I have a friend who over sees the building of Malls and large scale buildings. He is an electrician by trade and his main responsiblity is making sure that the electrical portion of the construction meets code. He interviewed for 2 plus months with a firm in Georgia and the company loves the guy.

The talent acquistion department of the company came back with a failed background check. He did not get this high paying gig because he has 2 many speeding tickets. WTH does this have 2 do with anything? This is nonsense from my perspective but it is getting 2 the point where companies can hire or NOT hire 4 any damn reason they choose.

What do u think about this?

[Edited 6/8/10 9:14am]

Graycap23 said:

I have a friend who over sees the building of Malls and large scale buildings. He is an electrician by trade and his main responsiblity is making sure that the electrical portion of the construction meets code. He interviewed for 2 plus months with a firm in Georgia and the compnay loves the guy.

The talent acquistion department of the company came back with a failed background check. He did not get this high paying gig because he has 2 many speeding tickets. WTH does this have 2 do with anything? This is nonsense from my perspective but it is getting 2 the point where companies can hire or NOT hire 4 any damn reason they choose.

What do u think about this?

There's a glutton of job seekers. Employers can afford to be extremely choosy.

If they really want or recognize the talent, they can work with him to get over some of those issues. If they have other people they love who are equally qualified and do not have the blemishes, then of course they'll pass.

I was turned down for a job once because my personality profile (after doing one of those tests) did not land me in the right spot on the color wheel.

Also, I was turned down for my skin color a few times... but that's another dicussion.

Well I don't see how that is out of ordinary. I know people who have gotten turned down for jobs because they have bad credit, which had nothing to do with their work ethic...but that's just how it is. That's the whole purpose of a background check in the first place...so if the company were lenient on those type things, then they would be, but since they aren't, then your friend is out of the job. Based on the criteria that they are hiring on, it's the company's choice to set the guidelines based on their perception on who is the best fit for their organization.

Just encourage your friend to keep on trying and he'll find something soon. Persistance definitely pays off. The best of luck to him.

Graycap23 said:

FauxReal said:

Graycap23 said:

I have a friend who over sees the building of Malls and large scale buildings. He is an electrician by trade and his main responsiblity is making sure that the electrical portion of the construction meets code. He interviewed for 2 plus months with a firm in Georgia and the company loves the guy.

The talent acquistion department of the company came back with a failed background check. He did not get this high paying gig because he has 2 many speeding tickets. WTH does this have 2 do with anything? This is nonsense from my perspective but it is getting 2 the point where companies can hire or NOT hire 4 any damn reason they choose.

What do u think about this?

[Edited 6/8/10 9:14am]

I don't know much about this sort of thing so I'll pose my thoughts as questions. Would this job require your friend to drive a company vehicle around to carry all the electrical equipment? Is the company's insurance on their vehicles in any way affected by the operators' driving records? Could it simply be a safety and reputation concern (assuming he would be entrusted with a company vehicle)?

This posistion in no way shape or form involves company cars.

These are personal speeding tickets.

Speeding is illegal. Too many speeding tickets shows someone not only regularly breaks the law, but clearly hasn't learned their lesson and continues bad behavior even when reprimanded for it.

Graycap23 said:

I have a friend who over sees the building of Malls and large scale buildings. He is an electrician by trade and his main responsiblity is making sure that the electrical portion of the construction meets code. He interviewed for 2 plus months with a firm in Georgia and the company loves the guy.

The talent acquistion department of the company came back with a failed background check. He did not get this high paying gig because he has 2 many speeding tickets. WTH does this have 2 do with anything? This is nonsense from my perspective but it is getting 2 the point where companies can hire or NOT hire 4 any damn reason they choose.

What do u think about this?

