by Nick Fishman

I know everyone is piling on the bandwagon of Kobe haters with the LA Lakers getting blasted out of the NBA Finals against the Boston Celtics and since I’m a bandwagon kind of guy, I thought it might be fun to see what a background check might look like this year’s MVP.

Pre-warning for fans of Kobe or for those that take every written word seriously: this is a tongue and cheek article. Hopefully, you’ll get a good laugh out of it.

Kobe Bean Bryant started his career in the NBA by forcing a trade from the team that drafted him, the Charlotte Hornets (now the New Orleans Hornets) to the LA Lakers. Many consider this trade to be “ROBBERY”. After all, the Lakers dumped aging veteran Vlade Divacs. No charges were ever filed? Okay, we’ll move on.

Over the course of his career Kobe has orchestrated a number of other “THEFTS”. Case in point, he has amassed 1,321 “STEALS” in his career thus far. That’s a lot of stolen basketballs!

So maybe the thefts, robberies and steals mentioned above wouldn’t be reported on a background check. Now let’s get into some serious issues. Kobe was accused of and charged with rape at a resort in Eagle, Colorado in 2003. Those charges were eventually dropped, but it was clear that some type of inappropriate conduct was committed as the victim later filed civil charges and the matter was settled out of court.

How about Kobe’s conduct in the workplace? What might his employer reveal about him in an employment verification? Since we are having fun, let’s say that you could get owner Jerry Buss, General Manager Mitch Kupchak or team coach Phil Jackson (oh yeah, he was hired back after Kobe said they couldn’t win without him) to conduct an employment verification and reference interview.

Dates of Employment:1996 to Present

Job Title: Superstar Basketball Player

Salary: $100 Gazillion Dollars

Questions:

How is Mr. Bryant as an employee?

Every year it seems, Kobe is making a new demand of his employers. The first was his hand in getting his teammate, Shaquille O’ Neal traded to the Miami Heat. This selfish act combined with others caused the team’s coach Phil Jackson to quite. Jackson later skewered Kobe in his book “The Last Season: A Team in Search of Its Soul“. These selfish acts led to the dismantling of a championship team and made the Lakers a sub-par non-contender for several years after. Every year since that time, Kobe has demanded that he be traded.

How does he get along with his colleagues?

Well, Kobe has been accused of not sharing the ball or the spot light with his teammates. In fact he even once decided not to share his wife with a teammate. Just ask Karl Malone. He often gets mad when they don’t perform to his expectation. Even Curt Schilling recognized it in his recent blog posting after attending one of the Finals’ game in Boston. See excerpt below:

I would assume that’s his [Kobe’s] style and how he plays and what works for him because when I saw the leader board for scoring in the post season his name sat up top at 31+ a game, can’t argue with that. But as a fan I was watching the whole thing, Kobe, his teammates and then the after effects of conversations. He’d yell at someone, make a point, or send a message, turn and walk away, and more than once the person on the other end would roll eyes or give a ‘whatever dude’ look.

Not exactly a poster-child for creating workplace harmony.

Now that we’ve had some fun with this whole exercise, what can we take away from this? (besides that the author of this post had way too much time on his hands today)  One thing for sure is that the standard rules that apply to you and I in our daily lives, do not apply to star athletes. However, don’t be so quick to think that there isn’t a double standard in the workplace. Kobe Bryant is a top performer in his field. Any lesser player would not get away with much of what he has done and continues to do. Any lesser player wouldn’t have other employers begging him/her to work for them.

Would a corporate executive be hired with a rape charge on their record if it was reported on a background check? Maybe. Would an average run of the mill employee? No way. Would a top corporate executive be hired after the not-so-glowing fictitious employment verification shared above? Maybe. Would an average employee? I don’t think so.

As for Mr. Bryant, I don’t think he’ll ever have to worry about an employment background check for the rest of his life! Now, how do I make $100 gazillion. (Certainly not with blog posts like this).

by Jason Morris

As long as you keep reading them, I will keep posting stories about why employers should not use social networking sites when hiring people. Do Employers Using Facebook for Background Checks Face Legal Risks? is a legal blog the following story was written by Carolyn Elefant. Look for more in depth articles to hit employeescreen University in the coming months!

Do Employers Using Facebook for Background Checks Face Legal Risks?

As employers increasingly turn to social networking sites like Facebook to conduct background checks on job applicants and employees, a potential face-off is brewing regarding the legality of this practice, according to reports from Financial Week and The New York Daily News. Long ago, most employers stopped requiring applicants to submit photographs or inquiring about marital status or age to avoid accusations that they rejected a candidate for discriminatory reasons. Now, social networking profiles make this once off-limits information readily available, thus reopening the potential for liability. And demographic data isn’t the only concern for employers. Facebook profiles may also include information about employees’ political activities, a factor that employers are prohibited from considering under most states’ laws.

More

by Jason Morris

We often have this conversation with clients; Why should I search these alias names? Well as you can see from this article Identity Theft continues to be a problem.  This individual has 23 different alias names that he uses to rip off consumers!

