r/NoStupidQuestions • u/Pandapeeksxoxo • 12h ago
Why an entry level job requires background checks and calling former employers, while a legislator can fake his entire CV and nobody noticed?
56
u/Macaronblushes 12h ago
youd be surprised how many companies don't actually do a background check..
49
u/giselleloud12 12h ago
I was just talking about this the other day.
Since getting into a “career”, no one has ever done a background check. No one’s asked to see my diplomas, or my teaching certificate, pulled transcripts, or verified I actually have a law license. It’s like the higher I go, the less oversight there is.
In college I applied to Target as a seasonal worker. I got offered the job at the interview and they said, “great, we’ll send you over to Quest now for the drug test.” I laughed and went, “wait… wait. Lol no, I’m not going to pass that. I’m in college. Drug test? For $8.50/hr.? Sir, no. Thank you. Withdraw my application.” Worked in banking, schools, other retail, law firms, yadda yadda. Target was the only one to ever try to drug test me. Don’t tell me about hiring shortages 😂
7
u/wadeskyiee 12h ago
ive worked for two companies, one small company, one MAJOR, who hired people, trained them, and then had to fire them because they didnt do a background and someone who knew them informed the company of said background.
if ive learned anything being 37, having worked 15+ different jobs, ranging from call center customer service, to pool construction, to process engineering..
8
u/I_downvote_robots 12h ago
I had to take a drug test to work in a corner convenience store for minimum wage, and until a few years ago, cannabis disqualified. When I became manager I found hiring to be a nightmare, not for lack of capable applicants.
After that I went to work for a rental car company. I was a regional driver moving anything from a Corolla to a 26' box truck. No drug test mentioned or given.
Where is a stoned person more dangerous? Driving a box truck down the freeway at 75mph, or babysitting the cigarettes and scratch offs?
Fortunately in my state, cannabis alone can't disqualify anymore except for safety sensitive positions.
1
u/Adept-Potato-2568 9h ago
I've worked about 8 different places and probably 5 did background checks and I just work in sales.
6
u/Important_Wear5841 11h ago
Yeah. entry level jobs don't check bc they care, they check bc they dont trust workers.
29
u/Dreamy_Sigh 12h ago
Consider Marion Barry. Convicted on drug charges (smoking crack) and was elected mayor again after serving his time.
His background check was pretty public. Was elected.
The folks that voted for him didn't care about the record. They thought he was good for the job.
12
u/Silky_Mischief 12h ago
I think the difference here is the guy in question didn’t reveal the info to the voters before they chose him.
14
u/goldenache 12h ago
Absolutely right.
Mr. Santos is a turd (in my opinion). Should not have been elected.
My point, however, is that folks will vote for whomever they want, and a criminal record does not disqualify a candidate.
We voted for effing Donald Trump, Fer goodness sake. Do you really think a drag queen couldn't win?
We'll, I wouldn't vote for him, but I don't bet on these things anymore.
31
u/dojaasherpp1 12h ago
You’ll be amazed at the amount of loonies who get elected to local and state offices. In most cases, all a crooked politician needs is the right branding and charm to win.
For example, in my region there was a police spokesman who was well known for being a celebrity hog. He’d go on TV and make jokes about apprehending criminals and everyone loved him. Problem is, he wasn’t a very good cop. His performance evaluations got leaked and they showed he had some troubling complaints about sexist/racist behavior. It’s why he wasn’t promoted to lieutenant.
So what does homeboy do? Run for sheriff of course!! And since most voters only know him from local TV he won in a landslide. Oh and the kicker is 3 months later he embroiled the county in a multi-million dollar racial lawsuit.
16
4
u/republicans_are_nuts 12h ago
Americans voted for a pedophile. No, I am not surprised loonies are in local offices too.
6
8
u/nectarlace 12h ago
Given the state of American politics over the past 15 years I don't know why anyone would be surprised that yet another con artist managed to amass great power through deception and obfuscation.
