OT - Explaining periods of unemployment on an application

[JD Austin]

I've only ever seen applications ask if you've been convicted of a crime
never just accused.
If the question is 'accused' I would check yes and write 'I was falsely
accused and was acquitted' next to it; if there wasn't room I'd check both
boxes.  Alternately I'd cross out the offending word and put convicted and
check no.  Anyone fired for undisclosed suspicion of a crime who has been
acquitted should sue the heck out of that company.

I can see if you were convicted and left it out where that would be grounds
but if you were acquitted it's a different matter.  Accusation!=guilt.
 People falsely accuse people of things they didn't do all the time.  Police
mistakenly arrest and charge the wrong person for a crime they didn't commit
(some even are put to death though those people ARE convicted).

I don't think it's fair to ask if someone has been accused of a crime but
it's fine to ask if they have been convicted.
More direct questions like 'have you ever stolen' are fine with me too.

On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 15:21, Eric Shubert <ejs at shubes.net> wrote:

> The significance isn't the crime itself, that you were tried, or what the
> verdict was. The significance is you falsified your application by omitting
> the fact that it occurred. Lying about it (or anything) on you application
> is a term of dismissal. It's that simple.
>
> JD Austin wrote:
>
>> I'm glad I don't work somewhere like that.  If I was acquitted/exonerated
>> of a crime I wouldn't list it on an application either!  I can't think of a
>> reason anyone would.  If it was a crime I'd been convicted of that was later
>> expunged I would list it though; perhaps that is what you're referring to?
>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/pipermail/plug-discuss/attachments/20100916/1c847347/attachment.html>