Filling out a Federal background check for a crappy ex-employee (1 Viewer)

[Mad Cow]

So I just got a letter from the US Office of Personnel Mgnt Investigation center for a former employee. Seems he/she is applying for a job requiring a background check or security clearance.

My question is, exactly how fun will this be? This individual was dishonest, unreliable and left my employment owing me money that I just wrote off to not have to deal with them anymore. Should I save it for when I am feeling down, or go ahead and revel in the moment and just go crazy?

Any other experiences here?

 

[Poke_4_Life]

No experience with this situation, but I think this will be fun to watch/read.

 

[gianmarco]

So I just got a letter from the US Office of Personnel Mgnt Investigation center for a former employee. Seems he/she is applying for a job requiring a background check or security clearance.

My question is, exactly how fun will this be? This individual was dishonest, unreliable and left my employment owing me money that I just wrote off to not have to deal with them anymore. Should I save it for when I am feeling down, or go ahead and revel in the moment and just go crazy?

Any other experiences here?

How would you feel if you knew that a previous employer knew about this person and their habits prior to your hiring him/her and didn't disclose it to you and you ended up having to deal with what you dealt with? Don't you think you would have liked to have known? If a person is dishonest, unreliable, and left owing money, they deserve what they get when getting a recommendation. Don't overstate it but I'd take it seriously and be honest.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

How bad was she? Did she make a specticle out of herself?

 

[beer 30]

I know he screwed you over but karma is a #####, I'd just be honest and move on. Even my bad employee's got a decent recommendation letter from me. Reason being I didn't want to be supporting them on unemployment or some other federal support group I (we) subsidize. And I wanted someone else to enjoy their typically bubbly, cherub-like demeanor.

 

[Mad Cow]

How bad was she? Did she make a specticle spectacle out of herself?

So close. And yes.

 

[FUBAR]

I know he screwed you over but karma is a #####, I'd just be honest and move on. Even my bad employee's got a decent recommendation letter from me. Reason being I didn't want to be supporting them on unemployment or some other federal support group I (we) subsidize. And I wanted someone else to enjoy their typically bubbly, cherub-like demeanor.

yeah, it's a federal investigation. Embellishing is not the way to go.

Dishonesty will be key in a security investigation, I don't remember how much "he owed me money!" will matter. Maybe it does, but although I've participated in a handful of these, none were for dishonest dirt bags.

 

[The Tick]

I though you legally had to be careful in these cases. Aren't there laws you need to follow as employer as to what information you can give out? Don't most companies only confirm employment when someone calls to ask about an employee? I don't know the exact stuff since I'm not in HR, but I'd think you need to be careful.

I also wouldn't put anything you couldn't conclusively prove in something like that. Hate to have an employee try and sue you as you are "lying to get revenge and prevent them from getting further employment".

 

[Mad Cow]

I don't even care about the cash, honestly. It had to do with me changing dress policy and for current employees to soften the blow, I have them $200, with the understanding that if they left before 6 months, I would be paid back. They then proceeded to go down a very bad road with me in several ways, to where they did not get 2 more pay periods more before they were gone. They had the gall to ask for a final paycheck amounting to less than the $200. I gave it to them simply because I had found out their spouse was a meth addict and I just wanted my freaking key back so I did not end up with a major theft on my hands.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

How bad was she? Did she make a specticle spectacle out of herself?

So close. And yes.

friggin iPad

 

[Mad Cow]

I will post what is asked. Yes, I understand about laws on what you can and cannot say. I am guessing security clearance and background checks trump that.

 

[Mad Cow]

Here is the scan of the questions.

 

[whoknew]

I though you legally had to be careful in these cases. Aren't there laws you need to follow as employer as to what information you can give out? Don't most companies only confirm employment when someone calls to ask about an employee? I don't know the exact stuff since I'm not in HR, but I'd think you need to be careful.

I also wouldn't put anything you couldn't conclusively prove in something like that. Hate to have an employee try and sue you as you are "lying to get revenge and prevent them from getting further employment".

It can be the basis of a defamation claim pretty easily. I would never fill out a response on a former employee, other than whether they worked there.

