Case 9: To Hire or Not to Hire
1. If the applicant mistakenly thought that her record had been cleared over time and therefore
did not lie intentionally, would that make any difference in the hiring decision?
Yes, part of the consideration of whether to hire an employee is trust. If the applicant did not
2. Should the fact that the applicant did not tell the truth on one part of the application
automatically disqualify her from any further consideration?
A company has a legitimate interest in being able to trust its employees. If a potential employee
3. Should the supervising manager be allowed to hire this applicant despite the fact that the
applicant lied on her application, provided the manager is willing to take the risk and assume
responsibility for the applicant?
Yes, the applicant simply may have been trying to get a clean start, knowing that the mistake
4. If the applicant had freely admitted the conviction, should she still be considered for the
position? Should a minor offense committed 18 years ago, when the applicant was in her early
20s, disqualify her when she is overall the most qualified applicant? What types of convictions,
and how recent, should disqualify potential new hires?
Yes, a minor offense committed long ago should not disqualify a qualified applicant. It should be
assumed that a clean record for a long period goes a long way towards showing that the applicant
has reformed.