Job and General Employment Thread
Job and General Employment Thread
I know someone who quit a studio job while their boss was at lunch via a Post-It note on their monitor.
-
- Posts: 50577
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:27 pm
- Location: A moron or a fascist...but not both.
Job and General Employment Thread
The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
-
- Posts: 11093
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:08 pm
- Location: Location: Location
Job and General Employment Thread
When I did the hiring process at one of my previous employers I sent around 30 people in total and neither the drug test nor background check came back bad.
-
- Posts: 15443
- Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 3:13 pm
- Location: dodint is a millennial
Job and General Employment Thread
Maybe you need to get with mikey on your talent evaluating talents shad.
Job and General Employment Thread
Last day of work here after 15 years. Its the only job I've held as an adult basically.
To celebrate, I took my kids orange hair dye and spiked my half balding head. If you can't have a little fun on your last day...
To celebrate, I took my kids orange hair dye and spiked my half balding head. If you can't have a little fun on your last day...
Job and General Employment Thread
There's no reason why that statement should absolutely disqualify someone from a position. If you like the candidate enough to make an offer, and the person has changed since this "record" was entered, they are worth the 2nd chance.The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
-
- Posts: 30606
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:53 am
- Location: I have four degrees and am a moron. Don’t let that fool you
Job and General Employment Thread
What’s on your record, there Gabe??There's no reason why that statement should absolutely disqualify someone from a position. If you like the candidate enough to make an offer, and the person has changed since this "record" was entered, they are worth the 2nd chance.The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
Job and General Employment Thread
There's also a chance that the 'record' is not for the person being screened. I've twice had hits on background checks that were for a different Tif (as in, for things that happened in states where I've never actually set foot, much less done the thing on the report).
It is also against the law in SF to use arrest or prison records that meet certain qualifications in evaluating a candidate. Like, if a conviction is more than seven years old, it sorta doesn't exist (unless the position in question involves supervising childrens).
It is also against the law in SF to use arrest or prison records that meet certain qualifications in evaluating a candidate. Like, if a conviction is more than seven years old, it sorta doesn't exist (unless the position in question involves supervising childrens).
Job and General Employment Thread
The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
... why would you run the background check post-hiring?
I know there are some anti-discrimination laws depending on what pops up in the search, but why wouldn't you have done your due diligence prior to extending the offer?
Job and General Employment Thread
Haha. nothin that I know of.What’s on your record, there Gabe??There's no reason why that statement should absolutely disqualify someone from a position. If you like the candidate enough to make an offer, and the person has changed since this "record" was entered, they are worth the 2nd chance.The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
-
- Posts: 30606
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:53 am
- Location: I have four degrees and am a moron. Don’t let that fool you
Job and General Employment Thread
Ehhhh, don’t call us. We’ll call you.Haha. nothin that I know of.What’s on your record, there Gabe??There's no reason why that statement should absolutely disqualify someone from a position. If you like the candidate enough to make an offer, and the person has changed since this "record" was entered, they are worth the 2nd chance.The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
-
- Posts: 15443
- Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 3:13 pm
- Location: dodint is a millennial
Job and General Employment Thread
The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
... why would you run the background check post-hiring?
I know there are some anti-discrimination laws depending on what pops up in the search, but why wouldn't you have done your due diligence prior to extending the offer?
-
- Posts: 50577
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:27 pm
- Location: A moron or a fascist...but not both.
Job and General Employment Thread
The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
... why would you run the background check post-hiring?
I know there are some anti-discrimination laws depending on what pops up in the search, but why wouldn't you have done your due diligence prior to extending the offer?
Several reasons.
a) It would be obscenely expensive. We have to run more checks than most employers because of the field we are in. I've never worked for a company that does that FWIW. Not to mention it would drag out the hiring process multiple weeks, causing candidates to fall off or accept jobs elsewhere. Better to get the signed offer and THEN make them wait a few weeks to start, especially considering you can do that during their notice period at their current employer if they are working.
b) While most states allow it, some don't and there has been a big focus on that lately (think Block the Box)
c) There is really no reason to. The worst-case scenario if a background check comes back with a barrier crime is that we rescind their offer before they start. Simple as that...why would we run a background for every single candidate that we want to offer to?