 

[whoknew]

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

 

[Jaysus]

So I just got a letter from the US Office of Personnel Mgnt Investigation center for a former employee. Seems he/she is applying for a job requiring a background check or security clearance.

My question is, exactly how fun will this be? This individual was dishonest, unreliable and left my employment owing me money that I just wrote off to not have to deal with them anymore. Should I save it for when I am feeling down, or go ahead and revel in the moment and just go crazy?

Any other experiences here?

Here is the scan of the questions.

Just fill out the form honestly with the above bolded text in section 6

 

[wittyusername]

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

Then you abdicate any opportunity to criticize USG employees who are nonperforming, dishonest, lazy scum. I say this as a 35 year Federal Employee. I am appalled by many of the Fed Gov employees, but is the profile any different than elsewhere? Believe me am not defending Fed Employees - I am saying that you have an obligation to report the unvarnished truth to background/reference checks. If you don't, then don't criticize what you get. Sorta like if you don't vote, then you can't complain about the politicians in office. :waiting for the blowback;

 

[FUBAR]

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

really? If a guy you don't trust is applying for a job requiring a security clearance, you need to fill it out.

 

[Fennis]

How bad was she? Did she make a specticle spectacle out of herself?

So close. And yes.

friggin iPad

Maybe you should get your eyes checked.

 

[larch]

Dishonest? Unreliable?

Sounds like a perfect fit for the current administration.

 

[Fennis]

Dishonest? Unreliable?

Sounds like a perfect fit for the current administration.

Oh snap! I'd hate to be the Obama Administration after that one.

 

[larch]

Dishonest? Unreliable?

Sounds like a perfect fit for the current administration.

Oh snap! I'd hate to be the Obama Administration after that one.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

How bad was she? Did she make a specticle spectacle out of herself?

So close. And yes.

friggin iPad

Maybe you should get your eyes checked.

Why? They look pretty nice just being solid blue.

 

[whoknew]

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

Then you abdicate any opportunity to criticize USG employees who are nonperforming, dishonest, lazy scum. I say this as a 35 year Federal Employee. I am appalled by many of the Fed Gov employees, but is the profile any different than elsewhere? Believe me am not defending Fed Employees - I am saying that you have an obligation to report the unvarnished truth to background/reference checks. If you don't, then don't criticize what you get. Sorta like if you don't vote, then you can't complain about the politicians in office. :waiting for the blowback;

Its not my responsibility to help federal managers do a better hiring job. We pay them to do that job. I don't abdicate my responsibilities at my law firm to you. Why are you abdicating your responsibilities for hiring to me? That makes no sense.

And the non-voting can't criticize thing is silly. There are plenty of reasons not to vote - and only one of them is because I don't care who gets elected.

 

[Fat Nick]

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

really? If a guy you don't trust is applying for a job requiring a security clearance, you need to fill it out.

Trustworthiness is subjective. A lot of those kinds of things are subjective. Even if I feel 100% that a guy is a POS, I'm not putting it in writing. If they want to call me, I'll tell them whatever, but like whoknew said, those kinds of things open you up to lawsuits very easily.

My own financial and legal security is more important than whether some ex employee gets a job or not. I had a former business partner who royally screwed me over. I got a few calls on him after we parted ways. The only question I'd answer via phone was "Is he eligible for re-hire?" To which I'd simply respond, "Ha Ha...#### no." I figured that was sufficient. But I'd never put it in writing.

 

[(HULK)]

If they're applying for a clearance, both the dishonesty of the applicant and his martial ties with a meth head NEED to be mentioned.

This isn't about defamation, this is about the protection of our nation's secrets.

You should call the investigator and tell them everything, and ensure your anomnimity.

