Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Attachments: (Clear attachments)
Restrictions: 4 per post (4 remaining), maximum total size 192 KB, maximum individual size 64.00 MB
Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached
Click or drag files here to attach them.
(Clear attachments)
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
Type the last letter of the word, "America.":
Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by PrivateSnowball
 - Sep 11, 2006, 10:31 PM
On my last application, I only put my most recent employers within the last 3 years or so (im only 21), and ive had a large number of temporary jobs.  I did this not because I had something to hide, but because it can be very difficult to disclose the information they want about the job especially if it was a very small company.  They wanna know everything like dates employed (hell if I can remember the exact dates or months I was employed there) and they wanna know your supervisors names, which some I couldnt remember their last names and thought just first names would be incomplete, as well as phone numbers and addresses, which can even be difficult to get if you were working in a different county then you live in presently and that area isnt listed in your current phone book.

But the next job I will apply for will likely be a job that I want to have a future with, so I will work harder to get this information.  But I was just saying there is other reasons why people leave jobs out.  
Posted by DippityShurff
 - Aug 10, 2006, 12:47 AM
Quote from: woogie on Aug 09, 2006, 11:50 PMDippitty-

How much emphasis is placed on prior employment?  Lets say, hypathetically speaking of course  ;), that a certain someone worked at a business for 3 days, hated it, and then quit?  I know it doesn't look good, but what is your opinion?


It goes into the mix and is considered along with all other relevant factors.  If however, we find out about an unreported job, that raises a very serious red flag
Posted by DippityShurff
 - Aug 10, 2006, 12:44 AM
I can't speak for all Agencies but the tools I use allow me to track, in most cases, anywhere you have lived for the past 25 yrs.  I then do some asking from there and will usually find out about phantom jobs.  In addition, we always check law enforcement and courthouse docket records in those areas identified.  

You may try that at your own risk.  
Posted by woogie
 - Aug 09, 2006, 11:50 PM
Dippitty-

How much emphasis is placed on prior employment?  Lets say, hypathetically speaking of course  ;), that a certain someone worked at a business for 3 days, hated it, and then quit?  I know it doesn't look good, but what is your opinion?
Posted by DippityShurff
 - Jul 16, 2006, 02:18 PM
Certainly, there is a chance that the BI will not be able to locate your first places of employment where you performed in a less than stellar fashion.

There is a far better chance that the BI will be able to find out about these jobs.

Don't bet your new career on it!

Good luck to you.
Posted by Jeff
 - Jul 09, 2006, 01:36 AM
I have a question about my work history. I am 21 years old and had 5 jobs so far. I do understand the background investigator will contact my employers and the problem is, my first and second job I quit because I couldn't handle the people's attitudes and basically left both slamming the door behind me swearing at everybody. Initially, I thought these two might be a bad idea to put down on my application but then I thought if I'm going to be straight up and not lie, then I might as well be straight up about everything and just see what happens.

Here is my question. I spoke to my friend about this and he said there is no way anybody can find out about my first 2 jobs because my employers did not have my social security number. Even though they paid me with a check, I never had to use my SNN even when I cashed it. So he's saying it's impossible for them to trace me and just omit those two.

I disagreed because I think if they really want to, then they will trace me and find out. So who is right here? Me or him? I'm going to put down those 2 regardless but I still needed to ask if that's even possible for them to trace me when I didn't even use my SNN back then when I worked.

If anybody could clarify this for me I'd appreciate that.