EmployeeScreenIQ Blog

A Jet Blue flight attendant quit his job in a very interesting way on Monday.  I’ll refrain from paraphrasing because I believe this article does it enough justice.  Should any future employer  conduct an employment verification with Jet Blue, he can pretty much bank on not receiving a good reference.  Not to mention he may also have to explain a stint in prison.  Best of luck buddy!

Cursing, beer and a popped chute as flight attendant quits

New York (CNN) — Call them the not-so-friendly skies.

A flight attendant cursed out passengers, grabbed a beer then triggered an emergency chute Monday at a JFK Airport terminal, authorities say.

New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said it “appears” Steven Slater was quitting.

“It’s a strange way to quit, let’s put it that way,” he said. “I don’t think he’ll be able to come back.”

Police arrested Slater for allegedly triggering the emergency escape chute, a spokeswoman for the district attorney said.

Slater was arrested at his home and charged with criminal mischief, reckless endangerment and criminal trespass, said Helen Peterson at the Queens District Attorney’s Office.

The incident took place just after the Jet Blue flight landed when a passenger stood to remove a bag from the overhead bin while the plane was still taxiing, a law enforcement source with direct knowledge said. A flight attendant exchanged words with the passenger, and the conversation escalated.

Slater picked up the intercom and used expletives directed at the passengers, according to a source with knowledge of the investigation. It is not clear exactly what was said on the intercom. The source said that when the plane at stopped at the gate, Slater then grabbed some beer from the beverage cart before deploying the emergency slide and using it to leave the plane.

More

Continue Reading

By now everyone knows that Hewlett-Packard (HP) CEO Mark Hurd has resigned from his post after an internal company investigation revealed that he mislead the company about expenses he submitted for contract work that was never performed.  It gets more scandalous though.  The expenses were paid to a marketing consultant that recently settled a sexual harassment claim against Hurd.

So in the aftermath, will this series of events limit his future employment prospects?  What would an employment background check reveal?  Would HP reveal Mr. Hurd’s reason for departure if ever contacted for an employment verification?  I’m thinking they wouldn’t get into the details. After all, there was no criminal conviction for the misreporting of expenses and HP’s investigation of sexual harassment concluded that the allegations were unfounded.  Now, of course most prospective employers will know about Mr. Hurd’s exploits because the media has reported on them ad nauseum.  However, I question whether that will dim his ability to find a similar position elsewhere.

However, let’s say that Mr. Hurd was not the head of a major public organization.  Would an employer reveal such information on a rank and file employee? What do you think?

Continue Reading

The Stolen Valor Act of 2005, signed into law on December 20, 2006 by President George W. Bush, makes it illegal to falsely claim to be a recipient of military awards and medals handed out by Congress to military personnel.  A little over three years later, the constitutionality of this Act was challenged. 

Rick Strandlof, a Colorado man accused of posing as a Marine Captain and claimed to have received a Silver Star and Purple Heart during the Iraq War, argued that prosecution under the Stolen Valor Act violated his First Amendment right to free speech.  A district court judge agreed.

This isn’t the last we’ve heard on this issue as I’m sure the government is gearing up for an appeal.  However, it is important to point out that any claims of military honors can be verified by employers by requesting a copy of an applicant’s military records, commonly known as the DD Form 214.

Judge Says Constitution Protects Right to Lie About Purple Heart

By David Kravets,  Wired.com – July 19, 2010

A federal judge has declared unconstitutional a little-known law making it a crime to falsely claim to have been awarded a military medal.

A Colorado man who was never in the military was arrested for falsely claiming to have won the Purple Heart and other medals as a Marine in Iraq. He challenged the Stolen Valor Act of 2005, which provides penalties up to a year in prison, on grounds it breached the First Amendment.

In the first ruling declaring the measure unconstitutional, U.S. District Judge Robert Blackburn agreed with defendant Rick Strandlof’s contention. The judge said the government’s defense of the act was “troubling” as well as “contrary, on multiple fronts, to well-established First Amendment doctrine” (.pdf). The Purple Heart is awarded to military personnel wounded or killed in “any action against an enemy of the United States.”

