Wrongful Hiring in Big Companies: How Can We Ensure Fair Opportunities for Deserving Candidates?

Recently, it was found that one of the groups of companies hired an employee with a criminal record. Upon informing the HR chief and subordinates, no action has been taken even after a week.

What can be done about the wrongful hiring and the most deserving candidates?

What steps can be taken to address the issue of wrongful hiring and ensure that the most deserving candidates, who were looking for the opportunity, are considered?

Dear member,

In the recent past, you have identified a faulty hiring process where a job candidate with a criminal background has been hired. Nevertheless, your post raises a few more questions:

Are you an employee of that company?

If not, then what is your interest in passing the information to the company officials about hiring a person with a criminal background? Are you in any way connected with the hired candidate?

Who discovered the criminal background?

Who discovered that the hired job candidate has a criminal background? How was it discovered? Is there material evidence?

Accusation or conviction?

This "candidate with a criminal background," has he just been accused and a criminal case is ongoing, or has he been convicted by a court? Please note that Indian jurisprudence works on the principle, "nobody is guilty till it is proved."

Background check process

The candidate has been hired by one of the companies of the group. However, do they conduct a background check, and if yes, do you know whether an antecedent check is a part of the background verification (BGV) process?

Possibly the hired candidate could be smart, and he might have provided information to the HR department that his detractors could show that his hands are deep in the jam of a crime. However, because of his proactiveness, they might have ignored this piece of information from your side.

Please provide us with the complete information. It would not be fair on the part of the members of this group to give opinions unless we know the facts. The selected job candidate might have a criminal background; however, this group cannot become a channel to satisfy one's malevolence.

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar

Thank you for the reply. The complainant presented evidence that the criminal case is pending in court. It’s a well-known group that must have conducted his background verification. However, it was only after the complainant informed them of the background that they became aware. The intention behind informing the officials was to safeguard their process and to bring to notice the heinous act of the candidate. We all know no one is guilty unless proven. Isn’t it unfair to other eligible candidates?

What can be done to address unethical hiring practices?

What actions can be taken to address unethical hiring practices, such as hiring individuals with criminal records without proper disclosure? It is important to ensure that the most deserving candidates are considered for opportunities.

Dear member,

This reply is for post No. 3. The replies to the few sentences are below:

The complainant presented the evidence that the criminal case is pending in court.

Reply: If the case is pending in the court of law, then we need to wait until the court gives its ruling. The court may find him guilty and award him the punishment, or the court may acquit him. Let the company take the decision depending on the court verdict.

The intention behind informing the officials was to safeguard their process and to bring into notice the heinous act of the candidate.

Reply: More than playing the role of a Samaritan, it appears that the information has been passed to the hiring company out of jealousy.

We all know no one is guilty unless proved. Isn’t it wrong for other eligible candidates?

Reply: Nothing wrong per se on the part of the company to accept the candidature of a job candidate against whom the criminal case is going on. We do not know; the candidate might have been falsely implicated as well. In matrimonial disputes, it is a widely accepted fact that Section 498 is misused most. Thousands of husbands, spread across India, are booked under this section. Does it mean that all are guilty? Certainly not!

Please look around, and you will find a large number of MPs and MLAs in India have criminal cases of a very serious nature filed against them. Not only are they public representatives, but these very tainted persons are making laws for us!

Thanks,

Dinesh Divekar

The complainant is one of the acquaintances. The charges of sexual harassment do not allow for many details about her, and I do not wish to disclose the name of the company that the accused individual works for. All information is crystal clear with nothing hidden. As an HR person, I was surprised that despite facing such charges, the accused was placed in a prominent position, even though the company follows background verification procedures.

Thanks

Dear member,

Replies to Post No 8 & 9

Post No 8: The complainant is one of the acquaintances. The charges being of sexual harassment cannot provide much detail about her, and I do not wish to state the name of the company for whom the accused has been hired. All information is crystal clear, nothing hidden. As an HR person, I was surprised that despite such charges, the accused was placed in a big giant, though the company follows BGV. Thanks.

Reply: "Complainant is one of the acquaintances," but of whom? Is he/she an acquaintance of the victim or the accused? For the first time, you have revealed that the accused is facing sexual harassment charges. Neither do we wish to know the details of the survivor of the harassment nor the company. However, we need the facts of the case to know what exactly happened.

Merely being accused in a criminal case cannot be the criteria for disqualification. The reply on this point has been given already.

If you are an HR professional, then we, the members of this forum in general, and the seniors in particular, are also surprised at your inability to provide the facts of the case in the very first instance. Alas, you could have done some study on how to write a post in a public forum!

Post No 9: It’s not related to a matrimonial issue. Please understand the gravity of the case under sexual assault. Kindly be sensitive before judging someone. There’s no jealousy of any form, but the hiring process, which is faulty, is the main point that we have diverted from.

Reply: To emphasize the point of how the law is being misused, I had given an example of matrimonial disputes. Telling us that it is not a matrimonial issue is the height of getting oneself misunderstood.

The posts on a public forum are bound to come under public scrutiny. We, the members of this forum, are third parties and cannot take the side of either party. We see all the cases dispassionately.

Final Comments: Keeping the issue aside, you deserve feedback. It is high time you invest your time in understanding the concept of "communication." Your style, ability to put forth the points in sequence, and descriptiveness all merit a big improvement. Your inability to understand the examples given as metaphors is also shocking. If the weakness is not addressed, it could withhold the growth of your career.

All the best!

Dinesh Divekar

The notion of redemption for criminals

The idea that "once a criminal, always a criminal" is outdated. There is enough evidence to suggest that many individuals have redeemed themselves and turned out to be virtuous. The options are to condemn and consign a criminal to the dark ghettos, blocking all efforts to lead a normal life, or to give them a second opportunity. Perhaps the saying "once bitten, twice shy" gets proven here.

Accusation of sexual harassment

In this case, the individual is accused of sexual harassment. How far this gets testified during the trial remains to be seen. In such matters, there are no black-and-white personalities; the circumstances are the major villains rather than a defective personality type.

So, the final word: don't condemn someone based on one part of the story. You have already done your bit, and it has been responded to, it appears from your post. However, to conclude that the recruitment process or the background verification (BGV) of the big company is defective does not seem warranted.