[Edited 6/8/10 9:14am]

think about it this way, they want someone responsible for ensuring the electrics meet legal safety requirements. they run a check and find he isn't responsible enough drive safely within the speed limit on numerous occasions. if he isn't responsible enough to keep to the legal driving limit even after several warnings, would you want to make him responsible for a far more important job?

that's what the employers consider. they want a responsible person for the job. if they have a number of applicants they will pick who the feel is most qualified and responsible. if there weren't many good applicants he might have got it, but these things can help swing deals your way or the wrong way

i've interviewed and employed over 1000 people for a number of jobs, there are all sorts of things you consider when employing, and every interviewer will consider different things

if there was a problem with his checking and there was an accident and they investigated it and found the guy in charge was an irresponsible speeder with a number of speeding tickets, it would sound like a guy who likes to rush about in cars, so would be likely to rush his work too. he doesn't care about the law as he has broken it a number of times speeding, thus why should he adhere to the laws he is supposed to be checking as part of his job?

unique said:

Graycap23 said:

I have a friend who over sees the building of Malls and large scale buildings. He is an electrician by trade and his main responsiblity is making sure that the electrical portion of the construction meets code. He interviewed for 2 plus months with a firm in Georgia and the company loves the guy.

The talent acquistion department of the company came back with a failed background check. He did not get this high paying gig because he has 2 many speeding tickets. WTH does this have 2 do with anything? This is nonsense from my perspective but it is getting 2 the point where companies can hire or NOT hire 4 any damn reason they choose.

What do u think about this?

[Edited 6/8/10 9:14am]

think about it this way, they want someone responsible for ensuring the electrics meet legal safety requirements. they run a check and find he isn't responsible enough drive safely within the speed limit on numerous occasions. if he isn't responsible enough to keep to the legal driving limit even after several warnings, would you want to make him responsible for a far more important job?

that's what the employers consider. they want a responsible person for the job. if they have a number of applicants they will pick who the feel is most qualified and responsible. if there weren't many good applicants he might have got it, but these things can help swing deals your way or the wrong way

i've interviewed and employed over 1000 people for a number of jobs, there are all sorts of things you consider when employing, and every interviewer will consider different things

if there was a problem with his checking and there was an accident and they investigated it and found the guy in charge was an irresponsible speeder with a number of speeding tickets, it would sound like a guy who likes to rush about in cars, so would be likely to rush his work too. he doesn't care about the law as he has broken it a number of times speeding, thus why should he adhere to the laws he is supposed to be checking as part of his job?

I guess it it time 2 give up the 600 hp.

Oh well. Just seems like a dumb reason 2 turn somebody down.

It is not like u can find his skill set every day.

Graycap23 said:

I have a friend who over sees the building of Malls and large scale buildings. He is an electrician by trade and his main responsiblity is making sure that the electrical portion of the construction meets code. He interviewed for 2 plus months with a firm in Georgia and the company loves the guy.

The talent acquistion department of the company came back with a failed background check. He did not get this high paying gig because he has 2 many speeding tickets. WTH does this have 2 do with anything? This is nonsense from my perspective but it is getting 2 the point where companies can hire or NOT hire 4 any damn reason they choose.

What do u think about this?

[Edited 6/8/10 9:14am]

I know where you coming from but the company may perceive his numerous speeding tickets as a disregard for authority and if he is perceived to have a disregard for traffic laws then the company will say he may have a disregard for our company rules. If you apply for a job at a bank as a teller or loan officer, the bank will do a credit check and if your credit is pure dookie, you certainly won't

get hired. That's just the way it is these days.

Graycap23 said:

unique said:

think about it this way, they want someone responsible for ensuring the electrics meet legal safety requirements. they run a check and find he isn't responsible enough drive safely within the speed limit on numerous occasions. if he isn't responsible enough to keep to the legal driving limit even after several warnings, would you want to make him responsible for a far more important job?

that's what the employers consider. they want a responsible person for the job. if they have a number of applicants they will pick who the feel is most qualified and responsible. if there weren't many good applicants he might have got it, but these things can help swing deals your way or the wrong way

i've interviewed and employed over 1000 people for a number of jobs, there are all sorts of things you consider when employing, and every interviewer will consider different things

if there was a problem with his checking and there was an accident and they investigated it and found the guy in charge was an irresponsible speeder with a number of speeding tickets, it would sound like a guy who likes to rush about in cars, so would be likely to rush his work too. he doesn't care about the law as he has broken it a number of times speeding, thus why should he adhere to the laws he is supposed to be checking as part of his job?

