OT - Explaining periods of unemployment on an application

[Steve Phariss]

That is still a bit strange.  All the applications I have filled out the
question is have you ever been found guilty....



On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 2:54 PM, Tim Bogart <timbogart at yahoo.com> wrote:

>  No.  Maybe I didn't explain it clearly enough.  No, they did not
> terminate people for having a brush with the law and being found innocent or
> acquitted or for whatever reason, were not convicted.  They terminated those
> people for *FAILING TO DISCLOSE* their brush with the law, and the
> accompanying details on the application.  Understandable in my mind.
>
> Tim...
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* JD Austin <jd at twingeckos.com>
>
> *To:* Main PLUG discussion list <plug-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
> *Sent:* Thu, September 16, 2010 2:48:46 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: OT - Explaining periods of unemployment on an application
>
> Hold on.. they fired people that were ACQUITTED of a crime?  That seems a
> bit too far :(
> If a court can't find them guilty how can an employer?
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 14:38, Tim Bogart <timbogart at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>  I like your response.  At a company with which I worked for many years,
>> many years ago used to send me email on a daily basis listing folks who had
>> been terminated.  Of those, many were terminated because of falsehoods on
>> their applications.  And of those, not nearly, but ALL were due to
>> information omitted regarding some crime that the individual had committed.
>>  And they ran the gambit from robbery to murder.  Yes, murder, believe it or
>> not. But in fairness, of those, they involved folks who had been tried for
>> murder and had been exonerated by some means (found not guilty, thrown out
>> due to mistrial or other reasons) but the point is that they had concealed
>> the facts regarding criminal activities (I mean seriously, how can you
>> forget to list something like that, or how can you think it somehow doesn't
>> qualify as something a potential employer would not be interested?) that are
>> easily checked.
>>
>> Tim B.
>>
>> I'm sticking with Grandpa Jones here...
>>  "True is stranger than fact."
>> Hee-Haw
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss at lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss<http://lists.plug.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20100916/2852c87c/attachment.html>