiring process, let candidates know that this is part of your process. That gives them time to make any changes to content or security settings to protect personal information they don’t want potential employers to see.
 
Consider, also, asking candidates to agree to this review by giving you permission to do so.

Just because social media accounts are readily accessible to all of us, doesn’t mean that you should take this as an open invitation to review these accounts as part of your talent acquisition process. The risk can be too great. 

Writing for Harvard Business Review, Rose Wong points out that those involved in the hiring process should use caution when considering candidates’ social media channels. “Much of what they dig up is information they are ethically discouraged or legally prohibited from taking into account when evaluating candidates—and little of it is predictive of performance.” 

What kinds of risky, bias-related, information might be accessible through candidates’ social media channels? Wong points to research based on a review of the Facebook pages of 266 U.S. job seekers which pointed to the following troublesome information that could potentially be prone to generating bias:
 

▪    Gender, race, and ethnicity (100% of profiles).
▪    Sexual orientation (59%).
▪    Religious affiliation (41%). 
▪    Political views (21%).
▪    Disabilities (7%).
▪    Pregnancy status (3%).

To avoid that potential for bias, however inadvertent it may be, these researchers recommended that hiring managers simply resist the temptation to view candidates’ social media sites on their own.

A better option: work through a consumer reporting agency (CRA), or a company that works with a consumer reporting agency, to conduct these types of reviews. It’s the best way to avoid any potential for risk—however unintentional—that could lead to fines, lawsuits, brand damage, and loss of potentially great employees.

Bryan Carter, founder and CEO of ResumeBuilderPro.com, says: “I advocate outsourcing the work to eliminate prejudice from social media screening. If you are concerned about potential legal ramifications of screening or believe you may be biased, you can easily outsource the work to a firm specializing in reference checks. They'll look for red flags, such as a history of violence, breaking the law, or substance addiction, while omitting facts, such as the candidate's intoxicated spring break parties.”

Guy Hadas, co-founder and CEO of Age Group agrees. “Outsourcing social media screening is the most effective strategy to minimize boas,” he says. ‘It is critical to avoid examining any protected class information about the candidate during the hiring process,” he says. In addition, he notes, outsourcing “reduces the possibility for discrimination litigation and protects your business against privacy breach allegations.”

That’s good advice. If you take it, though, it’s also important to continue to communicate to your workforce about the risks to ensure that they don’t inadvertently, and independently, turn to social media and share with hiring managers or others the “juicy tidbits” they unearthed about candidates.  

The best direction for those within a company curious about the backgrounds of potential job candidates and considering checking them out on social media may simply be “don’t go there!”