Dozens of defendants have been charged under the statute. The San Francisco–based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is weighing the statute’s constitutionality in a case brought by a man sentenced to 400 hours of community service and fined $5,000.

The government, which is mulling an appeal, argued that the law should be upheld.

“By allowing anyone to claim to possess such decorations, could impact the motivation of soldiers to engage in valorous, and extremely dangerous, behavior on the battlefield,” the government wrote.

Judge Blackburn was not buying it.

“This wholly unsubstantiated assertion is, frankly, shocking, and indeed, unintentionally insulting to the profound sacrifices of military personnel the Stolen Valor Act purports to honor,” the judge ruled. “To suggest that the battlefield heroism of our servicemen and women is motivated in any way, let alone in a compelling way, by considerations of whether a medal may be awarded simply defies my comprehension.”

Strandlof told CNN last year that he lied about his record because, among other things, of a “severely underdiagnosed mental illness.”

Continue Reading

I typically don’t comment on content I read in online forums, but I saw this post on WallStreetOasis.com about a recent college grad who has accepted a position with Goldman Sachs, but must first submit to an employment background check before it’s official.  Unfortunately, he/she now realized that they inadvertently lied on their resume and is trying to decide whether to come clean prior to the background check. See below.

I’m so worried about it and haven’t been able to sleep well…

Here’s my advice.  Whether Goldman Sachs actually checks this information or not (and I’m quite certain they do) is immaterial.  This oversight on your resume is simply that until you realize it is false.  My recommendation would be to come clean and let them know the truth.  This is nothing more than a technicality and can be explained by addressing it ahead of time.  If they conduct the background check and find out otherwise, your oversight becomes a lie.  And even if that particular distinction would have no bearing on your employment prospects, the lie speaks volumes.

Just my two cents.

Continue Reading

Greenberg Traurig labor and employment attorney, Dan Pasterternak just posted a story about an employer who lost a multimillion dollar judgement over a negative job reference/employment verification which deviated from company policy.  See Dan’s post below which includes his advice for providing employment verifications.

Like most employers, Credit Agricole’s policy is only to confirm dates of employment in response to a request for employment verification, without providing any information about a former employee’s job performance. But that didn’t happen to William Raedle.

Instead, according to court testimony reported in the press,his former supervisor told a prospective boss at Dreyfus Corp. that William had difficulty working with others and had mental issues. Raedle didn’t get the job at Dreyfus. What he did get, however, was a big verdict in his favor against Credit Agricole. After a weeklong trial, a jury in a New York federal court deliberated only five hours to award Raedle $2.4 million in lost earnings, damage to his reputation, and punitive damages, including $200,000 in punitive damages against his former supervisor for interfering with his efforts to get a job at Dreyfus.  (The trial judge vacated the punitive damage awards on the defendants’ post-trial motions, reducing the judgment amount to just over $1.6 million.)

What does this case tell us?

It’s not just what your policy says on paper, but what actually happens that really matters. No policy – whether it’s an employment reference policy, an anti-discrimination or anti-harassment policy, a leave policy, etc. – will amount to a hill of beans if you aren’t following it. The key is making sure that all employees are trained, and, if appropriate, periodically retrained, to comply with company policy. As the case shows, the consequences of failing to actually do what your policy says can be enormous.

The moral of the story is not to stop performing employment verifications.  In fact, we seen and written about instances where an employer failed to provide adverse information and was later successfully sued for not warning the prospective employer, Employment Verifications: Less May No Longer Be More.  Employers must be consistent and must reinforce company policies again and again.

Continue Reading

Did you know that EmployeeScreenIQ finds a 52% discrepancy rate between what an applicant claims about their education and work experience and what we find when we verify such information?  Check out this sage advice from John Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc., on resume fraud:

“As millions of Americans struggle with long-term unemployment, the temptation to stretch the truth on one’s résumé to gain a competitive advantage is becoming harder to resist. Some desperate job seekers are going so far as to establish fake references. However, the payoff may not be worth the risk, according to one employment authority.

