Conquent: Without Limits
Conquent: Without Limits
Kristen Fife's Blog

Truth Or Consequences

2009-07-11 10:09:15

Yesterday I had the unpleasant responsibility of rescinding two offers of employment for candidates. I had to tell the hiring managers that their new employees would not be eligible to work for them and I had to call the candidates and tell them that they were ineligible to apply with us for two years. And both of them were the same reason.

They lied on their applications. Specifically, they failed to disclose criminal convictions.

It is important to keep in mind that criminal convictions will not necessarily bar you from employment in most jobs. There are some guidelines, of course. If you have two DUI's in the last three years, chances are you won't be eligible to be a driver, but that doesn't mean you wouldn't be considered for a sales position, for example.

Applications for employment are *legal documentation*. And they are the first "official" line of trust between you and  a new employer. Why would an employer want to hire you if you start off your relationship with a lie?

Background checks of any kind are confidential. If a past conviction is disclosed but does not have a direct bearing on the responsibilities of the position, the hiring manager never sees the results of it. Only HR has access to this sort of information. So not disclosing it for fear of looking bad for your new boss is a needless worry.

So do yourself and us all a favor. Be honest. It really *is* the best policy.

The Resume "Black Hole"
What Is That Acronym?

Anon., for obvious reasons: Re: Truth Or Consequences
2009-07-13 15:50:42

What about items supposedly wiped from your record by the court? For example, I've seen one person make completely false accusations against another (one word against another), which ended up in criminal misdemeanor court. The misdemeanor was unrelated to work.

The accused could not afford an attorney to fight this, and the misdemeanor status meant the court didn't need to provide one. The judge decided to put the accused on probation for 6 mos, at the end of which time the charge would be expunged from their record, assuming they didn't get another charge.

Should an applicant have to reveal something a judge has deemed unnecessary to leave on their record? Is it considered lying by HR if this is not shared?

Kristen Fife: Re: Truth Or Consequences
2009-07-14 19:07:15

The accused should be able to get some documentation from the court that the record had been expunged so that if there is any doubt, s/he has documentation.

In one of the cases I mentioned rescinding an offer, I did let the candidate know that if there are extenuating circumstances why she failed to report the conviction, I would certainly escalate to the determining body. The example you outline would be one of those cases.

Most states also allow anyone to get a copy of a criminal record at no charge or minimal. (In WA state it is $10). Thus the person mentioned above can find out if the "expunged" conviction truly has been and if not, challenge it again.

Brenda Ball: Re: - Truth Or Consequences
2009-08-07 08:59:45

I looked under this subject because I thought it would give some information regarding a person being fired from their position. I do not have crimmal record or DUI's but I was fired from my job. Could you please advise how or what to say in this regards? (I reason given to me was poor work performance.)

Your advise would be most helpful.

Thank you

Comment on this blog
Your name:

Your email (will not be displayed):



Enter the text above to help us filter spam:

This article also appears on
Human Resources