How Can We Tackle the Issue of Fake Experience in Our Companies Together?

Dear Friends,

As we all know, there are many fake experienced people entering our companies. This is due to liberal background verification. If we all put the details of those fake experienced people that we come across, we can filter out these individuals to the maximum extent.

Please post your comments. If everybody comes forward, we can put those details on the site.

Best Regards,
Sushma.V

We can create a list called BLACKLIST and post it in forums. People from the forum will keep updating it from all over India. This way, fake resumes can be minimized. :icon10:

Hi people,

I'm an HR professional at a reputed MNC. My brother owns an employment verification firm. We conduct employment verifications for candidates within our organization. Although we have caught many individuals (in their mid-fifties!), I believe it is essential not to share the blacklisted details. This information could potentially be used by companies or individuals to target employees who may be honest but seen as problematic.

Even if a candidate is found to be dishonest, as a principle, we believe it is unethical to disclose their adverse background to any potential employer, regardless of whether they are in the same industry or not. Various situational factors should be considered in the analysis of the verification process. There is always room for improvement in a candidate's conduct, behavior, maturity, interpersonal relationships, financial matters, and career integrity. Past adverse behavior should be viewed as a learning opportunity for the individual, leading to personal growth and avoidance of similar mistakes in the future.

We believe that each verification process stands alone, regardless of the candidate or the company involved. It's important to recognize that mistakes are not exclusive to candidates; companies can also err. While such instances are not as common, awareness has increased following scandals like Satyam. Mistakes in verification could happen due to personal vendettas, intentional falsehoods, or misinformation from previous employers due to unresolved issues with the candidate. Therefore, caution must be exercised in sharing blacklists as they may contain discrepancies. It's always better to be safe than sorry – sharing information and later realizing the innocence of a candidate can have severe consequences.

However, individuals engaged in fraudulent activities should be held accountable, which we address through dismissal – a significant punishment in itself. Preventing them from securing employment elsewhere may be excessive. People can transform and mature over time or age, providing opportunities for redemption in the future. Our goal is to prevent fraudulent CVs without permanently damaging individuals' careers. Increased vigilance can help prevent fraud, as seen in the common pool system using SSNs in the US.

In France, the government provides care for the elderly, contrasting with the stark reality of starvation-related deaths in India despite the presence of immense wealth among a few individuals. These contrasting scenarios highlight the need for societal responsibility and compassion. Dismissing individuals involved in misconduct serves as a strong deterrent, but it is crucial not to jeopardize innocent individuals' lives for the sake of convenience. Let's approach this issue sensibly and progress positively.

Please let us interpret this message correctly and move forward.

Yes, Ramya, I agree with you. In terms of moral responsibilities, it's not a nice idea to share the list in these forums. We, as HR people, have no right to affect anyone's individuality. Let the verification bureaus and companies do their jobs.

Agreed with RAMYA, even I am of the viewpoint but some extremist members of CITEHR are hell-bent on sharing the details of candidates and these people are going to go to hell...

Dear Sushma,

The cost of someone cheating you has made you think of posting their details on the web and making it accessible to everyone's view. The cost of hurting their image would be much difficult to handle for the employer :-)

I believe you need to focus on taking stringent measures to verify backgrounds rather than thinking of posting their details. By letting the candidate know that they have faked their experience, they will make sure that they don't do it again. But you can let them know in person.

Thanks.

Hello Everyone,

When I read this posting, I recollected one resume that I chanced to see in one of the portals while handling a requirement. The guy was 50+ years of age, and his earlier experience showed that he worked in a company where I worked too, with the periods partially overlapping, and I couldn't help but laugh for 10 minutes when I noticed that he was supposed to have worked UNDER me in the department that he showed his experience in!

I fully agree with Ramya on the need to put our perspectives in the right place. But there are a couple of things that she doesn't seem to have considered.

FIRST.... I agree with her statement: "There are situational factors that go into the analysis of the antecedent verification." But remember that unless and until the person KNOWS that his/her immoral/unethical act WILL BE noticed and the consequence will have an adverse effect on his/her career, no one—REPEAT—no one will have the incentive for course-correction leading to improvement. That's human psychology—whether we admit it or not—every crook (to whatever grade) THINKS he/she can get away with it until the end of the world.

Only sometimes (or only for some people) would this realization emanate from within (such people usually have a lot of self-introspection leading to change, whether the world notices or not), but for the large majority of the people, the incentive/necessity to change comes from OUTSIDE themselves—through law, friends' feedback, public opinion, etc. I can give JUST one example here...though I am sure you can get umpteen—small and big ones—if you look around you. Had Ramalinga Raju been caught or alerted way back in 2001, do you think we would be seeing the lakhs of people affected NOW...including employees, investors, the ordinary people, and the slur on the IT industry in general? Whatever corrective action is taken, it would be only post-mortem rather than proactive.

