@Robobot: also identifying yourself as Pagan or Wiccan. We don't drink the blood of Christian babies, but there's a lot of silly stereotypes out there.

@ Gramin

It doesn't matter. That is not for public viewing. Whether or not Myspace or Facebook is for fun, the messages I recieve are MY messages. The pictures I set to private, or for certain people to view, are NOT to be viewed. You're trying to piss people off. You CANNOT be that dense, because several times people have asked for your information and you still haven't given it.

@Gramin
Wow. You continue to astonish me. Lets use your car example, as a metaphor for the computer. (the car being a computer, the coke being your privacy). If the coke is in plain view, ie front seat or back seat, yes the police have the right to search your vehicle. But, if the coke is in your locked glove compartment or trunk, they need a WARRANT to search your vehicle. What you are basically saying is the cops should search everyones car, without motive, for cocaine, and that they should also have access to their trunk or glove compartments. Either you're saying all of this to get everyone riled up, or your just a simple suzie. If it's the simple suzie... dear God don't procreate.

sorry. my above response was aimed at Gramin

It's not in my nature to bash anyones opinion.. that being said you're an idiot for saying that. Illegal activities are monitored on facebook and myspace. If you have a sexual predator record, you WILL be booted off of myspace. Have you ever read the TOS where it says if you have offensive material you will be KICKED OFF the site. No one has the right to my buisness, just as I don't have the right to theirs. The companies asking for that information might as well ask to come check your personal mailbox everyday. You would probably agree with that tho right? Make sure I'm not getting Hustler or Penthouse. Because nobody reads those articles, it's just for the raunchy pictures, and if you look at those pictures you don't deserve to water, food,electricity or a roof over your head. You probably helped right the legislation. That's sad, pretty soon with thinking like yours, we won't be a democracy anymore. We'll just be the 2009 version of 1984.

Keep a balance.

No company deserves more than 1/3 of your life.

Off Topic: Can I request he stop using my screen name since I've had it for 15 years?

While this might seem like an understandable thought at first glance, it's insupportable and therefore irrelevant. Just because my Facebook account doesn't have a drunk/naked photo of me on it today, doesn't mean it won't have that photo up next week or next year. Just because I'm a member of Mytown Deeply Religious Really Good People Church today doesn't mean that in six months I can't decide that I feel more comfortable at the Satan Is My Overlord Let's Kill Puppies congregation.

Bearing in mind the fluidity of human nature and the fact that an online presence can be changed, falsified, and/or deleted at whim, this request just doesn't hold any water.

we can crucify our employees for anything - public or private - they have to take it in this economy - HAHAHAHAHAHA.

Oddly enough, Billings, Montana is often discussed on the group due to a certain municipal policy - I smell a rat!

The stupidity of all this is that it really cannot prevent someone from creating a new ID in the future, placing embarassing photos, or saying something contreversial . IN other words you have to be monitored on a regular basis which is even more scary .

Stuff like the online check or credit check is nothing more than a form of profiling . These HR types/firms need something better to do with their time .

Some job applications are legally binding agreements. I am specifically referring to government jobs where they ask for your online aliases/handles so that they can do an Internet background check in addition to the real life check. I'm sure there are legally binding agreements in the private sector (at least legally binding enough to fire you if you were ever linked to an alias you did not claim on your application).

@snowburnt: No, I do that b/c I like being different, and it keeps my mind....uh...what is it....oh yeah, sharp!

[www.msnbc.msn.com]

It says "Google". Right there.

Google Account password gets you access to Gmail, Google Talk, Google Calendar, Google Docs, Google Checkout.

It also says Yahoo. Yahoo password gets you access to Yahoo profiles, Yahoo Messenger, Yahoo Mail.

It doesn't explicitly use the word "email". But that is what it ends up getting when it asks explicitly for Google and Yahoo.

@JoshRogan: It doesn't say anything on the form about email passwords.

Not that I am in ANY WAY agreeing with what they are doing.

