Quote:
Originally Posted by migee
All of these comments are amazing.
Welcome to "1984" - where we are all under absolute control, we can't trust anyone, we cannot leave anything to our own judgement and no one should be credited with an iota of integrity.
There is more going on behind the scenes than you realize. So, these employers may not be acting so irresponsibly.
For instance, when I have the opportunities to hire someone, I do treat them with respect to their integrity. I judge them by the fact if they are from the local area (and often someone else in the organization does know at least something about them), I do check their references (without them knowing it), and if it is a false SS#, that will come out soon enough.
Much depends on what their job responsibility will be. If it does not require high security - You treat them with respect to their integrity.
|
Do you think a person working for Sears that performs carpet cleaning is considered 'high security'? I seem to recall that a family had to sue Sears because their mother contracted them to clean the carpets in her house and they sent an employee who ended up raping and murdering her. Sears had failed to perform a background check - had they done one, they wouldn't have been able to hire him because of his prior convictions and history of violence.
I don't think performing background checks in the process of hiring someone for a job is "1984". I think this is something that all employers should do proactively - when the damage is done, it is impossible to "un-do" certain things.