YES...I am convinced that the Satyam saga is a case study in a lot of ways...some of which haven't even been realized as of now—in a way, today's corruption in quite a few IT companies' HR departments can be traced back to the beginning of Satyam's rise between 1999-2001. All those who have been following the unfolding story of Satyam on a regular basis would know what I am referring to.

But at the same time, Ramya does have a point when she says "There is always a scope for betterment in the conduct, behavior, maturity, and interpersonal relationship."

So where do we draw the line? That's a definite challenge for HR. If we just leave such cases to the individual companies and/or individuals—some of which may not have the resources to pay for the background checks—we run the risk of such guys slipping into the mainstream and causing havoc when they are caught. And if we make some sort of a carte blanche conclusion, the natural process of betterment of quite a few individuals would be definitely impaired...which goes against the primary premise of the effort itself.

I am not sure...but this is one topic that needs a solution and at the same time needs to address long-term aspects too.

Aur Ravi...... zindagi chahiye udne ke liye bhi Doobna ya udna bas apne apne khayalo pe nirbhar karta hai. :p

Regards, TS

It is all a part of your belief. I have seen many people who prepare fake resumes and are now relishing in big companies. And these people have very good contacts.

Now coming straight to the point, instead of thinking that you got cheated by some person who put a fake profile and was trying to get a job, just be happy that you found out his fakeness and prevented one person from joining the organization. And before pointing fingers at others, see how clean and clear you yourself are.

This is just a normal thing, and just by venting out your frustration on some forum will not help you. Today, I will fake my resume, and you will put my name there; tomorrow, someone else may do the same. People passing out every year are many, and many will falsify information to secure a job. So, you will just go on and prepare a list of such people. Then it might become that if the name is not on the list, the person is good. This you, HR, will then declare to make your job simple. So, just after you recruit a person, you will search their name on the blacklist. If it is not there, you will give them a clean chit. Or apart from searching the blacklist, will you also conduct your own reference check? If you don't trust the blacklist and choose to do your checks for every new employee, then what is the use of the blacklist?

Let them fake; sometimes, I encourage people to fake. I advise them to do this and that so that they can secure a job. Now, what are you planning? To put my name on the blacklist because I am encouraging people to fake resumes? Oh no. 😢😢

Hello Ravi,

I am not sure what you mean by that posting of yours. Are you justifying that faking is OK? It does seem so, going by your line - "even sometimes I encourage people to fake, I tell them to do this and that so that they get a job." This is what I understand from it: faking is OK if it ensures getting a job. So, by extension, doing anything wrong - including murder - is OK if the returns - read the 'price tag' - are appropriate. I can’t see any other logical conclusions than this [someone please correct me if I am wrong... I will stand corrected]. In which case, frankly, I have nothing to add except to say that I AM SURPRISED. I don’t want to put any labels on this human nature, though I can. But anyone who is an expert in psychology would be in a better position to comment on this trait.

Please don’t worry about me getting cheated. If you read my posting again carefully, my intent was just to mention something that happened, as an example - nothing more, nothing less. THAT person tried to cheat, which is different from me getting cheated. I hope you can see it. And it’s HIS problem, not mine. And please don’t worry about me getting happy or sad. Unfortunately - for whom is up to you to conclude - I don’t allow such things to DECIDE my happiness or sadness, Ravi.

To answer your line - "I have seen many people who prepare fake resumes and are now relishing in big companies. And these people have a very good contact" - it only suggests YOUR frustration rather than mine.

When I said, "I FULLY agree with Ramya," I would also have appreciated if those who read my posting also read what followed those words, which is: on the need to put our perspectives in the right place. I don’t think it’s correct to read half a line and begin to draw conclusions. What I meant was Ramya's logic and the reasons were correct. How to find a way to handle the situation is what I wasn’t sure about... BLACKLISTING may be just one of the ways. But like many - including me - suggested, the cons it has would be more than the pros. But yet, a way does indeed have to be found before it's too late for the HR profession... again, up to each individual to take his or her call. Thus far, Asha's suggestions seem to be the best. Let others too air their views and let's then see where we go from here.

I do hope I have made my line of thought clear... which is different from the conclusions, if at all.

Regards, TS

Hello Everyone,

Is this thread alive and in circulation? I have not seen any postings after mine from 4 days ago. Did I say anything wrong?