How far can businesses go to control their employees outside of work hours??

I was at a bar with one of my buddies and someone started an argument with him, it got pretty heated. One of the other patrons recognized my buddy from where he worked and reported the incident to his (my buddy) superiors the next day. His superiors told him to be careful what he does when he's out and about as these kinds of incidents could result in a negative image for the company. He didn't take too kindly to that.

I should also mention my buddy was not wearing a work uniform nor anything on him that had the company logo. The only reason the guy knew he worked there was because he'd seen him at the business before.

@BluePlastic: Thank You ; sounds better .Although I hope resistance is NOT futile here .

Thats why my one and only social networking account is listed under a mixture of my first and middle name. You will not be able to access me by typing in my real name.

I googled my name and found some other people with my name on Facebook and LinkedIn. I hope no prospective employer would think they were me. I don't even have accounts on those places or MySpace or anything. I'm such a relic.

Before the day and age of computers if they asked if you were a member of a club did they call that club and ask what you did ? Did they even ask did you frequent bars . If an HR saw you enter a bar on your own time would they have the right not hire you just because they saw you go into a bar and yet you have no DUIs or signs of alcholism ? This is just another form of profiling .

And lets say there wasn't the internet . Unless you gave them permission would a potential employer even bother calling or asking that club about you ? Would that club be required to respond without permission or a court order ?

How did employers survive in pre internet times ?

@redskull: If you are posting your bank account information on "current personal or business websites" or "any Internet-based chat rooms, social clubs, or forums", then you shouldn't even be walking around, much less working for the city.

It would be very easy for an employee to grab a stack of apps and write down a bunch of usernames and passes and have a field day when they got home.

And now that this story is public and making the mainstream press, I would think there might be some enterprising thieves and hackers circling the office.

I'm also assuming the city HR department is probably treating these job applications like normal job applications and throwing them in a file bin with a shitty lock (if that) or even the trash. And probably without shredding them.

@gafpromise: Then try looking at the picture of the application at the top of the post.

For example. You wouldn't put down the login info for this site since (I'm assuming Pecan Pi) isn't you real name. The employer would receive your app, then probably check whatever sites you may have listed. Then probably google your real name. Your consumerist account would never show up since you don't use your real name on it. Knowing this, you'd be stupid to list this site since they would never discover it anyway. And since a job application isn't a legal binding document where swear to tell the truth under penalty of perjury or a subpoena, then you're in the right.

Another frieghtning thing with this is that I don't think the Bozeman HR was ignorant enough to this on their own .

They probably got this from some HR website,consultant or recent HR graduate with the latest and greatest in intrusive privacy smashing background profiling techniques . Which means this won't be the last place where we see this kind of invasion/errosion of our rights .

But, since you don't seem to have a problem with it, can I have your usernames and passwords to Facebook and MySpace? After all, since it's right out there in the open, you have no expectation of privacy, right? So you don't mind if I go in there and poke around?

@qxrt: Translation: We have no applications to date.

This is flat out creepy . And even more scary is that they said no one has withdrawn their name so either they are lying , created false accounts or brainwashed job seeking fools . Most work to live but these chumps will be living to work . Bozeman now owns you .

And if Pentagon Security secrets can be leaked to the press I guarantee you one day YOUR personel file for the City Of Bozeman or who ever can be leaked as well . One of these toads runs for office and the opposition and/or reporters will have access to YOUR ONLINE LIFE and put YOUR non work activities out of perspective and context all they want . You will be profiled worse than a management applicant with a bad credit score . Sheeple=public employees of Bozeman .

And by the way : is this retro active on existing employees ?

How do they say it on Star Trek - WE ARE THE BORG , YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED , YOU WILL COMPLY ...

Bozeman Montana - I wonder if Bozeman is a tourist destination ? or WAS .

@farcedude: I'd just write the asterisks in place of my password.

