_2012_Social_Recruiting_Survey.pdf (application/pdf Object) The United States Constitution. The Constitution is presented in several ways on this site.
This page presents the Constitution on one large HTML-enhanced page. Other pages present the Constitution as a series of individual pages, in plain text, in standard Palm DOC format, and in enhanced TealDoc format. A quick reference is also available, as are photos of the Constitution. The Constitution of China is available for comparison.
In these pages, superseded text is presented like this: (This is superseded text.) US Constitution Table of Contents The Constitution of the United States PreambleNote We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Article I - The Legislative Branch Note Section 1 - The Legislature Section 2 - The House Delaware - Geo. 1. Using social networking sites in employment screening decisons.
Using Social Networking Sites In employment Screening Decisions According to Facebook official records, many organizational personnel are already subscribers – for example, 30,000 employees from Microsoft, 33,000 employees from IBM, and 20,000 employees from Accenture.
Research by the Pew Internet And American Life project indicates about 70% of all Internet users between the ages of 18 and 29 have posted profiles on an online social network. Use of these web sites by older individuals continues to grow also. More and more employers are tempted to use social networking sites like MySpace, Twitter, FaceBook etc as part of the employment screening process. One can not help but be amazed at the poor judgment exercised by people in posting pictures and information about themselves that can be viewed negatively by many people that may make important decisions regarding their future. I am reminded of a commentary by a business school instructor.
Home FAQ Site Map. Red Tape - facebook. Can Employers Fire Over Facebook Gaffes? Employers ask job seekers for Facebook passwords. Poll: Would you give up your Facebook password during a job interview?
SEATTLE (AP) — When Justin Bassett interviewed for a new job, he expected the usual questions about experience and references. Thank you for downloading 2012 Social Recruiting Survey. Social Recruiting Reports & Trends — Jobvite. Trends in recruiting and hiring change — often.
To stay in the know and to be able to properly forecast trends, Jobvite does a lot of research, interviews a variety of recruiting-industry insiders and conducts surveys fanatically. As a result, Jobvite has a wealth of data and insight into how people are looking for jobs, how employers are searching for candidates and how both are connecting on social media and social networks. Take a few minutes to look through our reports. We think you’ll find plenty of data and analyses that will give you a better picture of how the world of talent acquisition is changing so you can stay well-informed and make better decisions when it comes to using technology and creating a social recruiting strategy. 2014 Jobvite Job Seeker Nation Study.
Worker objects to use of Facebook for background checks. By Byron Acohido, USA TODAY Updated 2011-02-23 2:43 PM The American Civil Liberties Union is championing the case of a Maryland corrections officer, Robert Collins, who does not believe his employer should have the right to scour his personal Facebook account as a condition of employment.
Collins gives his account in this video: The ACLU's Maryland chapter sent this letter to state officials on Collins' behalf. According the ACLU, the Maryland corrections division has a "blanket requirement" that job applicants, as well as current employees undergoing recertification, provide the government with their social media account user names and personal passwords for use in background checks. The ACLU in this blog post calls the policy "a gross breach of privacy" and a violation of state and federal law "which protect privacy rights and extend protections to electronic communications. " As of late last week, the advocacy group had received no response from the state. Update: 6 p.m.