Regards,
TS

Yes, no one is interested because those who fake won't justify their act here, and those who are against it won't have time to gather candidate details. Even if they gather details, who is going to believe them? So, the thread is closed for good, I think.

I guess you are right, Ravi, but I think you meant "can't justify their act here" rather than "won't justify their act here" that you used. They can't justify it ANYWHERE, not just here.

I thought this forum did have people who do not hesitate to face reality straight in the face, rather than close their eyes and imagine that the problem doesn't exist or wish that it would vanish on its own.

Rgds,
TS

Blacklisting is a toxic practice. Why blacklist? Do a background verification and then decide. By the way, has anyone considered why people falsify information on resumes? The reason is simple: they want to secure jobs; otherwise, they may not be able to. Even if they do secure a job, employers sometimes take advantage of the candidate, which compels people to resort to such tactics. If the interviewer is knowledgeable and a bit intelligent, it is easier to assess a candidate's potential. There is no need to follow any other unethical policies.

Imagine a scenario where an employee's name is listed in the block list even though they are genuine. For instance, I might include people whom I don't like in the list. Therefore, let's set aside the employee's background and focus on their current performance. An industrious fake candidate could potentially bring more value to the company than a hundred useless genuine candidates.

Thank you.

The topic has been discussed at length and appreciated. However, when HR professionals are desperate to solve the problem of faking, why don't you hit at the root cause? A doctor doesn't treat an ailment by symptoms but goes to the root and solves it in phases as necessary.

I bow and apologize if any of these comments below hurt anyone. With all due respect to HRs and seniors, please pardon me and correct me if I am wrong.

While I don't support faking resumes or any such act, I would still dare say that corporates are the reason candidates fake their resumes. I strongly believe in this.

Sample Criteria for Selecting Candidates

Here's a sample list of criteria for selecting candidates:

- No freshers (minimum 3 years experience)
- No career or education gaps
- Family business is taboo or looked down upon, or considered fake
- Requires documentation for everything, even if the company pays in cash due to being a small entity

This list goes on. However, I have come up with major requirements.

How will any candidate gain experience without being provided a job initially? Despite having good skills and knowledge, candidates are rejected for lack of experience. All corporates, for God's sake, want experienced candidates. Time flies, and one year after PG or graduation passes by just scouting for opportunities. If a candidate from outside the software industry wants to enter, they have to replace real experience with fake. Otherwise, they wouldn't get a job. This industry doesn't accept diversity at all. No matter what, they need someone with experience. Businesses want someone to start quickly and finish projects on time. But what about candidates? Not just thousands, but lakhs of potential candidates who are skilled (certified) and willing to put in good efforts are discarded. What option will the candidate have other than faking?

No gaps? Why? Don't many HRs have gaps? Remember, you are dealing with humans, not machines. The branch reads "Human Resource Management." People have problems (personal, professional, or any). There might be inevitable issues that need attention, resulting in a gap. Let candidates justify their gaps. You might miss a potential candidate if gaps bother you.

People from entrepreneurial backgrounds may, due to unforeseen downturns, want to enter the corporate world. These candidates are considered fakers. Many corporate giants are family businesses. Just as an example, would you consider Roberto Mondavi Jr. (a member of the founding family and a fourth-generation winemaker from Roberto Mondavi Wine Company) a faker if he joins Vina Concha Y Toro, another wine company? Just because these companies are famous, people respect them. Why wouldn't small firms with real-time experience deserve that respect?

Small firms may not have payslips; they may pay in cash. Why is it a mandate? Why won't companies inquire with the previous employer and confirm the details? If previous employers don't disclose salary details, what can the candidate do? Please advise.

Thanks to all those who read this post with patience. Again, I apologize if I am being harsh.

Cheers,

Rishi

Here's a sample list of criteria for the selection of candidates:

- No freshers (minimum 3 years of experience).
- No career or education gaps.
- Family business is taboo or looked down upon - or considered fake.
- Needs documentation for everything - even if the company pays in cash due to being a small entity.

This list goes on. However, I have come up with major requirements.

How will any candidate gain experience without being provided a job initially? Despite having good skills and knowledge, candidates are rejected for lack of experience.

After having completed my MBA in HR from an institute ranked in the top 5 in Mumbai and top 30 in India, I myself faced the problem of being rejected solely for being a fresher. I questioned my interviewers on how they expected me to gain experience if they kept rejecting me. It was demotivating to work in a consultancy alongside graduates at the same level, receiving the same pay, and being treated equally.

Please note that I do not wish to boast about my degree, but it does hurt when faced with such situations. It was demotivating also because starting with a low salary, any change has become an issue.

