The biggest concern: Users of social networking sites are primarily Caucasians age 20-40. For example, on LinkedIn, only 4% of users are African-American, and just 2% are Hispanic, according to the latest data from Quantcast.

As with all social networking sites, usage declines in older demographics.

Recruiting on those sites can cause problems, says attorney Pamela Devata in Workforce, because it could have a disparate impact on groups without a large social networking presence.

That may be especially true with LinkedIn, which lets users create online connections with people they know. They can then find other people by seeing their contacts’ contacts, their contacts’ contacts’ contacts, etc.

The problem is, finding candidates that way could leave HR with a very homogeneous group.

What’s the danger?

Not all HR experts have the same concern about social networking. As many of those who’ve commented on the story point out, the same complaints can be made about a lot of traditional recruiting strategies. For example, most newspaper readers are white, so therefore recruiting via classified ads could have a disparate impact.

The same goes for referrals, a time-tested hiring strategy. In 2004, an employer was sued by a group of minority applicants who claimed the company’s referral practices were biased.

Nearly all new hires were referred by current employees. Nearly all of the referred applicants were white. The company tried having the case tossed on the grounds that it was just choosing from the applicant pool made available. But the judge refused, ruling that hiring only through referrals had a disparate impact on some groups of applicants (Cite: EEOC v. Caril Buddig & Co.).

Use a variety of sources

So is recruiting through social networking sites really dangerous? It could be.

But probably not much more than some other recruiting methods. The best solution is to find applicants in a variety of places to get a diverse candidate pool.

What do you think? Is recruiting on Facebook, LinkedIn and other sites likely to lead to legal problems for companies? Is the strategy worth the risk? Let us know in the comments section below.

While the president was speaking to high school students in Arlington, VA, a 9th-grader asked him for some tips on how to become the Commander in Chief.

“First of all,” Obama answered, “I want everybody here to be careful about what you post on Facebook,” because “it will be pulled up again later somewhere in your life.”

A lot of job candidates probably wish they’d heard and followed that advice. According to a recent CareerBuilder survey, 35% of managers say they’ve turned down someone for a job because of what they found on social networking Web sites.

No, according to one recent survey.

In fact, 43% of employers don’t use social networking to recruit and have no interest in starting, according to a recent poll by Smartbrief on Workforce. Another 29% haven’t tried, but are interested. Finally, 11% say they’ve tried, but haven’t seen any good results.

Just 17% of companies have successfully recruited through Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.

What about you? Have you used those sites to attract new employees? If so, was it worth it? Let us know in the comments section below.

Most are spending more time on social networking sites and less money on job boards like CareerBuilder and Monster, according to a recent survey by Jobvite, a recruiting software provider.

Of the 440 HR pros who responded, 72% said their company will invest more in recruiting through social networks this year. Meanwhile, more than half expect to spend less on job boards.

What online tools are getting the most use? The most popular social networks for recruiters and HR pros:

• Linkedin (used by 80% of those who responded)
• Twitter (42%)
• Facebook (36%)
• Jobster (17%)
• Myspace (13%).

Other traditional, low-cost methods are getting more attention in this economy as well — for example, 68% of companies said they plan to increase the use of employee referrals.

Regular, old-fashioned networking.

A recent survey by AfterCollege.com asked recent graduates to pick the job-searching methods they found to be most effective. The top two options were searching job boards and applying directly through a company’s Web site, followed by various types of networking, such as:

• talking to someone who works at an employer of interest
• attending a job fair, and
• talking to friends or family members.

Other preferred methods include asking professors for help, looking at ads in a newspaper and attending information sessions at a school.

Last on the list: using social networking sites like Facebook or LinkedIn, with only 11% of users finding them to be effective job searching tools.

What does it mean? While companies have been able to find employees through social networking sites, like any recruiting tools, they need to be used in conjunction with other strategies. Focusing too much on one avenue, especially a brand new one, limits the audience you can reach.

The fastest growing population on Facebook: professional adults, according to O’Reilly Media.

Since September 2008, the number of Facebook users between the ages of 35 and 44 went up by 51%. Users age 45-54 increased by 47%, and by 26% for those 26-34.

Many of those users are logging on specifically for job-seeking purposes. As the site begins to attract huge numbers of people from all generations, it could be a great resource for HR and recruiting pros.

It’s not quite widespread yet, but more companies are starting to use Web sites like Facebook and MySpace to recruit employees.

Only 9% of HR pros frequently use those sites to recruit, according to a recent survey by the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM). But that’s a big jump from the 2% that did so in 2006.

Also, 56% said they never go to the sites. In 2006, more than three quarters of the respondents gave the same answer.

With so few employers using the sites regularly, it could give your HR department a chance to get a leg up on the competition.

The pros

What are the benefits of recruiting through Facebook, MySpace and other social networking sites? The most common reasons HR pros gave for using them were the abilities to:

• reach candidates who aren’t actively looking for a job (69%)
• target a specific level of experience (40%)
• find someone with specific skills (38%), and
• increase employer brand recognition (35%).

The cons

The biggest reason employers have for avoiding those sites: concerns about legality.

By looking at a candidate’s online profile, hiring managers may inadvertently learn about someone’s membership in a protected class. Therefore, making a decision based on online information could leave the company open to bias claims.

Other reasons employers have for not using social networking sites to recruit:

• don’t have enough HR staff to try new recruiting methods (49%)
• not sure everything users post about themselves is true (42%), and
• most information on the sites is not work-related or useful (36%).

What about your company? Have you tried recruiting candidates on Facebook, MySpace or related sites? Has it been successful?

Let us know by leaving a comment below.

About 22% of hiring managers say they look for job candidates’ profiles on social networking sites, according to a recent survey by CareerBuilder. That’s up from 11% who said they did so in 2006.

Also, 9% said they’re probably going to start using the Web to help in hiring decisions.

How are they using the information candidates post? Of the managers who check the sites, 34% said they’d found cause to remove an applicant from consideration. Most of the time, it was because the candidate talked about drinking or using drugs, posted inappropriate pictures or had noticeably poor communication skills.

On the other hand, roughly one quarter of those managers found info that solidified their decision to hire someone, such as background supporting their qualification for the job, creativity, diverse interests and a general professional appearance.

Any problems?

Of course, the big question on HR’s mind: Are there any legal dangers or other problems to worry about?

There is the possibility of a manager learning about a candidate being in protected class, which could result in a bias claim if the person isn’t hired.

Beyond legal concerns, there’s also the danger of mistaken identity, especially if the candidate has a common name. Also, some argue that what someone posts online won’t necessarily have anything to do with their job performance (even if they were dumb enough to put questionable items online in the first place).

What do you think? Have your managers ever checked out applicants on the Web? Do you think it’s a good idea, or a terrible one? Let us know by leaving a comment below.