Accused identity thief allegedly used at least 23 names to steal $291,139

by Nate Reens | The Grand Rapids Press  Thursday March 13, 2008, 6:01 AM

GRAND RAPIDS — There are many sides to Mamoudou Bathily, none of which federal agents can fully authenticate.

A citizen of Mali, a West African country, Bathily says he has a wife and child in Texas, but that he doesn’t know his offspring’s name. He told authorities he has another child in Minnesota, but he has been living in Grand Rapids with more than one woman.

 More

by Jason Morris

I found this article while reading USA Today and felt it might be important to our readers.  Although this has little to do with employment screening and more to do with substance abuse testing its always interesting to show these types of studies.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Methamphetamine use continued to decline in nearly every part of the country last year as the government sharpened its crackdown on precursor chemicals used to make the illegal drug.

Overall, the number of workplace employees who tested positive for meth dropped 22% last year, according to a study released Wednesday by New Jersey-based Quest Diagnostics Inc., the nation’s largest drug-testing company. Meth use in the Northeast, however, remained steady.

More

by Nick Fishman

Recent post I made on Xtra Cheezhead:

Is the state of our economy starting to freak you out? Let’s start by saying that I will not profess to know whether we are heading towards a recession, how long our current economic cycle will last and what the overall affect will be. However, it is safe to say that we can all see signs of a slow down. I’m more of an optimist in this regard and think that whatever pains we are experiencing now can and will be corrected shortly. If it hasn’t already, a slow down will eventually have an affect on jobs; specifically they won’t be as plentiful. If and when this happens employment screening is even more important than ever. . .

The remainder of this post can be found by clicking on the link below:
More Benefits to Employment Screening in Slowing Economy

by Nick Fishman

Happy New Year! I apologize for the lack of postings in the last couple of weeks, but even The Screening Blogger needs a break. I look forward to sharing relevant information with our readers this year and maybe even making you laugh once or twice. As always, I encourage you to participate in this dialogue. Like what I say? Don’t like it? Feel free to share. I am also always looking for fresh topics, so if you have any you’d like to discuss, bring it on!

by Nick Fishman

Happy Holidays and Happy New Year to all of our loyal readers! Enjoy a healthy and peaceful holiday season. We look forward to hearing from you in the coming year.

by Nick Fishman

I’m taking a brief respite from posts related to background checks (trust me, it will be over after this one), to share an email that was passed on to me last week. Whether the story is true or made up doesn’t really matter. I still like the message.

Two Choices

What would you do? ….you make the choice.
Don’t look for a punch line, there isn’t one. Read it anyway.
My question is: Would you have made the same choice?
At a fundraising dinner for a school that serves children with learning disabilities, the father of one of the students delivered a speech that would never be forgotten by all who attended. After extolling the school and its dedicated staff, he offered a question:“When not interfered with by outside influences, everything nature does, is done with perfection. Yet my son, Shay, cannot learn things as other children do. He cannot understand things as other children do. Where is the natural order of things in my son?” The audience was stilled by the query.The father continued. “I believe that when a child like Shay, who was mentally and physically disabled comes into the world, an opportunity to realize true human nature presents itself, and it comes in the way other people treat that child.”Then he told the following story:Shay and I had walked past a park where some boys Shay knew were playing baseball.Shay asked, “Do you think they’ll let me play?”I knew that most of the boys would not want someone like Shay on their team, but as a father, I also understood that if my son were allowed to play, it would give him a much-needed sense of belonging and some confidence to be accepted by others in spite of his handicaps.I approached one of the boys on the field and asked (not expecting much) if Shay could play. The boy looked around for guidance and said, “Well, we’re losing by six runs and the game is in the eighth inning. I guess he can be on our team and we’ll try to put him in to bat in the ninth inning.”Shay struggled over to the team’s bench and, with a broad smile, put on a team shirt. I watched with a small tear in my eye and warmth in my heart; and, the boys saw my joy at my son being accepted.In the bottom of the eighth inning, Shay’s team scored a few runs but was still behind by three.In the top of the ninth inning, Shay put on a glove and played in the right field. Even though no hits came his way, he was obviously ecstatic just to be in the game and on the field, grinning from ear to ear as I waved to him from the stands.In the bottom of the ninth inning, Shay’s team scored again. Now, with two outs and the bases loaded, the potential winning run was on base and Shay was scheduled to be next at bat.At this juncture, do they let Shay bat and give away their chance to win the game?Surprisingly, Shay was given the bat. Everyone knew that a hit was all but impossible because Shay didn’t even know how to hold the bat properly, much less connect with the ball.However, as Shay stepped up to the plate, the pitcher, recognizing that the other team was putting winning aside for this moment in Shay’s life, moved in a few steps to lob the ball in softly so Shay could at least make contact. The first pitch came and Shay swung clumsily and missed.The pitcher again took a few steps forward to toss the ball softly towards Shay. As the pitch came in, Shay swung at the ball and hit a slow ground ball right back to the pitcher.The game would now be over. The pitcher picked up the soft grounder and could have easily thrown the ball to the first baseman. Shay would have been out and that would have been the end of the game. Instead, the pitcher threw the ball right over the first baseman’s head, out of reach of all team mates. Everyone from the stands and both teams started yelling, ‘Shay, run to first! Run to first!’ Never in his life had Shay ever run that far, but he made it to first base. He scampered down the baseline, wide-eyed and startled.Everyone yelled, “Run to second, run to second!” Catching his breath, Shay awkwardly ran towards second, gleaming and struggling to make it to the base. By the time Shay rounded towards second base, the right fielder had the ball. The smallest guy on their team now had his first chance to be the hero for his team. He could have thrown the ball to the second-baseman for the tag, but he understood the pitcher’s intentions so he, too, intentionally threw the ball high and far over the third-baseman’s head.Shay ran toward third base deliriously as the runners ahead of him circled the bases toward home.All were screaming, “Shay, Shay, Shay, all the Way Shay.”Shay reached third base because the opposing shortstop ran to help him by turning him in the direction of third base, and shouted, “Run to third! Shay, run to third!” As Shay rounded third, the boys from both teams, and the spectators, were on their feet screaming, “Shay, run home! Run home!”Shay ran to home, stepped on the plate, and was cheered as the hero who hit the grand slam and won the game for his team “That day”, said the father softly with tears now rolling down his face, “the boys from both teams helped bring a piece of true love and humanity into this world”.Shay didn’t make it to another summer. He died that winter, having never forgotten being the hero and making me so happy, and coming home and seeing his Mother tearfully embrace her little hero of the day! AND NOW A LITTLE FOOT NOTE TO THIS STORY:We all send thousands of jokes through the e-mail without a second thought, but when it comes to sending messages about life choices, people hesitate.The crude, vulgar, and often obscene pass freely through cyberspace, but public discussion about decency is too often suppressed in our schools and workplaces.If you’re thinking about forwarding t his message, chances are that you’re probably sorting out the people in your address book who aren’t the ‘appropriate’ ones to receive this type of message. Well, the person who sent you this believes that we all can make a difference.We all have thousands of opportunities every single day to help realize the ‘natural order of things.’So many seemingly trivial interactions between two people present us with a choice:Do we pass along a little spark of love and humanity or do we pass up those opportunities and leave the world a little bit colder in the process?A wise man once said every society is judged by how it treats it’s least fortunate amongst them.You now have two choices:

1. Delete 2. Forward

by Jason Morris

HIRES AND LIARS
IT’S TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES FOR JOB SEEKERS WHO FIB ON THEIR RESUME

By BRIAN MOORE

December 3, 2007– A resume is a modest document - a dry, page-long summary of achievements that, while failing to capture what writer Richard Price calls “the wonder of me,” makes a serviceable introduction between job seeker and job giver.

And according to many experts, it’s more often than not a steaming pile of bovine feces filled with fraudulent academic credentials, mysterious omissions and wildly embellished job descriptions.

“When some people start dreaming up resumes, they go into an almost novelistic mode,” says Michael Hershman, president of the risk-management firm the Fairfax Group, who cites studies that say fully 70 percent of resumes include a “major misstatement of fact.”

“I think there’s a lot of fraud, personally,” agrees Dorothea Gaulden, a former executive and author of the business ethics tome “Right Makes Might.” “Fraud is everywhere.”

Paul Viollis, the CEO of Risk Control Strategies, a Manhattan security screener for high-end clients, estimates conservatively that six of 10 resumes include “exaggerated or blatantly fraudulent” information. Other experts put the number between 10 and 20 percent.

Some claim resume fraud is on the rise - while others disagree, all concur that people are getting nabbed more often, due to a steep rise in background checks.

And even if claiming a Harvard degree when you actually flunked out of CUNY gets you in the door, misrepresentations can come back to haunt their perpetrators. That’s been demonstrated by a number of recent incidents, which experts say have caused employers to look at resumes more closely.

Former MIT dean of admissions Marilee Jones resigned in April after an anonymous source tipped off her egghead associates that she’d fabricated academic degrees when applying for her first job at the university in 1979.

Last year, Radio Shack CEO David Edmondson switched off his career at the electronic retail giant after press reports that he’d fudged information about academic degrees he didn’t receive. Ditto football coach George O’Leary , who was hired and then fired by Notre Dame, for citing phony academic credentials.

The most common misrepresentations are academic degrees, previous salaries and haziness about gaps in employment, says Jason Morris, COO of employeescreenIQ, though he adds that some misrepresentations are honest mistakes or miscommunications.

Read More

by Nick Fishman

Hayes International just completed its 19th Annual Retail Theft Survey and I found the results to be very interesting. See in particular some bullet points related to employee theft. Remaining highlights of the study can be viewed by clicking the hyperlink above.

Employee Theft
• In 2006, survey participants apprehended 66,507 dishonest employees, an increase of 6.57 percent over 2005’s apprehensions.
• Dollars recovered from dishonest employee apprehensions totaled over $56.6 million in 2006, a substantial increase of 16.44 percent over 2005’s recovery dollars ($48.6 million).
• One out of every 27.9 employees was apprehended for theft from their employer in 2006. (Based on comparison data of over 1.85 million employees.)
• The average dishonest employee case value in 2006 was $851.44, a 9.26 percent increase over 2005 ($779.27).