There is very little proof that any form of résumé boosting directly results in a job interview, much less a job offer. In contrast, there are scores of examples of individuals who have been eliminated from candidacy or fired after a fraudulent résumé was uncovered.”

John offers the following advice to job seekers:

* The Short Chronological Résumé

A short chronological résumé summarizes the last 10 years of your career in reverse, briefly listing your accomplishments from the most recent to the much older.

* The Long Chronological Résumé

Use the long chronological résumé when you meet with the hiring decision maker. Its goal is to distinguish you from other contenders whose backgrounds resemble yours; therefore, focus on accomplishments, not responsibilities. This is your chance to provide a comprehensive summary of your career accomplishments.

* The Functional Résumé

A functional résumé stresses abilities such as purchasing, marketing, selling, managing or analyzing. Résumés organized by function, rather than chronology, give you an opportunity to gloss over a gap in job history or frequent job hopping. If you have many skills, this kind of résumé can market you as a sort of utility infielder who can perform well in several functions.

* Use Relevant Key Words

Increasing numbers of search firms, executive recruiters, and personnel managers initially use computer software to scan résumés for history, education, location, and so forth. Once scanned, résumés can be sorted by these key words to produce a customized list of professionals in a certain field. By including the right key words in your short chronological résumé, you can increase the chances that it will pass the screening process.

* Avoid Flash Or Gimmick

Think about the position for which you are applying. Bright florescent paper, glitter, perfume or different colored fonts seem unprofessional. Thinking outside the box is always welcome, but using gaudy tricks to catch the hiring manager’s eye will most likely irritate instead of dazzle.

Full Article

Continue Reading

Nurse of the Year is a pretty impressive feather in the cap of a health care practitioner.  That type of honor can place a nurse looking for a job in high demand.  In the case of Betty Lichtenstein of Norwalk, CT, she  claimed to have won the Connecticut Nurse’s Association’s “Nurse of The Year” award in 2008.  It turns out Nurse Betty wasn’t really a nurse, but she pretended to be one.   Oh, and the Connecticut Nurse’s Association doesn’t exist.  In the words of Homer Simpson, “DOH!”

Nurse Betty was hired on by a Connecticut doctor after committing resume fraud and had been treating his patients.  Word to the doctor: You might think about ordering a background check next time including a professional license verification and past employment references.

‘Nurse of the Year’ Charged with Not Being A Nurse

NORWALK, Conn. – A Connecticut woman who authorities say spent more than $2,000 to stage a dinner honoring her as “Nurse of the Year” has been charged with pretending to be a nurse at a doctor’s office. Betty Lichtenstein, 56, of Norwalk was charged Thursday.

Prosecutors say Dr. Gerald Weiss believed Lichtenstein was a registered nurse, especially after she was named the Connecticut Nursing Association‘s “Nurse of the Year” in 2008.

According to the arrest warrant, that association does not exist.

The state’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit began investigating after a patient complained about Lichtenstein.

She faces up to five years in prison if convicted of reckless endangerment and criminal impersonation charges.

Lichtenstein did not return a telephone message for comment.

Continue Reading

According to the New York Times, Indira Noel, the director of intergovernmental relations to New York state senate democrats, forged the signature of an employee on an applicant release form in an effort to discredit him by proving he had lied about his education.  As many of you know, a candidate must sign a consent form that allows the employer to conduct a background check. Most academic institutions will not provide education verifications without seeing the executed form.  (Check out our study on the acceptance rates of electronic signatures).

How did this person manage to keep her job?

Senate Aide Admits to Forgery in a Bid to Fire An Employee- Dominick Tao

A top State Senate aide pleaded guilty on Friday to disorderly conduct after being accused of forging the signature of an employee she supervised. Prosecutors had said the aide wanted to obtain the employee’s college transcripts in an effort to discredit him by proving he had lied about his academic credentials.

The aide, Indira F. Noel, 44, was charged by the Albany County district attorney’s office with criminal possession of a forged instrument and with offering a false instrument for filing, both misdemeanors that could have sent her to jail for up to a year.

But in a deal reached with prosecutors, Ms. Noel pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of disorderly conduct and paid a $250 fine.