But you did the right thing. Employers should be made to feel they are losing qualified candidates for even attempting this sort of thing. And I guarantee they are, even if they're unaware of it. No one intelligent would ever comply with a request like this (unless you were applying for a job at the CIA requiring a security clearance or something, but that's kind of different as a) there's a good reason for it, and b) that's the expectation when you work for the CIA.

And which 800-53 control are they failing for requesting the userID and password? Maybe PS-3 or an MP control?

The problem is that the city is asking for PASSWORDS. Why on earth would they want to log into your social networking sites as you? That is where the invasion of privacy starts. They can look at your public information all they want, they shouldn't request you to give them your sensitive personal information that has nothing to do with the job at hand.

Though I totally disagree with anyone asking for UN/PW's, it seems like some of the posters here REALLY trust Google.

There is a difference between something you post publicly and access to ALL YOUR PASSWORD-PROTECTED DATA.

I can post items on Facebook that are only viewable to friends and family. Similarly, I can post pictures on Flickr that are viewable to nobody but me.

Once you have my password, you will be able to see everything, so the reasonable expectation of privacy will be violated.

@HiPwr: It's illegal if it has it on there. They might ask you after you are hired for the purposes of your background check, but if they are asking before an offer has been made, they can face some pretty serious fines.

@snowburnt: He's untraceable like The Saint!

(has anyone seen that movie? that was a bit of a stretch on my part...)

yeah, if i ever got handed that application in a job interview, i'd leave, right after i quit laughing so hard i choked.

@Smashville: I've never filled out an application that didn't have the date of birth on it. Can you get a credit report without a date of birth?

You aren't allowed to ask for Date of birth, sexual preference, marital status, or race prior to employment.

They can find out that information after you've been hired for benefits reasons etc...but until that point, if they ask you...

@HiPwr: The United States. It's an EEO violation. Trust me...I work in HR. You can ask if they are under 18, but you cannot ask them their date of birth.

How is it different? Everything you do at work is using company resources and most of the time you sign something when you start the job saying that anything you do at work on work resources belongs to the company you work for. Ergo, monitoring your work internet use is far from illegal.

Also, unless they have keystroke loggers and spy software installed on your computer (which is entirely likely), most email websites are TLS encrypted and can't be decrypted by a middleman (firewall or monitor)

This (the article) is pre-emptive stalking. Not only can they check what you've sent out recently, but they can continue checking if you don't get the job and fail to change your password. Additionally they can act as you and send out mail, sign up for websites under your name...It's like identity theft made easy.

Which is why he will prove how nothing bad could ever happen from handing strangers the keys to one's online personas: by posting all of his login information here... right, Gramin?

Please be trolling. Please please please be trolling. Don't tell me you're really that dumb. Right?

Did you read the article? You're not addressing the question everyone else is debating.

Nobody in the previous thread, nor Dooley, are questioning an employer's right to do a background check or look at facebook.

The city is asking for your passwords. I'll put that in bold in case you missed it: passwords. If I post that online, that's fine, but reasonable expectation extends into the government not logging into my own personal account. It's not about them SEEING your information.

Anyway, the real issue here is not social networking login info. It's email passwords. Reasonable expectation of privacy would extend here as well. Why should the government be able to access my personal email account. They can do a credit check, but not access my personal email and obtain sensitive information.

That's like your kilo being hidden and the cop asking you to open your trunk and show him its empty even though he can't see your drugs (i.e. he doesn't have probable cause so he's asking you to do his work).

Do you understand now? Please tell me you do. For the good of this country, please reread the article and tell me you understand what we're talking about.

I think with all the layoffs that are going on employers think (and do) get away with way more than they have in the past. I went on a part time job interview at a market and they asked some questions that were leading toward very personal and political matters. I told them that I didn't feel it was appropriate to answer them. Despite all my experience I didn't get the job, though that probably is due to the attitude I developed after being asked irrelevant and annoying questions

Nobody is disagreeing with the employer's right to do a background check and not hire you based on your facebook activity, etc. The point is that they are asking for passwords. I have nothing I'm ashamed of on facebook, but I refuse to give someone my password

And it is COMPLETELY unacceptable to ask for access to your personal email. It's PERSONAL, and it's a gateway to sensitive info. You are a lunatic.