Why No Gaps?

Won't many HR professionals have gaps? Remember, you are dealing with humans, not machines. The very essence of Human Resource Management is that people have problems - personal, professional, or otherwise. There might be unavoidable issues that need attention, resulting in a gap. Consider the problems candidates face and let them justify their gaps. You might miss out on a potential candidate if you are overly concerned about gaps.

I have a gap after 11th grade and I was always asked why. There is a misconception that gaps indicate multiple attempts. A gap is a gap, which can be verified from the mark sheet or passing certificate that specifies the number of attempts. There may be personal reasons for a gap that a person may not be comfortable discussing, but interviewers often assume stories are being fabricated.

Documentation and Payslips

Small firms may not have payslips as they may pay in cash. Why is it mandatory to have payslips? Companies could inquire with previous employers and confirm details. If previous employers do not disclose salary details, what can the candidate do? Please provide guidance.

Suggestions Regarding Background Verification (BGV)

1. While many companies outsource BGV tasks, I believe internal HR should handle BGV until satisfied with the output. In my experience as a recruiter, I closed a position, and the client requested references for a reference check.

2. When asking for references for BGV, it's essential to speak to specific individuals:

- Former boss or supervisor
- Colleague or team member from the same department
- Colleague from another department

This approach offers a comprehensive perspective. Note their viewpoints, and if any contradict, ask for a reference from another person to provide an additional viewpoint on the candidate.

Regards.

As we all know, there are many fake experienced people entering our companies. This is due to liberal background verification. If we all put the details of those fake experienced people that we come across, we can filter out these fake experienced people to the maximum extent. Please post your comments. If everybody comes forward, we can put those details on the site.

Regards,
Sushma.V

Truths and Lies about Hiring the Unemployed

I hope this can also be of some help when people think being unemployed for a long duration is perhaps because the candidate is unemployable. Can we discuss this issue as well? This is also one of the reasons a candidate might want to fake some information in their CV by extending the tenure of their service or including services that couldn't be easily identified. Can we have some views?

Nice! A candidate is not supposed to fake details of a company ever. It's like digging his or her own grave. However, on the other hand, I would like to know about the situation of candidates who come from a family business background and are willing to move into corporates. For all you know, he might be a graduate/post-graduate who has been working for his father's shop or a small-scale business of his relative but due to some personal reasons wants to move to corporates. Even if he is willing to be straightforward about his experience, are companies ready to accept him?

There are many such graduates who go unnoticed in the industry - there are thousands - like water under a mat. Some intellectuals advise that such candidates should be straightforward and not hide anything. But companies reject such candidates. A genuine candidate who is not ready to put on a front and is frank about his experience is facing rejections. Can any HR here guide such candidates on how to proceed?

The Prevalence of Fake References

Giving fake references happens all over the world. For example, you can see the report at FSB Warns Firms on Fraudulent Employment References for brief details about a survey conducted in the UK.

If the employee has committed fraud (misappropriation of funds or embezzlement, etc.), then he/she deserves punishment after a thorough inquiry only if the employee's culpability is established. The employee should also be given a chance to defend themselves to ensure a fair inquiry.

However, upon reviewing the posts by Smruti21 and Simplyvandana1123, it appears that they are attempting to tarnish and discredit the candidate. Additionally, it seems that both accounts belong to the same individual, as the HR credentials for both accounts are undisclosed. The use of the salutation 'Cite.Communities' is clearly misleading. Perhaps the Admin can shed light on this misuse.

It is important to note that publicly naming an employee on certain websites and preventing them from securing future employment can lead to potential legal action for libel or defamation. Please refrain from spreading misinformation that could harm someone's career.

The candidate (Smita) is encouraged to file a First Information Report (FIR) and pursue the case legally if she suspects foul play.

Regards,
Amit Das

I agree that resume fraud is on the rise, and many candidates lie about their work experience to secure better job opportunities. However, for every problem, there is a solution, and identifying forged resumes and fake work experience can be addressed through past employment verification. This process can be performed before hiring a candidate and helps identify those who lie about their work experience.

Performing past employment verification is easy and quick in today's digital era, with various online verification tools available. One such tool is Verified Resources. It requests factual information related to a candidate's past employment and provides quick and accurate results. In addition to verifying a candidate's work experience, it validates their last withdrawn salary, the status of exit formalities, and whether the notice period was served. Being an online tool expedites the process, enabling you to make the right hiring decisions relatively faster.

Here is the link for Verified Resources: www.verifiedresources.com

Thanks,

Meesha