In our modern world of today, check to make sure that all individuals applying for a given positions have represented themselves honest and fair, and the only way that we have to do that is background checks. Knowing that 8 out of 10 large companies do background checks helps us to know that this is no small problem, but that many applicants are misrepresenting themselves.
Emotional hook (provocative question/ claim/real-life problem):
You have just applied for a job at a large company, with great compensation, great benefits, and an awesome fit for you. You are equally if not more qualified than other applicants. They call you back and say that they are unable to offer you a position, due to the results of your background check. How do you feel?
Key points to elicit in discussion
Wal-Mart will not even offer a position to individual that has lied on his or her application. Everyone is not perfect and has made a mistake or two that they are not proud of in the past. Does one bad decision force a lifetime of consequences? Or does it make a given applicant more qualified for a position if he or she has not been involved in any criminal history. The ability to detect crimes from other nations in dramatically different than those here in the U.S.A., so does that give an unfair advantage to a non-US citizen?
Are background checks the best way for companies to verify a job Candidates credentials? Is it fair for companies to check credit scores, and bank information?
No comments:
Post a Comment