Readit News logoReadit News
Posted by u/NewUser76312 a year ago
Ask HN: How much employee resume verification is done in practice?
We all know that it's commonplace to 'put your best foot forward' on resumes as an employee, and sometimes this can lead into bending the truth a little bit.

But I'm curious in practice how much actual employee resume verification is done? Do people even check if they've graduated the colleges they say they have, or have evidence of employment of somewhere they've noted down? What about job titles?

I'm also wondering how thorough current FAANG-type companies are. This topic came to mind after seeing a 'resume prank' video where someone came up with a ridiculous and troll-ish resume (with rude and offensive jokes in the bullet points), but had 'Stanford', 'Amazon', etc, and so he got about 30 out of 100 interviews applying to top (US) tech companies. Is this fakery something that would get someone caught further down the line perhaps?

Just been very curious how this all works in practice lately. I've done some hiring in the past and typically I'll just call contact references (who I can't even ensure are real people tbh). Of the few times I've requested a transcript, I take it at face value and have no way of telling if it's doctored.

PaulHoule · a year ago
My Aunt Ruth(less) attempted to murder her mentally retarded sister with insulin and did time. Later on she applied for a job at a nursing home and failed to check the box about prior felony convictions. Got the job anyway. My father-in-law was in the hospital at the time and we were terrified when Ruth, who was visiting, changed his IV.

She tried to end a patient at the nursing home and was also busted for raiding the medicine cabinet. Obviously no check.

My son applied for a job at a small construction firm and they did call his references.

bongodongobob · a year ago
To be fair, there is a LOT of turnover in construction, which is probably why.
cal85 · a year ago
Why would more turnover imply more reference-checking?
farseer · a year ago
Perhaps employers doing background checks are lenient on women in America? Or perhaps times have changed from your aunt's generation to your son's.
not_your_vase · a year ago
At some places they took my word for everything.

At some other places (notably banks) did full background check, calling all my previous employers from the past 10 years, and asking for criminal records from all countries where I spent more than 3 months in the past 5 years. They also wanted all kind of documentation where they found some discrepancy between my CV and their findings...

(Funnily they never asked for the records from my original country. For all they care, I might be a fugitive murderer there, as long as I have paid my parking tickets in the other countries...)

lylejantzi3rd · a year ago
Do you know what a full background check shows?

Calling all of your previous employers will get them your dates of employment and nothing else. Less than that if you worked for a startup that went out of business.

jabroni_salad · a year ago
I once failed to get hired by an F100 company because of that last sentence. It was a small business that had gone under after a few years after I moved away.

Since the business's domain and phone number no longer worked I had to get a letter of reference on """corporate letterhead""". He had never made any such thing so he printed it on the back of a receipt. Bigcorp HR hated this and said they were moving in a different direction.

It was really annoying at the time because I was fresh out of college and did not have any other jobs to list as experience.

Spooky23 · a year ago
Not always.

HR people say that they do that to avoid liability, but… typically they aren’t covered by NDA, and there’s only slander/defamation if you find out about it, it’s negative, and it’s not true.

I used to do my own reference checks and got lots of info, often without asking. Well placed silence will often lead people to jabber. More often than not they would say lovely things. They they’d say lovely things than silence on a difficult topic.

Deleted Comment

cryptonector · a year ago
> Calling all of your previous employers will get them your dates of employment and nothing else.

Eh, HR at previous employers might share whether you were a problem employee. And any references you provide from previous employers had better speak glowingly about you -- if they wouldn't, don't provide them.

I don't know if any of the references I've ever given were called, but since none of the references I've given ever told me about getting called about me I assume none were called. To be fair I've had a) few jobs, b) enough credentials in terms of portfolio of public works (in standards setting organizations, in open source, etc.) that there is little need to check those references. If you interview me and you can get me to talk in detail about said public work and also you can check how I think and would solve problems, then between that and a background check that's almost certainly enough.

This is why I tell people to make sure to have a portfolio of public work. In practice it is difficult to make a large portfolio of public work -- at some point that has to include participation in the upstreams of external open source, in mailing lists, in fora, etc., and that all takes time and not being shy. Most job applicants are not going to have much of a portfolio.

nostrademons · a year ago
Google verifies with a third-party background check service, but the service fucked up my resume. I had an employer that had since gone bankrupt (actually, all my employers besides Google have since gone bankrupt), and they couldn't find the business, so they just did the closest string match to the business name, which happened to be a local grocery store whose name was one letter off. Sure enough, I come back as never having worked there, because that's not the company I wrote on my resume, doofus.

It ended up working out because I had previously worked at Google and my former skip-level, who knew me personally, was now the SVP signing my offer letter. But if the hiring process is this incompetent, it makes me wonder how many other people have real career consequences because background check services are lazy and incompetent.

weinzierl · a year ago
I think it is a risk reward thing for the background check services. False negatives do not nearly hurt them as much as false positives. They are incentivized to process candidates quickly and must limit the time they work on each profile. Doing deeper and time-intensive research has not benefit for them, so they find a plausible reason to put laborious profiles in the bad pile.