 

[Fat Nick]

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

Then you abdicate any opportunity to criticize USG employees who are nonperforming, dishonest, lazy scum. I say this as a 35 year Federal Employee. I am appalled by many of the Fed Gov employees, but is the profile any different than elsewhere? Believe me am not defending Fed Employees - I am saying that you have an obligation to report the unvarnished truth to background/reference checks. If you don't, then don't criticize what you get. Sorta like if you don't vote, then you can't complain about the politicians in office. :waiting for the blowback;

Its not my responsibility to help federal managers do a better hiring job. We pay them to do that job. I don't abdicate my responsibilities at my law firm to you. Why are you abdicating your responsibilities for hiring to me? That makes no sense.

And the non-voting can't criticize thing is silly. There are plenty of reasons not to vote - and only one of them is because I don't care who gets elected.

This. If the guy is that bad and untrustworthy, he'll shoot himself in the foot anyway. Most of these people job hop because they can't be honest even when it's the right thing to do.

 

[Fat Nick]

If they're applying for a clearance, both the dishonesty of the applicant and his martial ties with a meth head NEED to be mentioned.

This isn't about defamation, this is about the protection of our nation's secrets.

You should call the investigator and tell them everything, and ensure your anomnimity.

This is why I'd say a lot more on the phone. You can let people know without putting it in writing. If you put it in writing, and the person doesn't get the job b/c of what you said, any subjectivity between your story and theirs becomes the basis for a lawsuit.

 

[Mad Cow]

I am getting the feeling I should fill in the bubbles of how it is, and then let them know they can call me if they want more info? Don't put it down in writing?

 

[Bucky86]

We were instructed to not fill these out. All we can and will disclose is employment date and salary.

ETA: We won't DISCLOSE salary...we can only confirm whether or not the salary on their resume was correct.

 

[Mad Cow]

I know in a business class I had, we were told the one question to ask and that you could always answer is, "Would you hire this person again?" A yes or no is typically all you need at that point, really.

 

[FUBAR]

I am getting the feeling I should fill in the bubbles of how it is, and then let them know they can call me if they want more info? Don't put it down in writing?

that's prudent.

If you're really not sure, do you have a legal department or HR?

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

Then you abdicate any opportunity to criticize USG employees who are nonperforming, dishonest, lazy scum. I say this as a 35 year Federal Employee. I am appalled by many of the Fed Gov employees, but is the profile any different than elsewhere? Believe me am not defending Fed Employees - I am saying that you have an obligation to report the unvarnished truth to background/reference checks. If you don't, then don't criticize what you get. Sorta like if you don't vote, then you can't complain about the politicians in office. :waiting for the blowback;

Its not my responsibility to help federal managers do a better hiring job. We pay them to do that job. I don't abdicate my responsibilities at my law firm to you. Why are you abdicating your responsibilities for hiring to me? That makes no sense.

And the non-voting can't criticize thing is silly. There are plenty of reasons not to vote - and only one of them is because I don't care who gets elected.

if you're able to get a subpoena for a witness in one of your cases, should that witness simply ignore it and say "it's your job to prove your case"?

 

[Fat Nick]

I know in a business class I had, we were told the one question to ask and that you could always answer is, "Would you hire this person again?" A yes or no is typically all you need at that point, really.

Exactly. You can say "no" in a way that conveys a lot about a person...

 

[Mad Cow]

I am getting the feeling I should fill in the bubbles of how it is, and then let them know they can call me if they want more info? Don't put it down in writing?

that's prudent.

If you're really not sure, do you have a legal department or HR?

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

Then you abdicate any opportunity to criticize USG employees who are nonperforming, dishonest, lazy scum. I say this as a 35 year Federal Employee. I am appalled by many of the Fed Gov employees, but is the profile any different than elsewhere? Believe me am not defending Fed Employees - I am saying that you have an obligation to report the unvarnished truth to background/reference checks. If you don't, then don't criticize what you get. Sorta like if you don't vote, then you can't complain about the politicians in office. :waiting for the blowback;

Its not my responsibility to help federal managers do a better hiring job. We pay them to do that job. I don't abdicate my responsibilities at my law firm to you. Why are you abdicating your responsibilities for hiring to me? That makes no sense.

And the non-voting can't criticize thing is silly. There are plenty of reasons not to vote - and only one of them is because I don't care who gets elected.

if you're able to get a subpoena for a witness in one of your cases, should that witness simply ignore it and say "it's your job to prove your case"?