If you would like a more unethical candidate, please choose one from the pile that contains working usernames and passwords.

Thank you.

What if you get online statements from ING Direct? What if they get an Amazon receipt of a weird book, or a receipt from a porn website. An email account is a window into lots of personal information. If you're a hacker, how do you get iTunes gift cards and passwords to porn websites, and bank accounts? Email is one of the easiest ways to get this information. It is more invasive than a credit card or background check. Your facebook can be checked without your password. Your email is PERSONAL. PERIOD.

You're a fascist lunatic. This is a POOR MAN'S BACKGROUND CHECK. They're too cheap to do it anyway but get your passwords from you and spy on you. God you scare me.

In the paragraph quoted I don't see anything about handing over passwords, just listing the account.

Granted, I can't get to the full article because my work server is blocking it.

If there weren't a bad recession, I'm sure someone would have sued. Maybe the next one to get fired sues out of spite.

@Smashville: In what country?

@Gramin: It is illegal to ask for a date of birth on an application.

In fact, for someone to log into another person's account using the provided credentials would be, I do believe, a violation of the Stored Communications Act (US Code Sec. 2701).

"(a) Offense.- Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section whoever-
(1) intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided; or
(2) intentionally exceeds an authorization to access that facility;
and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage in such system shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section."

Also, see the MySpace suicide case for how local DA's look at the interpretation of electronic trespass.

Wow. What paper state do you live in? Remind me to never, ever, ever move there.

I said "any" security credentials, not just credentials leading to financial information. Handing out security credentials to anything is a gross violation of numerous security best practices.

Furthermore, the application specifically lists "Google" credentials among its requirements. You do realize that many Google accounts do in fact store financial information, do you not?

You'd do well to go through and read the dozens of other comments that all say essentially the same thing that I am.

If it were me, however, I'd give them the finger and pilfer their trash for food before storming out.

I'm employed and don't need a job but even if I did Im not giving it up. I would just leave the spot blank and if anyone asked questions, I would answer honestly that those logins and passwords are private information and of no relevance on how I do my job.
I have memberships on sites on everything from pit bull rescures, tattoos, piercings, politics, and more. All it means is that I have a variety of interests and try to keep myself informed all sides of issues.

@Gramin: I didn't say that they set themselves up to lose lawsuits, I said that they set themselves up to be sued. They could lose in court, but whether they win, or lose, it is still costly for the city to defend and (in my judgement), not worth the expense.

I believe that this practice is legal only because the applicant is giving the city permission to snoop. Where they will run into trouble is when they turn someone down for a job because of something they posted on their facebook page. They are going to have to have very clear guidelines on what they consider inappropriate.

It comes down to fear that they might have picked the wrong person for the job, but honestly, it's still BS. Question is will they drop the requirement when they see the applications dwindle away.

@KhaiJB:
I was just thinking that too.

Hahahahahaha! Ridiculous for them to ask for this info!

@angelzero:

What are you smoking? What security credentials? Facebook? Myspace? Are you serious!? Those sites don't contain confidential information. If they were requesting my credentials for the private financial information I have for several companies around the world, that's different. This is a social networking site. Apples and oranges.

As for your paraphrasing the old saw of, "If you have nothing to hide..." I say: "Everybody poops, but it takes a very special kind of person to do so in public."

@Dooley:

Privacy only exists where there is reasonable expectation of it. If I have a kilo of cocaine in the back of my car and a police officer notices it from outside my car, he is not invading my privacy and is justified in making an arrest. Likewise, if I post something online, making it easily viewable for the general public, I no longer have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The Court would rule with the city.

It isn't a matter looking at the material, it's a matter of what they DO with the material that could get them in hot water. Say someone's facebook shows photos of them at a particular religious ceremony, or the person lists their religion on the profile. If that person doesn't get hired, they could say that it was because of their religion. Whether or not that's the case, the city will still end up in court and paying legal fees.