Ms. Noel, the director of intergovernmental relations for Senate Democrats, was suspended for two weeks without pay in 2007 when the forgery allegations became public. Democratic leaders said on Friday that she would not face any more punishment.

“When the incident first occurred, disciplinary action was immediately taken,” said Austin Shafran, a spokesman for the Senate president, Malcolm A. Smith. “Now the case has been resolved fully, and we are moving forward,”

In recent months, Ms. Noel had received a pay increase despite the charges pending against her. The $11,000 raise brought her annual salary to $118,000. Mr. Shafran would not say whether Democratic officials were aware that Ms. Noel was involved in plea agreement talks at the time she was granted her raise.

Ms. Noel’s lawyer, E. Stewart Jones, said her guilty plea ended months of negotiations with prosecutors. “The end result speaks for itself,” Mr. Jones said. He said that Ms. Noel had paid her own legal fees.

The case started after the employee, Jean Pierre, a policy analyst for the Senate Democrats, was fired two years ago. He filed a criminal complaint against his boss, Ms. Noel, accusing her of forging his signature to get records from the State University at Buffalo to make a case to fire him.

Mr. Pierre could not be reached on Friday, and his lawyer declined to comment. Mr. Pierre also filed a lawsuit last year against the state for unlawful termination that is continuing.

Ms. Noel started working for the Senate in 2005 when David A. Paterson was the minority leader. Since then, she has become friends with Mr. Paterson, who became governor last year, and his wife, and has joined them in their home to celebrate holidays like Thanksgiving and New Year’s Eve.

Marissa Shorenstein, a spokeswoman for Mr. Paterson, said the governor would not comment on Ms. Noel’s plea, but added that he had not intervened on her behalf.

Continue Reading

Nick wrote about a similar topic earlier this week!  In Nick’s posting he references an Ohio “hold harmless” law that allows employers to give thorough references on past employees.

I recently found this posting on HR Recruiting Alert that lends the same message. In it the author sites the case ‘Luttmann V. Tiffany and Co.‘ .

What should companies say when they get reference calls about a former employee who was fired for misconduct? Here’s some help from a recent court ruling.

An employee’s boss caught him tampering with the company payroll system to lower his federal tax withholding. His actions were against company policy, and he was fired.

Eventually, the manager got a call from another employer asking for a reference for the former employee. He told the caller the man had been fired for misconduct.

The prospective employer asked the employee to sign a release so it could get more information about his termination. He refused and didn’t get the job.

I am happy to see more of these cases come out.  Employers should always tell the truth when a fellow employer is conducting a background check.  Even though this was a ‘victimless crime’ imagine if he did something more serious.  One small incident can cripple a small business.  Not sharing this type of information could put another company at risk!  Always consult with your labor attorney first but creating a good reference policy and telling the truth is always a good practice!

Read the full blog here!

Continue Reading

In yesterday’s online edition of the New York Times we found a great article.   When verifying employment are employees being found guilty by association?   Being in the background screening industry for over 15 years I have to say this is a new concept to me.  I have many relationships with many HR professionals and I don’t know of any that subscribe to this practice.  I could not recommend hiring an executive from one of these corrupt companies but I would be surprised if their general labor pool had any idea of what was happening.  I would love to hear your take on this!

Can an Employer’s Past Follow Its Workers?

JOB hunting in this market is hard enough. Pity the candidate coming from Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, the Stanford Group or another company tainted by bad news of one sort or another.

Many recruiters and hiring managers do not hold the employee responsible for the possible sins of the employer. But others may. With unemployment at a 17-year high and the job market flooded with flawless C.V.’s, candidates in question may have to work especially hard to convince managers that they are not damaged goods.

“As a recruiter, you are automatically going to jump to conclusions because of the company they worked for,” said Shawn Desgrosellier, managing partner at Kaye/Bassman International, an executive search firm in Dallas. “Your wish is that H.R. will want to evaluate them based on their competencies, skill sets and qualifications. However, by working for an Enron or one of those types of companies we all know, it’s probably going to hurt you — to what extent, no one knows.”

More

Continue Reading