Live data from Hacker News

The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

askamanager.org

81–90 of 623 posts

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#81

Practices like this are hilariously common in the industry. Right out of college I accepted a job offer at a small consulting company on the east coast. They promised they would give me free housing at their luxury apartment for the first few months and give me all the training I need to excel in areas of my interest. I flew across the country and found out the whole thing is not as advertised. Their luxury apartment…

I work for a F100 company. We have some consulting companies working for us, who themselves sometimes subcontract contracts, to subcontracting companies who sometimes themselves subcontract contracts.

One consultant (US citizen) checked the boxes of your situation. Young, graduated college recently, a sub-contracting company presents him as senior even though he had little or negligible experience before. They had him in a hotel being billed to the F100, and then later at (crummy) corporate housing when the contract was not renewed.

Another consultant (also a US citizen) was in a similar boat, but never in corporate housing, for another sub-contractor sub-contractor. He was older, but also pretty junior - new to programming - although they presented him as senior. He had to sign all of these things about how much he would owe the sub-contractor under various circumstances. Technically he signed something that he would owe them a lot of money for "training" if the contract was not renewed, but when he was let go they did not pursue it - why sue to try to get blood from a stone? He also had mandatory meetings at all three companies and was on the phone all of the time with the consulting companies after the regular work.

Both contractors did one three month contract and were not renewed.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#82
post #71

I once hired a guy who had no experience, but seemed like a good culture fit for our company and seemed very interested in learning. We interviewed him and made e-mail communication a large part of the interview, because it is a critical part of our business. And his communication was great! After hiring, a recurring problem we had was his e-mail to us and to customers were terrible. Bad grammar, bad spelling, uncorr…

That sounds to me like it would meet the legal definition of fraud. A lawsuit to recuperate the wages and damage to the business might even be worth looking into.

[deleted]

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#83
post #73

We had this happen, but it did not get all the way to being hired thankfully. I got on a call to interview a candidate, and he didn't know anything . Like, hilariously unqualified, his knowledge level on software engineering was effectively zero. Fairly short call once we realized what the score was. Immediately the recruiter calls me back (she was on the call as well) and started apologizing profusely. She said the…

Haha, I really appreciate that kind of recruiter. Did his name happen to be John Keenan?

Ha, no, that's not his name. I'd have to think about it for a bit to recall the name, it's been a few years now. He retired :(

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#84

> HR is going to send up a quick red flag and John is likely to resign claiming a poor fit rather than get caught committing or admitting fraud. Though at this point they all know John is committing fraud, they still decided only to approach this guy claiming a poor fit for his resignation. I don't know why they do that. They have discussed a lot and considered many things. I am sure there are many reasons to do so.…

The legal system is a bad fix for this, though.

The most they could reasonably do here is attempt to sue for fraud for lost time and salary paid. It's unlikely that they can bring a criminal fraud case, so they have to prove damages.

Damages in this case are probably

- Lost time interviewing

- Any salary paid

If they caught this on day 1, they just don't have enough damages to make this worth pursuing (aka - they lose far more money trying to actually bring a case than they would be just firing him immediately and eating the lost time).

Basically - why waste time on a small claims verdict against this guy for trivial amounts of money?

The courts aren't going to lock him up for this, and even if they win, he can still go right to the next company and try again.

This is the kind of thing that other professions attempt to solve with extra-legal associations and certifications (ex: a lawyer might be disbarred for this - an action taken by the bar association that revokes his attorney's license, making it impossible for him to practice in areas that require such a license).

But software really has no such guardrails in current society (both a blessing and a curse).

I don't really know what it is you'd prefer this company have done in this case.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#85

> HR is going to send up a quick red flag and John is likely to resign claiming a poor fit rather than get caught committing or admitting fraud. Though at this point they all know John is committing fraud, they still decided only to approach this guy claiming a poor fit for his resignation. I don't know why they do that. They have discussed a lot and considered many things. I am sure there are many reasons to do so.…

If they terminate for fraud, they might be asked to prove it in some kind of wrongful termination claim, or risk being charged with libel or slander. Though the possibility might be remote, and the employer likely would prevail, the legal team and HR will not want to take any chance of having to spend time on that. They will want to take the lowest risk approach.

It’s true, but if the incentive for the employer is just to terminate, and there is no other consequence, then there is no dis-incentive for the fraudulent employee to keep trying until they find someplace their deception is unnoticed.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#87
post #71

I once hired a guy who had no experience, but seemed like a good culture fit for our company and seemed very interested in learning. We interviewed him and made e-mail communication a large part of the interview, because it is a critical part of our business. And his communication was great! After hiring, a recurring problem we had was his e-mail to us and to customers were terrible. Bad grammar, bad spelling, uncorr…

That sounds to me like it would meet the legal definition of fraud. A lawsuit to recuperate the wages and damage to the business might even be worth looking into.

Writing your own emails or resume isn't required or expected. Some people have assistants that do a lot of work by proxy of you. Its just very awkward that it becomes noticeable in a negative manner in the workplace.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#90
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they terminate for fraud, they might be asked to prove it in some kind of wrongful termination claim, or risk being charged with libel or slander. Though the possibility might be remote, and the employer likely would prevail, the legal team and HR will not want to take any chance of having to spend time on that. They will want to take the lowest risk approach.

Do wrongful termination cases like this ever come up when obvious fraud is involved from the get-go for a remote position? Resume fraud happens all the time with fudged degrees and job titles and positions. Usually when corporate HR finds out termination is immediate.

Crazy people who commit fraud are the same people who continue the fraud and make things weird. Get away from the crazy.
Post reply on HN