Yeah, I am pretty much legal, HR, the whole she-bang. Single doctor practice.

 

[beer 30]

If they're applying for a clearance, both the dishonesty of the applicant and his martial ties with a meth head NEED to be mentioned.

This isn't about defamation, this is about the protection of our nation's secrets.

You should call the investigator and tell them everything, and ensure your anomnimity.

LOL, if he is truly married to a meth head I'm pretty sure something like this will not end well for Mr. Dishonest Employee.

Unfortunately for the Cow, he has to deal with it as a former schmuck who got hosed by this guy. In typical FBG's fashion we are over analyzing the issue. Fill out the form honestly and move on.

 

[Bri]

There's stories of jerks suing companies that gave a bad reference and when they couldn't prove the bad behavior, the jerk won.

I would recommend short N sweet here. "I didn't have a good experience working with this person"

Why didn't his previous boss have a good experience? offers plenty of doubt.

Also bad workers bad people can hit rock bottom and then become a pretty decent soul and decent person. Your methhead comment...maybe he did and deserves a second chance?

 

[Bucky86]

There's stories of jerks suing companies that gave a bad reference and when they couldn't prove the bad behavior, the jerk won.

I would recommend short N sweet here. "I didn't have a good experience working with this person"

Why didn't his previous boss have a good experience? offers plenty of doubt.

Also bad workers bad people can hit rock bottom and then become a pretty decent soul and decent person. Your methhead comment...maybe he did and deserves a second chance?

Wouldn't this potentially leave him open for a lawsuit by the jerk? I would personally only confirm she was employed there and that you don't know her well enough say whether she should have government clearance.

 

[Bri]

There's stories of jerks suing companies that gave a bad reference and when they couldn't prove the bad behavior, the jerk won.

I would recommend short N sweet here. "I didn't have a good experience working with this person"

Why didn't his previous boss have a good experience? offers plenty of doubt.

Also bad workers bad people can hit rock bottom and then become a pretty decent soul and decent person. Your methhead comment...maybe he did and deserves a second chance?

Wouldn't this potentially leave him open for a lawsuit by the jerk? I would personally only confirm she was employed there and that you don't know her well enough say whether she should have government clearance.

Ya can't really prove or disprove having a good experience was what I was thinking

 

[whoknew]

I am getting the feeling I should fill in the bubbles of how it is, and then let them know they can call me if they want more info? Don't put it down in writing?

that's prudent.

If you're really not sure, do you have a legal department or HR?

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

Then you abdicate any opportunity to criticize USG employees who are nonperforming, dishonest, lazy scum. I say this as a 35 year Federal Employee. I am appalled by many of the Fed Gov employees, but is the profile any different than elsewhere? Believe me am not defending Fed Employees - I am saying that you have an obligation to report the unvarnished truth to background/reference checks. If you don't, then don't criticize what you get. Sorta like if you don't vote, then you can't complain about the politicians in office. :waiting for the blowback;

Its not my responsibility to help federal managers do a better hiring job. We pay them to do that job. I don't abdicate my responsibilities at my law firm to you. Why are you abdicating your responsibilities for hiring to me? That makes no sense.

And the non-voting can't criticize thing is silly. There are plenty of reasons not to vote - and only one of them is because I don't care who gets elected.

if you're able to get a subpoena for a witness in one of your cases, should that witness simply ignore it and say "it's your job to prove your case"?

Well, I mean, I wouldn't recommend it. The court could hold you in contempt.

The fed gov't can't do the same here.

 

[Bri]

why not just call it "unfavorable employment" and not give details.

 

[NCCommish]

Here is the scan of the questions.

There's no way I'd fill that out.

Then you abdicate any opportunity to criticize USG employees who are nonperforming, dishonest, lazy scum. I say this as a 35 year Federal Employee. I am appalled by many of the Fed Gov employees, but is the profile any different than elsewhere? Believe me am not defending Fed Employees - I am saying that you have an obligation to report the unvarnished truth to background/reference checks. If you don't, then don't criticize what you get. Sorta like if you don't vote, then you can't complain about the politicians in office. :waiting for the blowback;

Its not my responsibility to help federal managers do a better hiring job. We pay them to do that job. I don't abdicate my responsibilities at my law firm to you. Why are you abdicating your responsibilities for hiring to me? That makes no sense.