I guess it it time 2 give up the 600 hp.

Oh well. Just seems like a dumb reason 2 turn somebody down.

It is not like u can find his skill set every day.

how do you know that? if he was the best person for the job they would have gave him it. they obviously have someone else that has the skillset for the job that they prefer/trust to do the job better. if there was no other applicant with the skill set that is essential for the job they would have taken him on, unless they thought that his speeding violations were really that serious

personally i think the speeding violations were basically the deal breaker and someone else got the job instead. he might have been the more qualified person, but someone else with sufficient qualifications to do the job got it because they didn't have any undesirable issues in the background check. you have to consider the relevancy of what comes up in the background check. if his job was to make pizzas or something it might not be so relevant, but if the job was a delivery driver, you wouldn't want to employ someone who has a record of breaking the law speeding. as this job relates to ensuring something important meeting legal requirements, you don't really want to employ someone who has show disregard for the law by breaking the same law several times, as well as suggesting they may rush their work by being a speeder. there's a lot more to it than having the basic skill set

if you had 3 applicants all with the same or similar skill set, let's say 8/10, 9/10 and 10/10 ratings for the 3 people, but the guy with 10/10 was fuckwit in the interview, the 9/10 guy seemed like a stoner, but the 8/10 guy seemed a pretty boring guy, but a safe bet, and anthing over 7.5/10 is more than sufficient to meet the job requirements, who would you choose? you don't just pick the person with the best skillset/rating, you have to consider a number of things, essentially choosing the person that best fits the job profile and can fit in with the rest of the team. you don't want someone too under qualified (you can train people a bit, but you might not want to do too much training), and you don't want someone over qualified that might leave as soon as the next best thing comes along that would probably offer a salary more in keeping with the higher skillset

unique said:

Graycap23 said:

I guess it it time 2 give up the 600 hp.

Oh well. Just seems like a dumb reason 2 turn somebody down.

It is not like u can find his skill set every day.

how do you know that?

Did u read the 1st part of my thread? The hiring folks LOVED the guy.

The H.R. department 4 background checks is the issue.

CarrieMpls said:

Speeding is illegal. Too many speeding tickets shows someone not only regularly breaks the law, but clearly hasn't learned their lesson and continues bad behavior even when reprimanded for it.

Agreed

they can decide no to hire you for pretty much any reason or for no reason.

If u guys were in a position 2 hire, would u not hire someone on something TOTALLY unrelated 2 the job? I'm not talking about drastic stuff either............

Graycap23 said:

If u guys were in a position 2 hire, would u not hire someone on something TOTALLY unrelated 2 the job? I'm not talking about drastic stuff either............

I am not sure that his driving record is 'totality unrelated'.

Will he have to drive to the sites?

Can he be trusted to follow the strict code and rules when doing his job?

And how many speeding tickets does he have and how much over the limit were they?

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Graycap23 said:

If u guys were in a position 2 hire, would u not hire someone on something TOTALLY unrelated 2 the job? I'm not talking about drastic stuff either............

I am not sure that his driving record is 'totality unrelated'.

Will he have to drive to the sites?

Can he be trusted to follow the strict code and rules when doing his job?

And how many speeding tickets does he have and how much over the limit were they?

The guy is one of the top people in his industry.

That is why they pay him the big bucks on the big jobs.

Graycap23 said:

Graycap23 said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I am not sure that his driving record is 'totality unrelated'.

Will he have to drive to the sites?

Can he be trusted to follow the strict code and rules when doing his job?

And how many speeding tickets does he have and how much over the limit were they?

The guy is one of the top people in his industry.

That is why they pay him the big bucks on the big jobs.

which makes it all the more a shame that he lacked the self control to follow the rules of the road.

Now I am not saying it was smart to no hire him. But if that was the reason then your friend has no one to blame but himself.