My bro works for the federal government, and he used to have a supervisor who regularly bemoaned the fact that they're not allowed to do drug tests.

@mianne:

You're somewhat mistaken. You're required to provide your date of birth. I think most people can figure out your age from that bit of information. It is illegal to use that as consideration in the hiring decision.

@Gramin: They can see what I've posted on my facebook page without having my facebook PASSWORD.

What happens when the person assigned to go researching dislikes a job candidate and uses the person's password to send vicious emails or put up inappropriate photos on facebook?

@Etoiles: I had to sign a form of acknowledgement that they can and periodically will monitor, as I assume most people do at a job with internet access

@HiPwr:

You're completely wrong. For example, sexual orientation is not a suspect class and an employer can choose not to hire someone for that reason. Furthermore, several schools have been justified in punishing athletes or students for pictures posted online. The courts will side with the city. Privacy only exists if you have a reasonable expectation of it. Posting something online for anyone to view immediately removes any and all expectation of privacy.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that similarly unscrupulous HR people regularly use such information to avoid hiring people who are members of protected classes; and I've been waiting a very long time for someone to successfully sue an employer for discrimination, supported by evidence that HR is combing through people's personal information, actively looking for information they're legally prohibited from basing hiring decisions on.

@RB_Bhoy: Lol.. good for you.

@pecan 3.14159265:

I actually agree with the city. They're not requesting login credentials for private information (i.e. online banking or email). Rather, they're requesting login credentials for those sites that are easily accessible by the general public. Instead of waiting for a news reporter to find a photo of the chief of police and a couple teenage girls on his Facebook, the city is being proactive. This is no more invasive than a credit check or background check.

So what if I get hired and the asshat HR rep (not the one that hired me but that guy who sits and files crap) that is all pissy at me beacuse I hit on his GF logs into my account and changes it so I look like a pedofile, or some other offending action, and then says "you know that ospreyguy seems wierd. Did you ever check his online stuff?" Totally screwed.

If you answered YES to any of them, they'll stay well out of your personal and business life.

Your employer does not have the right however to monitor every action that transpires on your personal home computer outside of work hours. That is in effect what this application is asking you to provide.

What I do on facebook at home does not fall under their jurisdiction. Most places that monitor this also use filters that block social/dating sites.

And it probably is not a good idea to use facebook at work anyways. Slippery Slope.

Furthermore, it is a violation of these sites' TOS to share yourlogin information with anyone. Therefore, to be considered for employment, you must be willing to breach contracts you've already agreed to.

It goes to follow then, that if you're willing to selectively break policies to secure a government job, you are therefore corruptible. Likewise, if you are willing to give out your personal login details to anyone who asks, you are likely susceptible to social engineering attacks in which you give the root password to the city's mainframe to a hacker posing as a fellow employee on the phone.

Finally, that could be moot anyway with open government/sunshine provisions that may require these applications to be in the public record.

I'm ok with this as long as its all publicly viewable webpages-- but even then, no to the passwords. They have a right to know what you're publishing about yourself.

...and then change them.

@qxrt: Exactly right, and like a previous poster mentioned whos to say weather people either made up an account so it looked good or only gave them sites with clean information on thm and omitted the raunchy stuff.

For instance, there are many many people who believe that unwed mothers lack "moral character." So if a woman is a member of the group "single mommies" on Facebook is she going to be considered an unfit candidate?

@henwy: In that situation, employees are using company resources. A company has the right to know how their resources are being used- and arguably, employees should not be doing anything but work on work computers. In this case they are wanting to trawl through information that has nothing to do with them.

Or they'll pick three at random and check those.

@Trai_Dep: Because if there is anything that conservative small town government excels at, it's keeping government out of people's personal lives.

"No, we didn't fire Mrs. Beasley because she got pregnant, we fired her because she left her account information for cutefluffykittens.com off her application."