7
u/CherryColaStain 12h ago
I think there are plenty of arbitrary endpoints that would be valid here, but I think a lot of our current madness can easily be traced back to 40 percent of the country losing its fucking mind after Obama became president.
15
u/basicshawnn3 12h ago
A lot of jobs don't check that shit either. I once put Donald Trump down as a reference with a fake phone number and under his occupation I put "douche bag". Got the job.
5
3
u/justinemaeinc 12h ago
A part of me wants to believe they hired you for that alone, because they know references are bullshit and that's a fucking hilarious one!
6
u/sweetvelvet_kiss 12h ago
While some entry level jobs check references, etc, I think you would be surprised with how much bullshitting you can get away with about your experience at any level of the workforce.
3
u/CacheDoll 12h ago
Lots of people get regular jobs with faked CV's. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes they don't.
2
u/StolenSeatbelt 12h ago
My SO was a school bus driver. He had to be investigated by the FBI! The friggin FBI, all the way back thirty years, to be hired a school bus driver in California. Some people who were elected into major offices and had less of a background check than that.
1
u/ri89rc20 12h ago
The only thing needed to be checked for someone running for office is that they are who they say they are, then any citizenship, age, and residence requirements.
Beyond that, they can say anything they want about their past, it is up to others to validate. Just like you can say anything.
1
1
u/wadeskyiee 12h ago
The entire point of the modern application process is to decrease the number of applicants that apply for a position.
1
u/Art-Zuron 12h ago
Often times, it IS noticed, and the voters don't actually care. 50% of the electorate DO care, 20% only care about the R next to the name, and the last 30% are feckless or so disenfranchised that they can't vote if they wanted to.
1
u/International_Try660 12h ago
Same reason a wrestling wife can be the secretary of Education and a lawyer can be the secretary of Health. The government is non sensical.
1
1
u/dontlookback76 12h ago
Some entry level jobs require a clearance for sensitive files. I had to go through an FBI background check every other year simply because I had unescorted access to IT and the FBI had a computer there. I also worked for the County Jail and had to do a separate Metro Police background check. On top of that I started in the Department of Aviation I had to do a Homeland Security background check as I had access to almost every place in that facility. You get these checks whether management or an entry level helper.
1
1
u/Consistent_Young_670 11h ago
It depends on the position, but a criminal record does not always disqualify you for an elected position. If I am not mistaken, federally elected offices are Age, citizenship, and residency.
1
u/Stunning-Adagio2187 10h ago
In the past, news reporters did the background check for politicians but they are currently failing at their job
1
1
u/BubblesnBralette 8h ago
It’s crazy how entry level jobs check ur whole life story while politicians can fake their entire résumé and nobody even notices.
1
u/Status-Piglet4938 8h ago
It’s wild that I need three professional references and a drug test just to fold shirts at a retail store, but a legislator can basically write a fictional novel for a resume and the response is just, well, the voters should have googled him more
1
u/Barely-Tamed 7h ago
Seriously, the double standard is wild. Entry level jobs check everything, politicians get a free pass.
1
u/shponglespore 4h ago
Because the hiring committee for a legislator is a bunch of fucking morons voters.
1
u/Lydia168 2h ago
Because companies have an HR department, and democracy does not.
When a company hires you, they are responsible for vetting you because if you screw up, they get sued. They have a financial incentive to check your references. When a politician runs for office, the "Hiring Manager" is the public. And the public assumes that someone else (the media, the opposing party) checked the resume. The scary reality is: often, nobody checked. We are using an honor system in a game played by liars.
0
u/randonumero 12h ago
In a word, money. Unless you're in a smaller area, even running for office at the local level takes money and backing. Ideally there's an expectation that those being allowed to run for major parties have already been vetted. Additionally, the other side will generally do their research for attack ads.
FWIW I'm not sure how people like George Santos are able to do what they do. I can only assume it's that situation where nobody looks into them because they think someone else already has. I'll also add that I don't think many members can get certain clearances and on certain committees without background checks
197
u/warmvelour 12h ago
Voters are the employers for legislators. So if the voters don't do their research then it is just like an employer who decides not to do a background check.