On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 3:03 PM, JD Austin <jd@twingeckos.com> 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 lirdless of the questions.


Yes, the laws related to disclosure of convictions of traffic, misdemeaners and felonies for IT employment become vary vague, depending on situations where expungement, sealing or set aside are available.  Some HR, head hunters  and hiring IT managers have actually told individuals (including me recently) NOT to describe anything earlier than 7 years ago regardless of the questions wording on the application. 

Be aware that even when items have been set aside or expunged, they can still exist in the background check databases, so while legally you do not have to disclose them if they do not specifically ask for items which have been sealed by the courts,  you can still be fired "with cause" for failure to disclose, should they show up later on a background check.

Background check information disclosure and abuse is strictly controlled by federal laws but not enforced.

In situations where a felony occurred more than 15 years ago, and the question asks if you have EVER been convicted of a felony, it's again generally better to disclose,
 

On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 14:54, Tim Bogart <timbogart@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@twingeckos.com>

To: Main PLUG discussion list <plug-discuss@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@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@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss


---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss



--
Office: (602)239-3392
AT&T: (503)754-4452
http://it-clowns.com

“These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people”  --Abraham Lincoln