公司该监控员工私密的社交媒体吗

No: It Too Often Becomes a Fishing Expedition Unrelated to Work Issues
不该监控：太容易成为与工作问题无关的摸底调查

--Lewis Maltby
--Lewis Maltby

Employers don't need to practice wall-to-wall monitoring of employees' social media to protect their legitimate interests.
雇主不需要对雇员的社交媒体进行全方位监控来保护自己的正当利益。

Yes, employers have a legal right to monitor employees' conduct on their work computers. But the only time employers have a legal duty to monitor employee communications is when the employer has reason to believe that the employee is engaged in illegal conduct.
没错，雇主有监控雇员在公司电脑上行为的合法权利，但雇主唯一有法律义务监控雇员沟通情况的时候是雇主有理由认为雇员参与了非法行为。

Many successful companies do exactly that -- monitor only when there is a solid reason to suspect employee wrongdoing. These policies have been in place for years and work well.
许多成功的公司都是这样做的──只有有充分理由怀疑员工行为不当时才会监控。这些政策已经存在多年，而且非常有效。

The fact is, the vast majority of what employees do on the Internet has nothing to do with work, takes place during their private lives and is done on their personal computers. Once again, employers should get involved with employees' private lives only when there is reason to be concerned.
事实情况是，雇员在网上的绝大多数行为都与工作无关，基本都发生在私人生活中，而且都是在雇员的私人电脑上进行的。再次强调一下，雇主只有有充分理由怀疑的时候才应该干涉雇员的私人生活。

Human Elements
人的因素

It's simply too easy to turn social-media searches into fishing expeditions. Employers are human and cannot avoid being offended by employees' private behavior that goes against their values. Experience shows that employers fire employees for reasons having nothing to do with work. People have lost jobs because of their political opinions and religious beliefs. A photo in a bikini has cost many women their job. One man was fired because his employer didn't like his short stories (too much sex and violence).
社交媒体搜索太容易变成摸底调查了。进行搜索工作的是人，因此难免会被雇员违背自己价值观的私人行为所冒犯。经验表明，雇主常常会出于与工作无关的理由解雇员工。有人因为自己的政治观点和宗教信仰丢了工作。一张比基尼照片让许多女性失去了饭碗。还有一个人因为老板不喜欢他的小故事（太多性和暴力）而被解雇。

What's more, companies frequently reject qualified applicants because they don't like what they find out about them online. The majority of employers in a recent survey (77%) said they now conduct Internet searches of prospective employees, and over a third (35%) have rejected job applicants because of information they found. I have spoken to otherwise fair employers who refuse to hire anyone who has party pictures on their Facebook page.
此外，经常有公司因为不喜欢在网上发现的东西而拒绝合格的求职者。在最近的一项问卷调查中，大多数雇主（77%）说他们会在网上对潜在雇员进行搜索，超过三分之一的雇主（35%）由于在网上找到的信息而拒绝了求职者。向来很公平的雇主跟我说不会雇佣Facebook主页上有派对照片的人。

Refusing to hire people because of private behavior unrelated to work is not only unfair, but hurts the employer. In a competitive economy, companies need to hire the most qualified applicants. When HR professionals reject the top candidate because they disapprove of the person's private life, the employer loses, too.
由于和工作无关的私人行为而拒绝雇人的行为不仅不公平，而且对雇主也没有好处。在一个竞争激烈的经济环境中，公司需要雇佣最有资质的申请人。招聘人员因为不喜欢其私人生活而拒绝优秀申请人的时候，雇主也有损失。

There's more subtle damage as well. HR professionals are already hard pressed to investigate applicants thoroughly. Often there isn't enough time to speak with every prior employer, or to verify the applicant's academic record. Taking time away from these crucial activities to go on Internet fishing expeditions diminishes the quality of the hiring process.
此外还有更难以察觉的损害。招聘人员已经承受着要彻底调查申请人的压力，通常他们并没有足够的时间和每个前雇主沟通或者验证申请人的学习成绩。从这些关键的调查中抽出时间去网上做摸底调查会有损于招聘流程的质量。

Internet searches also put employers at risk of liability. An employer who learns that an applicant is gay, Moslem, disabled, or over 40 years old, and then hires someone else may face discrimination charges. Once the employer has such information, it may be difficult to prove that it wasn't used in making the hiring decision. Even if the employer ultimately prevails, valuable time and money are lost. It's much safer not to acquire the information.
互联网搜索还会让雇主面临承担法律责任的风险。如果得知某个申请人是同性恋、穆斯林、残疾或者超过40岁而雇佣其他人，雇主可能会面临歧视的起诉。一旦雇主掌握了这种信息，要证明在做招聘决定时没有参考这种信息就很难了。即使雇主最终胜诉了，也损失了宝贵的时间和金钱。不去获取这种信息要安全得多。

Use With Care
谨慎使用

Of course, there are situations in which an applicant's Internet activity is of legitimate concern to an employer. A police department should think twice about hiring an officer that belongs to racist groups. Someone who visits child-pornography sites shouldn't be hired to work with children. A applicant with a drinking problem could be the wrong choice to drive a truck.
当然，也有申请人的网上活动应该引起雇主合理关注的情况。警察局在雇佣一个属于种族歧视组织的警员时就应该三思。访问儿童色情网站的人不应该受雇和儿童一起工作。有酗酒问题的申请人做卡车司机就不合适。

In cases like these, employers should hire a third party to conduct the search. Employers should determine what type of information is relevant to the job and instruct search firms to report only this type of information.
在这种情况下，雇主应该请第三方进行搜索。雇主应判断哪类信息与工作相关，并告知调查公司只汇报这类信息。

You can't blame employers for wanting to know more about applicants before making a commitment. There are circumstances where the Internet may contain relevant information. But sending HR professionals indiscriminately trawling through social media is unfair and causes more problems than it solves.
我们不能怪雇主在做出承诺前希望了解申请人的更多情况。有时候网上可能有相关的信息。但让招聘人员不加选择地在社交媒体上搜罗信息是不公平的，而且带来的问题会比解决的问题多。