background check info on previous employer Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
- Posts: 432434
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
background check info on previous employer
i know similar topics have been discussed, but my facts are a little different -- i have a job that i held overseas a loooong time ago that's listed on my resume. i wasn't paid, so there's no paper trail (in the US at least) except for my resume, so i didn't bother to list it on my background check form. am i in big trouble? o.O i figured even if the background check company looks into my history, they wouldn't find anything about this company anyway.
-
- Posts: 432434
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: background check info on previous employer
No. They almost certainly won't find it (some absurdly small chance, less than 1% I'd say). Most companies don't even do international checks even if they know that you have an international background just because of the cost involved ($100+ per check, per country, if the provider even offers them).
The only possible problem is if the firm compares it to your resume and says that it doesn't match, even then, seems easily explainable.
The only possible problem is if the firm compares it to your resume and says that it doesn't match, even then, seems easily explainable.