Graycap23 said:

If u guys were in a position 2 hire, would u not hire someone on something TOTALLY unrelated 2 the job? I'm not talking about drastic stuff either............

i read your full post twice

the point is that it's not unrelated to the job. i explained why in detail in two posts. so do you still think it's unrelated to the job, when i've explained exactly why it's related to the job?

let's clarify...

his job is to check legal compliance, but he has a proven record of not complying with the law

his job is to check electrical wiring meets code, yet he has a proven record of speeding, which is essentially doing something faster than you should

would you want to employ someone who is required to check that something complys with law, when they have a proven record that they themselves don't comply with the law

and would you want to employ someone to check something complys with law when they have a proven history of speeding and being caught speeding, when taking time and paying attention is perhaps a vital point of checking that something important complys with the law?

if the wiring does not comply with code, and there is a problem with it, lives could be at risk. do you really want someone who rushes and has disregard for the law to be responsible for checking something that could put lives at risk?

unique said:

Graycap23 said:

If u guys were in a position 2 hire, would u not hire someone on something TOTALLY unrelated 2 the job? I'm not talking about drastic stuff either............

i read your full post twice

the point is that it's not unrelated to the job. i explained why in detail in two posts. so do you still think it's unrelated to the job, when i've explained exactly why it's related to the job?

let's clarify...

his job is to check legal compliance, but he has a proven record of not complying with the law

his job is to check electrical wiring meets code, yet he has a proven record of speeding, which is essentially doing something faster than you should

would you want to employ someone who is required to check that something complys with law, when they have a proven record that they themselves don't comply with the law

and would you want to employ someone to check something complys with law when they have a proven history of speeding and being caught speeding, when taking time and paying attention is perhaps a vital point of checking that something important complys with the law?

if the wiring does not comply with code, and there is a problem with it, lives could be at risk. do you really want someone who rushes and has disregard for the law to be responsible for checking something that could put lives at risk?

Hummm u are going a bit 2 far.

This guy has biuld complexes all over the USA 4 the last 20 plus years. His track record on the JOB speaks 4 itself.

This is the 1st time, this so called issue has come up as an employment problem.

I told him years ago 2 stop driving like a fool. I guess now he can see why.

Graycap23 said:

unique said:

i read your full post twice

the point is that it's not unrelated to the job. i explained why in detail in two posts. so do you still think it's unrelated to the job, when i've explained exactly why it's related to the job?

let's clarify...

his job is to check legal compliance, but he has a proven record of not complying with the law

his job is to check electrical wiring meets code, yet he has a proven record of speeding, which is essentially doing something faster than you should

would you want to employ someone who is required to check that something complys with law, when they have a proven record that they themselves don't comply with the law

and would you want to employ someone to check something complys with law when they have a proven history of speeding and being caught speeding, when taking time and paying attention is perhaps a vital point of checking that something important complys with the law?

if the wiring does not comply with code, and there is a problem with it, lives could be at risk. do you really want someone who rushes and has disregard for the law to be responsible for checking something that could put lives at risk?

Hummm u are going a bit 2 far.

This guy has biuld complexes all over the USA 4 the last 20 plus years. His track record on the JOB speaks 4 itself.

This is the 1st time, this so called issue has come up as an employment problem.

I told him years ago 2 stop driving like a fool. I guess now he can see why.

his track record on the job? most electrical work will be fitted fine, and checks are really just a formality. he could skip over checking half the stuff and there wouldn't be a problem. but it's when he rushes and skips over something that's important, and there is a problem, such as a fire, and someone is hurt, that's when it's a problem

and employers don't want to take that risk. he's proven that he has disregard for the law, and he's proven he rushes. perhaps his previous employers weren't as concerned about this, or more likely they didn't do as thorough checks

but as you say, you've warned him about it yourself. for a friend to warn another friend about something, as well as police warnings, then the problem must be serious. and it is serious, as it's caused him to lose a job. and if word spreads that he didn't get a job because of it, the problem could get worse

the thing is, many people don't understand the implications of their actions. it's usually younger people in thier first few jobs who screw up as they don't like the bottom rung jobs and throw sickies and dick around, and then don't get decent references, or the get in trouble with the law at an early age and it affects job prospects for years to come

unique said:

Graycap23 said:

Hummm u are going a bit 2 far.

