I have seen the question framed as have you ever been arrested (NOT
convicted) for a serious misdemeanor or felony.
On 09/16/2010 03:03 PM, 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?
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 14:54, Tim Bogart <timbogart@yahoo.com
> <mailto: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 <mailto:jd@twingeckos.com>>
>
> *To:* Main PLUG discussion list
> <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> <mailto: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
> <mailto: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
> <mailto: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
---------------------------------------------------
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
(text/plain)