careerexcuse.com

[choppedwood]

I have a fascination with data/information, and because of that, I also have a perverse fascination with how people tweak/cheat it.  I've seen a couple of doozie's  (is that word still used) over the years.  If it isn't real, my bad.

http://careerexcuse.com/job-references.html

[The Gorn]

This is a bit of absolute awesomeness - "for the win" as the younger generation posts on those new fangled social networks. 

This is like something you'd see in the Onion.

On one hand it appears on the surface to be for real and on the level: "We will refuse Police/Fire/Med/Gov." That makes it quite real - they know what is off limits and subject to criminal statutes.

On the other hand, a quick Google reveals a lot of complaints posted to Ripoffreport.com, and who knows if those are legitimate or are pimping some competing service...

Piercing the veil of disinformation provided by the service would be pretty easy. If an employer can't and won't find listings for the alleged reference providing past employer on Manta.com, BBB, or ReferenceUSA, they pretty much deserve to be conned.

This is funny in an absurdist way.

[Rastus P Shagnasty]

Doozie or Duesy, still works for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duesenberg

[TechTalk]

From the website: Your reference script will be assigned up to THREE Reference Providers who will act as your  - Human Resource Manager - Immediate Supervisor - Secondary Supervisor.

The Gorn mentioned: ... If an employer can't and won't find listings for the alleged reference providing past employer on Manta.com, BBB, or ReferenceUSA, they pretty much deserve to be conned.

So the way this works is that it relies on the future employer (a manager or a HR person) to simply call the numbers that the job candidate provides them with?  That said, don't most background checks that you pay for simply look for a prior criminal record, level of education, credit worthiness, and past lawsuits?  I guess I need to checkout Ripoffreport.com and read what is being said about this service to better understand its flaws.

From the website: We give a glowing recommendation by your former supervisor or professional contact.

I have no clue how often former supervisors are contacted, however, I suppose for some people who are in need of a professional reference (i.e. a former co-worker from two jobs ago type of reference) that this service could work for them.  What someone would need to do is provide a script or background information to the Reference Provider so that when he/she calls the manager or HR person he/she can do a decent job of making the fake relationship seem legit.

[choppedwood]

Piercing the veil of disinformation provided by the service would be pretty easy. If an employer can't and won't find listings for the alleged reference providing past employer on Manta.com, BBB, or ReferenceUSA, they pretty much deserve to be conned.

If the employer makes phone calls, and many probably still do, I could see getting away with it.  Many checks are little more than salary, title and how long you worked somewhere.  But a lot of that is also outsourced to places like ADP, requiring 10 signatures, before they check your driving records in whatever state is least inclined to protect your privacy, so I don't know how far they'd actually go.

[The Gorn]

My point was that you'd think that any employer or their agent checking references would look up obscure sounding companies just to see what size of company and what type of environment the person worked in.

OTOH, I can also see this procedure being like sausage-making. If they placed a call to each reference and heard what they expected, they would likely go no farther.

If the background check is that superficial, then it's probably not important that it returns real results or not.

[TRexx]

So I'm expected to risk my career on the word of someone who by definition, is willing to say anything for $50.

[The Gorn]

So I'm expected to risk my career on the word of someone who by definition, is willing to say anything for $50.

No, you aren't.

This is for a certain segment of the population that cannot find anyone to vouch for them. I mean, think about that. I have had friends in the past who offered to act as a manager-surrogate if needed.

So, it's pathetic, in addition to funny.

[DarkHumour]

This seems to be an exponential web of lies possibly perpetuated by the reliance of keywords in job applications and the unrealistic dreams (another thread maybe) of the unqualified.  If you are bullsh*tting the difference between your actual experience and the requirements of the job and then providing "references" to back up those lies, how is that fair to people who have real experience and real references.  Funny. Even sociopathy can be outsourced...

Would the 'filter' know the difference between an honest application with 50-99% of the 'preferred or mandatory skills required' versus a complete fabrication of 99-100% ?

I suppose the obscure unix variant Gornix as a preferred skill would still serve as a potential flag/bot check.

DarkHumour

[Origisaurus]

In August after graduation, we were hanging out after supper at Olsen's Pure Oil (later acquired by Union 76) station, organizing our nightly crooze.  A sharply-dressed guy (who wears a suit and tie in August?) stopped by looking for, it turned out 3 or 4 of us, by name.  Seems the guy was Army CID doing a background check on Fred, who had enlisted right after graduation.  Putting it all in sepia-toned slo-mo replay, the CID guy was very thorough - he asked each of us for additonal references on Fred, and probably got 10 or so.  Fred got his security clearance.

There seems to be only two ways employers handle background checks - in-house or hired out to a law firm or PI agency.  I 'spose they are thorough enough, but can easily be spoofed.  A former boss or co-worker can defame you and you will never know or have any recourse if you should happen to find out - say, via reference-checking agencies you can hire to check your own.

We have long known that reference-checking is prone to many kinds of abuses, which falsely cost people jobs.  It's no wonder that a counter-abuse is available.