Resources: Blogs

Would I lie to you?

Blogs
|

Applicants who provide phony statements of service and referees to secure a job

It has recently been reported that a Melbourne man is about to be sentenced for falsifying accounting documents and obtaining property by deception. The 313 charges laid against the man related to his employment at an electrical store. The man had forged four of his character references to secure the employment.

It has recently been reported that a Melbourne man is about to be sentenced for falsifying accounting documents and obtaining property by deception. The 313 charges laid against the man related to his employment at an electrical store. The man had forged four of his character references to secure the employment. It was discovered at the hearing that one of the referees had never heard of the man and the others denied providing the man with a reference.

In our blog article A Policy of Truth: Why Employers Should Carry Out Pre – Employment Checks we discussed the steps an employer can take to minimise the risk of hiring a dishonest candidate. In addition to these tips, employers are reminded to be vigilant – especially when speaking to an applicant’s referees and accepting statements of service.

A potential employer could:

  • call the company and confirm that the applicant or the referee works/worked there – go through the switchboard rather than calling a mobile phone;
  • when trying to verify the referee’s title, find out what their working relationship with the applicant is/was;
  • if you have not heard of the company the applicant claims to have worked for then you could do an internet search to see if it is a real company;
  • if it is a past employer, and the employee provided a Statement of Service, call the business and confirm the contents of the statement of service;
  • check to see whether the Statement of Service matches the resume provided (and possibly their LinkedIn profile);
  • be wary of online services that provide fake references and recommendation letters.

Our August 2016 Employment E-Update discusses what an employer can do if they discover that an employee has provided fraudulent information to secure their job. To subscribe to our monthly e-updates click here.

 

Information provided in this blog is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Workplace Law does not accept liability for any loss or damage arising from reliance on the content of this blog, or from links on this website to any external website. Where applicable, liability is limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation.

 

Similar articles

How pre-employment checks minimise the risk of post-recruitment discoveries

Skeletons in the closet

You have hired an employee who appears to be perfect on paper, only to later discover that they have misrepresented or deliberately withheld information about their qualifications, employment history or problematic past. A simple and often overlooked way of mitigating unfortunate surprises like these is conducting pre-employment checks to verify whether a candidate is as suitable, qualified and impressive as their resume or interview has portrayed them to be.

Read more...

Hiring in the Hybrid Workplace

The first of our 2022 webinars focused on the employment 'life cycle'. This webinar will cover key legal and HR issues to consider throughout the recruitment process.

Read more...

Court finds rescinded job offer was not age discrimination

The rooster and the sunrise

Discrimination in the workplace is unlawful under a number of Australian laws, including state and federal anti-discrimination legislation (such as the Age Discrimination Act 2004 (Cth)) as well as the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FW Act).

Read more...

High Court rules on scope of inquiry of redeployment within an employers enterprise

That’s not how this works

In “Where does it end?” we looked at the decision of the Full Federal Court of Australia in Helensburgh Coal Pty Ltd v Bartley [2024] FCAFC 45. In that decision, the Full Federal Court refused an application from an employer seeking orders to quash previous decisions and compel the Fair Work Commission from further dealing with unfair dismissal applications lodged by employees who had been made redundant.

Read more...

Mad Mex franchisee to pay $305,000 in damages for sexual harassment claim

The Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) protects employees from sexual harassment, and as part of the Respect@Work amendments now prohibits sex-based harassment.

Read more...

FWC rejects constructive dismissal claim, finding the employment ended by “mutual agreement”

Mutually beneficial

For an employee to have access to the unfair dismissal jurisdiction, the Fair Work Commission must be satisfied that the employee was “dismissed” from their employment within the meaning of section 386(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth).

Read more...

Let's talk

please contact our directors to discuss how ouR expertise can help your business.

We're here to help

Contact Us
Let Workplace Law become your partner in workplace law and sports law.

Sign up to receive the latest industry updates with commentary from the Workplace Law team direct to your inbox.

Subscribe

* indicates required