THAT's the hilarity I was talking about.

That said, while FISMA is not a requirement for individual states, it is required that certain systems that tie into federal systems comply with FISMA requirements (no state agency would permit MOU's of any sort with a system that does not atleast meet the minimum baselines, ala NIST 800-53 and FISMA). Most states also use NIST guidelines.

Why did I post all that mumbo jumbo above, well because they list Police personnel, police systems tie into federal systems, especially when it comes to criminal databases. The policy of requiring users to provide credentials violates every security control listed in FISMA requirements (which are generally based on NIST guidelines).

I would like to see every federal system that is in use in that city get their access pulled..

Sorry, after reading this application I closed every single one of my e-mail, message board, news, and social networking sites yesterday.

Like the above poster, I have at least a hundred open accounts at forums across the web. From Gamespot to Wired to Bigsoccer...they can take a long walk off a short pier if they think I'm giving them all that information.

3 lines would not be enough anyway, haha...I could start with the least worthy and just run out of space before I got to anything worthwhile.

when i asked what that had to do with the job, i was told they want to get to know the "real me," and not the "brown-nosing [me], that everybody shows up as in interviews." i told him i only have a facebook (lied, i have a myspace set to private, but haven't used in months), but it's set to private so nobody who wasn't a friend could view it, and i only add close friends and family...about 60 or so people. he said he'd when i got home to accept his friend request, that it'll be from his profile with his name. i told him "sorry eric, but i just don't think you and i can be friends anymore." and i left.

"In an interview, they couldn't ask me about my religion, my marital status, my politics, and various other prohibited categories. That's black-letter federal law that every employer knows, especially employers with in-house government-paid lawyers.

My Facebook page alone has all that information and more, most of it conveniently gathered together in a little box.

I know the bar for discrimination lawsuits is pretty high, but wouldn't any rejected applicant have a real leg up given that there's no way the city could claim it didn't know it was demanding information it wasn't entitled to know?"

I can't imagine this new rule sticking around for longer then a week.

There's no way something like this is illegal. It's actually a lot more open. Did you know it's legal (and around a third of businesses admit to doing it) to moniter your employee's internet traffic on the job? That means everything they do online. You can get a direct feed so you can read their emails, im's, whatever. It's been ruled legal a buncha times now despite court challenges.

I'd give them:

IBM.com
Microsoft.com
Joe Shmoe's Facebook
Sara the Myspace angle hot girl I don't know but am friends on with on Myspace.com

But in all serious, I've been on the internet for like 15 years and have signed up for hundreds of sites. I can't even remember 99% of the sites let alone the logins for them.

Easy... give them fake accounts.

~I

@pecan 3.14159265: I think they are leaving themselves wide open to litigation if they decline to hire someone based on some arbitrary judgement about on-line activity.

If they are wise, they will stop this practice.

Armed with your user name, they can search your chat logs, they can look through your comment history, they can build a profile based on what you say behind your alias - and contrast that with how you are in public. I can say confidently that I am the same person publicly and privately, but of course a person's word is no longer enough. In some ways, I get it - but in a great deal of other ways, not everyone is out to embezzle funds or steal company secrets or poison Tylenol. Most of us just want to make an honest living.

Then again, I'm not looking for a job.

Like, um, speech and association? Like the things you pretty definitionally do on social networking and e-mail?

Soooo creepy.

1. First, no one who has any measure of sense associates their real name with their online names, when it comes to chat boards or comments that have any possibility of being used for unforseen purposes. You use a dummy/spam email address to register for things -- I'm surprised at people who get all indignant about forms asking for your personal information online -- just put in junk crap. (although I know people for whom even creating one email account is a challenge, so who knows if they could manage more than one)

2. So if you've done that, why even write anything down when they ask you? I mean, aside from Facebook or other things that can obviously be traced to you via a Google search. If your online alias names cannot be traced to your online presence, there is no need to tell them, because you and that name are never associated. Aside from that, who in their right mind asks for your password? The person writing this questionnaire is obviously an idiot.

