Employers are gradually increasing their use of social networks to find and screen employees, with some relying heavily—even exclusively—on popular sites (think Twitter 
and LinkedIn to fill job openings.
Recruiting using social networks is gaining popularity because it’s easy and inexpensive. It offers employers a way to cut recruiting costs and avoid the avalanche of candidates that job boards generate. Some find networking sites especially useful as a means of reaching “passive” applicants—people who are not actively seeking work but might be interested if an especially good opportunity comes along.
And while employers may save some money by recruiting through such sites, there are a host of potential pitfalls that really aren’t on their radar yet.
Relying heavily on social networks to find candidates won’t ensure a diverse candidate pool in terms of age or minority representation. “Social networking sites are problematic because the population is limited and highly selective,” said Jessica Roe, managing partner at Bernick, Lifson, Greenstein, Green & Liszt, a law firm in Minneapolis.
Most users of social networks are white and range in age from 20 to 40 years old. Just 5 percent of LinkedIn users are African-American and a mere 2 percent are Hispanic. By law, employers can’t discriminate in their recruiting practices, but if they limit themselves to finding candidates through social networks, they could be accused of doing just that. “I anticipate more race and age claims over the next two years, and a significant portion will be from sourcing through social networking sites,” Roe said.
There are also record-keeping issues to consider. If the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs or plaintiff’s attorneys make a discovery request to see an employer’s recruiting paper trail, those that rely heavily on social networks will have the unenviable task of pulling together digital evidence from smart phones and flash drives. “Worse yet, when the EEOC comes knocking to investigate a complaint, the records are in a digital mist, and that could be a terrible problem. It’s risky because the records aren’t there,” said Paul Mollica, partner at Meites, Mulder, Mollica & Glink in Chicago, a law firm that specializes in employment issues.
Employers that use social networks for screening purposes can easily view personal information that puts them at legal risk. A recruiter who dares to look at a candidate’s profile could very well learn things that an employer wouldn’t readily discover in on a job application: religion, age, sexual orientation, or pregnancy, to name a few; things that reveal that the candidate is a member of a group protected by federal law. “If you wouldn’t ask a question in an interview or on an application form, why would you expose yourself to the information in any way?” Mollica asks. “Once you’ve seen it, you can’t pretend that you didn’t.”
There are ways for employers to integrate social networks into their existing recruiting structure. For example, some employers integrate Twitter into their employee referral program to help employees connect with possible job candidates.
“Combining Twitter with employee referral programs could turn out to be a digitized version of word-of-mouth hiring methods because you are simply using referrals and employees’ online acquaintances,” Mollica said. “If you combine these methods and use networks to expand the applicant pool, that’s a valid method, provided that you are also reaching candidates through broader means.”
—“Discriminatory Twist in Networking Sites Puts Recruiters in Peril, by Fay Hansen, Workforce Management Online, September 2009.
—“Social Networks Catching On as HR Tool,” by Steve Bates, HR News, Society for Human Resource Management, Nov. 3, 2009.