Gabe, to answer your question, it certainly doesn't disqualify someone. And the crime that came up on this one did not disqualify that person.
Job and General Employment Thread
Also, a background check requires sharing of some personal information from the candidate that they may not want to divulge absent a firm offer. (Namely SSN)
Job and General Employment Thread
Yep, I'm also an HR Sucker. There's no federal laws against pre-employment offer checks. It's just expensive to do so. But yes, the "ban the box" campaigns are becoming very effective. In a few years, you won't see the felony question on applications at all.The worst thing to see after going through the hiring process with someone, extending an offer, and initiating onboarding and background checks:
"A RECORD EXISTS FOR THIS PERSON"
Why can't people keep their damn hands clean?
... why would you run the background check post-hiring?
I know there are some anti-discrimination laws depending on what pops up in the search, but why wouldn't you have done your due diligence prior to extending the offer?
Several reasons.
a) It would be obscenely expensive. We have to run more checks than most employers because of the field we are in. I've never worked for a company that does that FWIW. Not to mention it would drag out the hiring process multiple weeks, causing candidates to fall off or accept jobs elsewhere. Better to get the signed offer and THEN make them wait a few weeks to start, especially considering you can do that during their notice period at their current employer if they are working.
b) While most states allow it, some don't and there has been a big focus on that lately (think Block the Box)
c) There is really no reason to. The worst-case scenario if a background check comes back with a barrier crime is that we rescind their offer before they start. Simple as that...why would we run a background for every single candidate that we want to offer to?
Gabe, to answer your question, it certainly doesn't disqualify someone. And the crime that came up on this one did not disqualify that person.
-
- Posts: 14869
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 7:09 pm
- Location: Across the River from Filthydelphia.
Job and General Employment Thread
I was informed today that our summer intern identifies as “gender split or gender fluid” and when referring to this person in pronoun form, we should use “they” or “them.”
I’m going to try, but damn that’s going to be tough to refer to one person as multiple people.
I’m going to try, but damn that’s going to be tough to refer to one person as multiple people.
Job and General Employment Thread
Thoughts and prayers
-
- Posts: 50577
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:27 pm
- Location: A moron or a fascist...but not both.
Job and General Employment Thread
God bless this great nation, amen.I was informed today that our summer intern identifies as “gender split or gender fluid” and when referring to this person in pronoun form, we should use “they” or “them.”
I’m going to try, but damn that’s going to be tough to refer to one person as multiple people.
-
- Posts: 42655
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:58 pm
- Location: More of a before-rehab friend...
- Contact:
Job and General Employment Thread
Isn't "they" and "them" grammatically incorrect...?
-
- Posts: 35313
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Job and General Employment Thread
BigotIsn't "they" and "them" grammatically incorrect...?
-
- Posts: 50577
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:27 pm
- Location: A moron or a fascist...but not both.
Job and General Employment Thread
I can just envision myself in a meeting with someone. "They is....are...going to work on this project for us. I told her...it...them thank you...thank them....thank all of you for the effort."
-
- Posts: 35732
- Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 2:06 pm
- Location: All things must pass. With six you get eggroll. No matter how thin you slice it, it's still baloney.
- Contact:
Job and General Employment Thread
I'm absolutely not engaged with my work at all this week. Just can't kick it into gear. Going to and from KY this weekend probably didn't help things, but still, buhhhhhhhhhhh.
-
- Posts: 42655
- Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:58 pm
- Location: More of a before-rehab friend...
- Contact:
Job and General Employment Thread
Same. I'm not bothering snapping out of vacation mode...
Was out Thursday-Monday for Firefly...came in yesterday and today...leaving tomorrow coming back Tuesday for the draft...no reason to engage...just trying not to curse, that's about it...
Was out Thursday-Monday for Firefly...came in yesterday and today...leaving tomorrow coming back Tuesday for the draft...no reason to engage...just trying not to curse, that's about it...
Job and General Employment Thread
Same, vacation is in less than a month now and I need it more than ever it seems. Having a hard time concentrating for a full day.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: skullman80 and 79 guests