3. And related to that, someone in this podunk town got the idea that they're big important people, and decided to emulate the background check that the Obama administration runs on new staffers -- they have this exact question (without the passwords). But that's understandable -- for a very public, federal administration job with important public relations implications. This is, what, Bozeman, where we want to make sure the manager of garbage collection doesn't have a negative online reputation? come on. Part of the responsibility of authority is realizing where it does not extend do, and excusing yourself from policing that.

According to Greg Sullivan's LinkedIn profile, he's only been a lawyer for four years and this appears to be his first legal job. Prior to becoming city attorney in April 09, he worked in the planning department. It seems he's got a lot to learn.

@pecan 3.14159265: It's legal if you give permission. Police departments routinely give polygraphs to applicants, too.

Mr. Sullivan says the City has "positions ranging from fire and police, which require people of high integrity for those positions, all the way down to the lifeguards and the folks that work in city hall here. So we do those types of investigations to make sure the people that we hire have the highest moral character and are a good fit for the City."

Okay, I get it, the new fire chief might be into all sorts of seedy stuff and you wouldn't know it - but I have to say, from what I've read in textbooks and studies, people who want to hide things will find a way. This is why people go "He was such a nice family man," and are surprised when they see police swarming their neighbor's house and find out later he was into children. People find a way. Asking for passwords and stuff is probably just the tip of the iceberg for them because if you give it over, that links you to email addresses, other users, and from there they could follow the trail and dig deeper into the people with which you associate yourself. It's not my fault the next door neighbor is running a bootleg moonshine business in his basement, but if we end up on the same wine enthusiast website, what is the city going to do if I hand over my password, and then the news breaks that my neighbor's moonshine business has been shut down.

The city manager, etc should be damn thankful that the legislature just got out of session, otherwise they would have been reamed.

I can understand certain jobs searching your name or profiles, but to ask for passwords, which give other people the power to modify your information is insane

Seriously, if true, this is outrageous.

Regardless of the privacy implications, any company that explicitly demands that any security credentials be provided written down on a piece of paper automatically fails at meeting nearly every security standard I can think of.

They would also be failing to meet the legal standards of several states that are not Montana.

Finally, if anything, public workers should be demanding more privacy, not giving up more confidential information.

They still have no right to ask for passwords.

This is the most retarded thing I've ever seen. I don't even use facebook or tweeter or nospace. Guess they'd just call me a liar and not hire me. Oh well, my credit sucks anyway...

So this is legal until it's challenged, and when challenged, it'll likely be overturned. Until then, it's "legal".

It speak a lot to the type of employee they are seeking. Apparently, they want someone who will mindlessly turn over their personal social data without question. So, who works for the city of Bozeman MT? The desperate? The folk who have only heard of the internet? Those with no social life? Certainly, no one who respects privacy.

How about "We need copies of your car key, house keys, and the time your child leaves from school, and you are not to open any personal mail you receive at home until you bring the envelopes in here first so we can read it"

Where do you draw the line?

I mean, if you undergo a background check and your friends express that you may be a shifty character, they can probably deduce that you may go to some shifty websites as well. But they don't need to spy on you for that.

What happens if you give them the wrong passwords? When they call you back, you can just say you had them changed? But they'll probably ask you for the current ones. I wonder how long you could do this before they just give up and evaluate you without this information..

This is an extreme invasion of privacy. This isn't like running a credit check, this is digging through e-mails and having access to financial data. I regularly communicate with Mr. Pi on various topics, including bills and such. I don't want anyone knowing where I bank, or how much is in my account because I happen to mention it in an e-mail planning a vacation.

What? The legality of using any info they get seems rather dubious.
Guess I won't be working at the Prehistoric Museum any time soon...

I know jobs are hard to get right now.. but I ain't givin up my passwords on a job application.

Well, that's a silly way of judging things. Obviously people who are turned off by this thing aren't going to apply in the first place, not send in an application and then retract it...