And the non-voting can't criticize thing is silly. There are plenty of reasons not to vote - and only one of them is because I don't care who gets elected.

Kind of silly on it's face. How are they supposed to know if you don't tell them? Break out the special hiring crystal ball?

 

[NCCommish]

There's stories of jerks suing companies that gave a bad reference and when they couldn't prove the bad behavior, the jerk won.

I would recommend short N sweet here. "I didn't have a good experience working with this person"

Why didn't his previous boss have a good experience? offers plenty of doubt.

Also bad workers bad people can hit rock bottom and then become a pretty decent soul and decent person. Your methhead comment...maybe he did and deserves a second chance?

This is for a security clearance you are only going to get into trouble for lying on it.

 

[Mad Cow]

I do have documentation of the things that happened with dates and such, as well as emails sent regarding their status as an employee, as well. I just filled it out and said if you want more, call me.

 

[GibbyGarcia]

I have filled these out before with the help of our lawyers. For some shady characters. This is what we do and do not answer.

2D

3C

4C

5/6 BLANK

7B

and that's it.

5/6 or the defamation danger ones. The rest are about your business.

 

[NCCommish]

I do have documentation of the things that happened with dates and such, as well as emails sent regarding their status as an employee, as well. I just filled it out and said if you want more, call me.

The only thing you can really get in trouble for is stating they did something criminal and you fired them. You have to have a police report for that if you relay it to a civilian employer. This is not a civilian employer and the job requires a background check which you are obligated by federal law to answer truthfully..

 

[Kanil]

So I just got a letter from the US Office of Personnel Mgnt Investigation center for a former employee. Seems he/she is applying for a job requiring a background check or security clearance.

My question is, exactly how fun will this be? This individual was dishonest, unreliable and left my employment owing me money that I just wrote off to not have to deal with them anymore. Should I save it for when I am feeling down, or go ahead and revel in the moment and just go crazy?

Any other experiences here?

I work for a company that does these investigations. My suggestion to you is tell the truth, the WHOLE TRUTH, and nothing but the truth. If this guy is a scumbag let the investigator know right off the bat. The sooner his clearance gets denied, the more money it saves the company hiring him (due to not having to pay to finish the investigation). Depending on the level of clearance this guy is going for, these can cost anywhere from $4,000 to $15,000 to get.

Edited to add: Most of these jobs are government jobs. These are your tax dollars you'll be saving.

 

[Fennis]

she-bang.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

So I just got a letter from the US Office of Personnel Mgnt Investigation center for a former employee. Seems he/she is applying for a job requiring a background check or security clearance.

My question is, exactly how fun will this be? This individual was dishonest, unreliable and left my employment owing me money that I just wrote off to not have to deal with them anymore. Should I save it for when I am feeling down, or go ahead and revel in the moment and just go crazy?

Any other experiences here?

just tell the truth. i've had to do this twice and both times 'agents' came to do the interview in person.

 

[jon_mx]

I know he screwed you over but karma is a #####, I'd just be honest and move on. Even my bad employee's got a decent recommendation letter from me. Reason being I didn't want to be supporting them on unemployment or some other federal support group I (we) subsidize. And I wanted someone else to enjoy their typically bubbly, cherub-like demeanor.

A bad government employee will end up costing you a heck of a lot more than one on welfare.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I do have documentation of the things that happened with dates and such, as well as emails sent regarding their status as an employee, as well. I just filled it out and said if you want more, call me.

That's fine. It's your duty to not let ####birds get security clearances, so thanks.

 

[Flying V]

How bad was she? Did she make a specticle spectacle out of herself?

So close. And yes.

friggin iPad

Maybe you should get your eyes checked.

Why? They look pretty nice just being solid blue.

Yeah, that would make you look demonocle.