This guy has biuld complexes all over the USA 4 the last 20 plus years. His track record on the JOB speaks 4 itself.

This is the 1st time, this so called issue has come up as an employment problem.

I told him years ago 2 stop driving like a fool. I guess now he can see why.

his track record on the job? most electrical work will be fitted fine, and checks are really just a formality. he could skip over checking half the stuff and there wouldn't be a problem. but it's when he rushes and skips over something that's important, and there is a problem, such as a fire, and someone is hurt, that's when it's a problem

and employers don't want to take that risk. he's proven that he has disregard for the law, and he's proven he rushes. perhaps his previous employers weren't as concerned about this, or more likely they didn't do as thorough checks

but as you say, you've warned him about it yourself. for a friend to warn another friend about something, as well as police warnings, then the problem must be serious. and it is serious, as it's caused him to lose a job. and if word spreads that he didn't get a job because of it, the problem could get worse

the thing is, many people don't understand the implications of their actions. it's usually younger people in thier first few jobs who screw up as they don't like the bottom rung jobs and throw sickies and dick around, and then don't get decent references, or the get in trouble with the law at an early age and it affects job prospects for years to come

I hear u. Personally I don't see how his driving is related but I get your point.

Graycap23 said:

I have a friend who over sees the building of Malls and large scale buildings. He is an electrician by trade and his main responsiblity is making sure that the electrical portion of the construction meets code. He interviewed for 2 plus months with a firm in Georgia and the company loves the guy.

The talent acquistion department of the company came back with a failed background check. He did not get this high paying gig because he has 2 many speeding tickets. WTH does this have 2 do with anything? This is nonsense from my perspective but it is getting 2 the point where companies can hire or NOT hire 4 any damn reason they choose.

What do u think about this?

[Edited 6/8/10 9:14am]

People go to jail for having to many speeding tickets. What if they hire him then two weeks later police arrest him and he has to spend some time in jail.

Maybe background checks are the new racial/sexual/political/national origin discrimination method? I've heard you can use a background check AND a credit report to weed out people you probably didn't want to hire in the first place. You probably can't deny somebody an interview . If the basic qualifying critieria are met through an application process then they can be interviewed...but if you come face to face and you don't like something...voila! Enter ye ole background check, credit check, or what have you. Parking tickets seem an extreme discerning factor here but again...it probably wasn't the parking tickets. Not like those can't be resolved before the actual hire.

kpowers said:

Graycap23 said:

I have a friend who over sees the building of Malls and large scale buildings. He is an electrician by trade and his main responsiblity is making sure that the electrical portion of the construction meets code. He interviewed for 2 plus months with a firm in Georgia and the company loves the guy.

The talent acquistion department of the company came back with a failed background check. He did not get this high paying gig because he has 2 many speeding tickets. WTH does this have 2 do with anything? This is nonsense from my perspective but it is getting 2 the point where companies can hire or NOT hire 4 any damn reason they choose.

What do u think about this?

[Edited 6/8/10 9:14am]

People go to jail for having to many speeding tickets. What if they hire him then two weeks later police arrest him and he has to spend some time in jail.

But what if he made arrangements to pay the fines?

DesireeNevermind said:

kpowers said:

People go to jail for having to many speeding tickets. What if they hire him then two weeks later police arrest him and he has to spend some time in jail.

But what if he made arrangements to pay the fines?

Well if it was up to me yeah thats cool. But these companies might think other wise

kpowers said:

FauxReal said:

kpowers said:

People go to jail for having to many speeding tickets. What if they hire him then two weeks later police arrest him and he has to spend some time in jail.

That reminds me...I still need to donate that $160 to Maryland...you know, to help them build highways and stuff.

somebody in HR cousin got that job....trust!

BklynBabe said:

somebody in HR cousin got that job....trust!

and your siggy too!