Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 323 posts

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#11

Post by Aloha »

egdod wrote: post #2

For those wondering, as I did, who’s behind this terrible report: > The background check company is Sterling Talent Solutions, and it looks like they contracted with Fama Technologies for this part of the report.

At least one of my employers uses Sterling, and I can tell you that they never checked my social media, or even asked about it, as I got the paper report from them. I'm more apt to blame the employer than I am to blame the background check company - I seriously doubt they just throw in this kind of service for free.

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#12

Post by marcinzm »

So the company requesting the background check for a job get's to decide what they'd like included. Which means they believe knowing what you tweet is important. Probably due to all the public flogging of companies where someone was found to have posted "inappropriate" things (or donated to an "inappropriate" candidate, etc.). Where inappropriate is defined as whatever the group of people doing the flogging think shouldn't be done so you get a rather large pool once you combine the definitions from all groups.

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#13

Post by wutbrodo »

CommieBobDole wrote: post #3

I'm torn between "My god, this is a dystopian nightmare" and "Well, you did all that in public, in print, with your real name attached, what did you expect?". Maybe both things are right. Edit: Since, looking at the downvotes, this seems to be controversial, let me clarify that I'm not blaming the victim, I'm questioning whether it's a good general policy to give everyone, including various bad actors, a vast databas…

Beyond the question of aggregating someone's likes is the fact that the actual tweets flagged are ludicrous: the system has a third-grader's notion of "bad language" and a temperance activist's view of even _references_ to alcohol (not drinking excessively, or drinking at all, but literally seeing a bottle of vodka somewhere)

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#14

Post by jolmg »

CommieBobDole wrote: post #3

I'm torn between "My god, this is a dystopian nightmare" and "Well, you did all that in public, in print, with your real name attached, what did you expect?". Maybe both things are right. Edit: Since, looking at the downvotes, this seems to be controversial, let me clarify that I'm not blaming the victim, I'm questioning whether it's a good general policy to give everyone, including various bad actors, a vast databas…

> "Well, you did all that in public, in print, with your real name attached, what did you expect?"

I don't think that's the issue for them. The issue is the bad algorithmic flagging.

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#15

Post by quotemstr »

rakoo wrote: post #6
CommieBobDole wrote: post #3

I'm torn between "My god, this is a dystopian nightmare" and "Well, you did all that in public, in print, with your real name attached, what did you expect?". Maybe both things are right. Edit: Since, looking at the downvotes, this seems to be controversial, let me clarify that I'm not blaming the victim, I'm questioning whether it's a good general policy to give everyone, including various bad actors, a vast databas…

Is it normal to live your private life in accordance to what a future hypothetical employer might think ? EDIT: private should be replaced with personal, as opposed to work

Isn't the OP's point that people shouldn't live their private lives in public?

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#16

Post by ardy42 »

rakoo wrote: post #6
CommieBobDole wrote: post #3

I'm torn between "My god, this is a dystopian nightmare" and "Well, you did all that in public, in print, with your real name attached, what did you expect?". Maybe both things are right. Edit: Since, looking at the downvotes, this seems to be controversial, let me clarify that I'm not blaming the victim, I'm questioning whether it's a good general policy to give everyone, including various bad actors, a vast databas…

Is it normal to live your private life in accordance to what a future hypothetical employer might think ? EDIT: private should be replaced with personal, as opposed to work

> Is it normal to live your private life in accordance to what a future hypothetical employer might think ?

Increasingly so. That's one of the many reasons for my minimal presence on social media.

However, it's an entirely different question if its right to be put in the position of feeling you need to do that. I think there probably needs to be some adjustment to the legal situation to encourage employers to mind their own business.

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#17

Post by achillesheels »

quotemstr wrote: post #5
brenden2 wrote: post #4

Here's the company doing this: https://fama.io/ The idea that you can assess someone's workplace performance based on automated screening of their tweets is utterly absurd. If anyone works somewhere that uses this tool, or anything similar to it, you should run far, far away from that company. This is a terrible precedent, and much too much Orwellian for my taste. EDIT: somewhat related, but a while back I made a Twi…

> If anyone works somewhere that uses this tool, or anything similar to it, you should run far, far away from that company. You might not even know --- and it could extend beyond hiring. Didn't get promoted? Maybe it's because someond keyword matched you for "toxic". The only real way to safeguard yourself is to keep your identity as small and bland as possible, and that's no way to live.

Or become financially independent? That does not necessitate Uber riches just a healthy customer base that mutually feeds each other over time.

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#18

Post by tyingq »

Oy. Similarly, I'm mystified with the CIA's and NSA's fascination with mandatory recurring polygraph tests. It's pretty well known the whole area is flawed bullshit. It doesn't measure anything remotely related to "truth".

Edit: I know we aren't supposed to discuss downvotes here, but the activity on this comment and my replies are very interesting. It's curious why discussion on this topic is so controversial. Why wouldn't the UK want it's own foreign policy distinct from the US policy? Downvotes welcome. I give zero shits about my HN "karma score".

Re: I had to get a background check for my job; the report is a 300 page pdf

#19

Post by cj »

rakoo wrote: post #6
CommieBobDole wrote: post #3

I'm torn between "My god, this is a dystopian nightmare" and "Well, you did all that in public, in print, with your real name attached, what did you expect?". Maybe both things are right. Edit: Since, looking at the downvotes, this seems to be controversial, let me clarify that I'm not blaming the victim, I'm questioning whether it's a good general policy to give everyone, including various bad actors, a vast databas…

Is it normal to live your private life in accordance to what a future hypothetical employer might think ? EDIT: private should be replaced with personal, as opposed to work

> Is it normal to live your private life

I think the OP’s point is that your “private life” was never really private to begin with.

Post reply on HN