Skip to main content
The Workplace

Return to Answer

Following clarification
Source Link
Keith
Keith
  • 549
  • 4
  • 10

I don't think the crime fits the punishment here.

The 'crime' is lying to try and get a job - nobody should do it, but in the current climate of high unemployment you can see why someone desperate might try to.

The punishment (a blacklist) has the potential to permanently affect that person's hope of future employment.

Should a person who once lied:

  • Still be punished for it 10 years later? Exactly how long should they be avoided for?
  • Be stopped from getting roles they do have the skills to do?
  • Be unable to go and acquire the skills and experience they claimed to have and apply again?

In addition the morality and ethics of lying to get a job are extremely subjective - what if someone lies their way into a job but then turns out to be really good at it? Wouldn't that just be exposing the prejudices inherent in the recruitment criteria? What about jobs that require, shall we say, a flexible approach to the truth?

Basically, with a blacklist you're setting yourself up as judge and jury on the applicant's career. Instead each recruiter needs to make their own decision.

In the EU and the UK any kind of recruitment blacklist is explicitly illegal.

The one exception is that certain jobs (for instance in medicine or law) have legal requirements that it is a crime to lie about. Those you can go ahead and report to the police/professional bodies.

I don't think the crime fits the punishment here.

The 'crime' is lying to try and get a job - nobody should do it, but in the current climate of high unemployment you can see why someone desperate might try to.

The punishment (a blacklist) has the potential to permanently affect that person's hope of future employment.

Should a person who once lied:

  • Still be punished for it 10 years later? Exactly how long should they be avoided for?
  • Be stopped from getting roles they do have the skills to do?
  • Be unable to go and acquire the skills and experience they claimed to have and apply again?

In addition the morality and ethics of lying to get a job are extremely subjective - what if someone lies their way into a job but then turns out to be really good at it? Wouldn't that just be exposing the prejudices inherent in the recruitment criteria? What about jobs that require, shall we say, a flexible approach to the truth?

Basically, with a blacklist you're setting yourself up as judge and jury on the applicant's career. Instead each recruiter needs to make their own decision.

In the EU and the UK any kind of recruitment blacklist is explicitly illegal.

The one exception is that certain jobs (for instance in medicine or law) have legal requirements that it is a crime to lie about. Those you can go ahead and report.

I don't think the crime fits the punishment here.

The 'crime' is lying to try and get a job - nobody should do it, but in the current climate of high unemployment you can see why someone desperate might try to.

The punishment (a blacklist) has the potential to permanently affect that person's hope of future employment.

Should a person who once lied:

  • Still be punished for it 10 years later? Exactly how long should they be avoided for?
  • Be stopped from getting roles they do have the skills to do?
  • Be unable to go and acquire the skills and experience they claimed to have and apply again?

In addition the morality and ethics of lying to get a job are extremely subjective - what if someone lies their way into a job but then turns out to be really good at it? Wouldn't that just be exposing the prejudices inherent in the recruitment criteria? What about jobs that require, shall we say, a flexible approach to the truth?

Basically, with a blacklist you're setting yourself up as judge and jury on the applicant's career. Instead each recruiter needs to make their own decision.

In the EU and the UK any kind of recruitment blacklist is explicitly illegal.

The one exception is that certain jobs (for instance in medicine or law) have legal requirements that it is a crime to lie about. Those you can go ahead and report to the police/professional bodies.

Source Link
Keith
Keith
  • 549
  • 4
  • 10

I don't think the crime fits the punishment here.

The 'crime' is lying to try and get a job - nobody should do it, but in the current climate of high unemployment you can see why someone desperate might try to.

The punishment (a blacklist) has the potential to permanently affect that person's hope of future employment.

Should a person who once lied:

  • Still be punished for it 10 years later? Exactly how long should they be avoided for?
  • Be stopped from getting roles they do have the skills to do?
  • Be unable to go and acquire the skills and experience they claimed to have and apply again?

In addition the morality and ethics of lying to get a job are extremely subjective - what if someone lies their way into a job but then turns out to be really good at it? Wouldn't that just be exposing the prejudices inherent in the recruitment criteria? What about jobs that require, shall we say, a flexible approach to the truth?

Basically, with a blacklist you're setting yourself up as judge and jury on the applicant's career. Instead each recruiter needs to make their own decision.

In the EU and the UK any kind of recruitment blacklist is explicitly illegal.

The one exception is that certain jobs (for instance in medicine or law) have legal requirements that it is a crime to lie about. Those you can go ahead and report.