I recently returned from a meeting where one expert recommended doing a Google search on applicants as part of the evaluation process. He said you often find very interesting things about people, especially if they blog or have their own website. Someone else thought it might be an invasion of privacy, and others objected that you'd get lots of info on some people and none on others. What do you recommend? — Sheila R., Employment Manager in Santa Rosa

Each stage of the screening process used to review and select prospective hires is, in essence, a "test" addressed in the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC's) Uniform Selection Guidelines. To completely comply with the idealized process designed by the EEOC and other government entities to make sure that employment decisions are made fairly, are fully job-related, and are not based on discrimination, each screening stage should be analyzed for any potential adverse impact.

In reality, that is almost never done unless the selection process is under such tight scrutiny that every step is minutely reviewed and assessed. That usually happens only in the unusual convergence of a consent decree and a high-level, highly contested, public sector position that may be subject to media attention.

The following background is helpful for addressing any question about any particular step in the candidate or prospective applicant review process.

First, any screening process step, to make business sense, must be sufficiently related to the position being applied for to justify the investment of time, energy, and cost. In other words, the step must be fully related to the job. Unless the job-related connection is very clear and obvious, and unless the test has been applied to all candidates being considered for a particular position, it would be very difficult to justify using the test as even a small part of the selection process.

In relation to Sheila's concern, how would you define or quantifiably measure the relevance of someone's blog or random mention in a Google search result? How would you define an objective benchmark to meaningfully and accurately use the information garnered by doing a check of blog activity, someone's personal website, or mention in a Google search to predict success on the job or measure needed skills and abilities? What if your Google search uncovered a person's private political leanings; lifestyle choices; or religious affiliation, belief, or activity?

We take endless measures to teach our supervisors and managers which interview questions are appropriate, effective, and without bias. We are very careful to avoid questions about a person's marital status, religion, age, etc. Employment applications are carefully designed to elicit only the necessary information to confirm an applicant's job-related experience, skills, and education. We don't ask about physical limitations or conditions, Social Security numbers, etc.

So then, in contemplating a Google search, in one word—why? Why would you want to check Google? For what purpose? What would you do with the information you found? Do you do it for everyone applying for that position?

Sheila also mentioned that someone questioned whether such a search might present some privacy concerns. Hooray for that person. However, it is not just a matter of privacy. It is much more basic; it is not job-related. Unless a person is applying for a Web designer position and asks you to review websites he or she has designed as a legitimate work sample, I would strongly suggest that you not run a Google search or blog check on a prospective applicant.

In addition, the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act outlines some types of information you may seek out about a person and how you must communicate to him or her if you do not hire him or her based on an item in the background check. While this usually applies to more formal background checks, there is the same need for the check to be related to the job the person is applying for and the same requirement that the check be consistently applied with a consistently interpreted benchmark or cut-off point.

For all types of inquiries, whether pre- or post-hire, the question remains—how does it relate to the person's job? In general, it is best not to ask any question or seek information out of idle curiosity. If the reason to garner such information is not legitimately related to the job, you run the chance that if a person is not selected, he or she will attribute the nonselection to the question that was asked. That can lead to a challenge of the selection process and possible legal action. A good rule of thumb is to limit any review or questions to information that is strictly relevant to the person's skills, experience, and education as defined in a job description.

Rhoma Young is founder and head of HR consulting firm Rhoma Young & Associates in Oakland.

Proceed with Caution When Using Google and Other Sites

In addition to searching on Google, employers may be tempted to browse social networking websites such as MySpace and Facebook to learn more about prospective hires or current employees. But using these sites to glean personal information may expose an employer to a lawsuit, so watch your step.

Next week, find out the pros and cons of relying upon online data when you screen potential and current employees during our 90-minute audio conference, "Hiring: The Hidden Risks of Using Google, Facebook, MySpace, and Other Websites to Scope Out New and Prospective Hires; What You Need to Watch Out For." On April 3, a California employment attorney will explain when you can use Google, MySpace, and other websites for HR purposes, how to gauge whether what you learn about your workers is accurate, the types of online material you should never search for, and more. Find out the most common mistakes employers make when checking up on candidates online and what to do if an applicant or employee claims discrimination or invasion of privacy.

Click here to register for this informative audio conference or to order a CD recording.