What you call lazy and incompetent is probably a system working as intended where the collateral damage is accepted approvingly.

muzani · a year ago
Personally I don't like applying to these companies because the false negative rates makes it feel like a lottery. I'd rather just do the other lottery and start a business.
ctkhn · a year ago
had something like this happen for two of the roles, the verification contractor was put on hold by hr and then never followed up and marked my internship jobs as false. had to call them up personally to get it fixed
VirusNewbie · a year ago
that's weird, usually they let you verify other ways by showing tax returns or something.

At one point for Verizon I had to prove I did 1099 work for a company and had to show bank deposits from the LLC! (With amounts redacted).

ahel · a year ago
welcome to the real world where no one does a good job and everyone is more or less impacted.
dyingkneepad · a year ago
Okay, so he got the interviews, but did he pass them?

In the place I work for, when engineers are going to conduct technical interviews, the only preparation material they are given is the candidate's resume. So we try to ask questions based on their experience in the places they claimed to have worked for. It's not super hard to realize the job description in the resume is embellished once you start asking questions, but yes this is not fool-proof. Still, the best candidates will often have very interesting discussions about challenges they had in their previous jobs and be able to properly articulate what they did and why and how. If you're gonna lie, you better back it up very well.

NewUser76312 · a year ago
I'm curious about this more from an employer's perspective, especially as a smaller operation (contracting firm).

If somebody claims to have worked at Amazon as a product manager for 2 years, and rehearses a story they wrote with ChatGPT (who maybe has data from blogs of related product managers)... Then I'd probably get fooled, if the candidate was reasonably well-spoken and confident. Similarly, I don't have the time or patience to contact a university to try and get real verification for a transcript. Just being honest...

TeMPOraL · a year ago
Ironically, for some roles (more on the people and marketing side), a candidate that managed to convincingly act out a fabricated employment history would be demonstrating the very skills required for the job they're interviewing for.
dyingkneepad · a year ago
On the technical side, if you have actually worked with certain stuff you will have gone through certain experiences that everybody else has gone through. Some tools are absolutely necessary but horrible to work with in certain ways. Some libraries are a pain in the back to use, but are unavoidable. Compiling certain components may be a huge pain.

Stupid example: the person claims they know CSS, and you bring up the subject of aligning a div for the first time.

advisedwang · a year ago
When verification is done, it's typically right before making an offer. So getting interviews with a fake resume doesn't tell you anything about getting past verification.
conductr · a year ago
Agree, I've actually seen it done after the offer most frequently - I'm guilty of this too as a hiring manager - the offer always has a mention of background checks being a contingency. It's like buying a house, no point in doing inspections until you have an executed offer that both parties agree to.
anon743448 · a year ago
Yeah, it cost money, they will not spent money on every applicant that applies.
burner420042 · a year ago
As someone who had a juvenile record I can confirm that companies do background checks. The felony misdemeanor as a minor still followed me for 7 years into adulthood.

As a consequence I hold my breath about job background checks to this day. Realize that background checks aren't done until they've offered you the job. In Seattle Tech, and thus covered under WA State laws, I've always had criminal record, job history, sometimes credit, but very rarely education. Never had a drug test.

Expect Federal background checks, and then they check in the cities, county level, and state based on the prior addresses you supplied.

Most job history in the US is tracked through Lexis Nexis or Equifax (owner of The Work Number). Education history through the Education Student Clearinghouse.

The whole process is automated. It's software, looking for records that contain the word "felony", deciding your future. Anybody working there is making very little money and they have no power nor oversight.

Faaak · a year ago
Again, "as en European", it seems crazy to me that something you did when you were a minor can still follow you into adulthood.. crazily dystopian
1123581321 · a year ago
It’s not like that for most kids. Juvenile records are sealed or expunged which means they wouldn’t show up in an adult background check. There’s probably some unusual circumstance involved here or he lived somewhere where you have to ask the court to seal the record and didn’t.
ChrisMarshallNY · a year ago
I think that many established corporations, these days, outsource verification, and the background check companies can get very deep. I have heard of them returning massive dossiers, with social media posts, etc.

When I was looking for work (about seven years ago), One company asked for my HN handle, and another company wanted my Facebook login (and password).

I don't think so. Homey don't play dat game.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the folks, here, work for those background check companies, and could probably provide more complete information.

cryptonector · a year ago
> and another company wanted my Facebook login (and password).

"I don't have Facebook" or "sorry, no, that's private", whichever one is accurate. If that doesn't do it it's not a place worth working at.

ChrisMarshallNY · a year ago
Yup.

I believe that there has since been a court case, that ruled that kind of thing illegal.

Of course, with the current political environment, I suspect we may see things like requirements for proving marriage (to a man), if you are a woman with children (like it used to be in Days of Yore), etc.

gnopgnip · a year ago
Most medium and large employers, employers in an industry with compliance requirements will match your previous employer, dates worked and job title through "the work number"/experian. This happens alongside the criminal background check, credit check. For an entry level role verifying your degree. But that would not happen until after the interview, if it went well.
TeMPOraL · a year ago
Curious about the order - I'd think doing semi-automated checks on a CV is much cheaper than an interview, and would work as a filter.
nonethewiser · a year ago
probably costs something for each verification though? Or you have some limit for different plan levels?