No law prevents employers from asking or discovering why you were fired, AND taking it into account. Do all you can to try and not get fired.

"By law, the only information they can get from your other employers is the dates you worked there and whether or not they will rehire you.

• Not at all true. Pay, raises you got, dates, job titles, quality of work, etc. There's a lot that they can ask. More than they can't in fact. It's just that most companies won't readily if at all give it.

"If the new employer contacts the old employer, it is illegal for the old employer to give out detailed information"

There is no such law. See above. Neither employers nor individuals can be successfully sued for reporting facts honestly, regardless of the harm the truth causes.

"Technically they are not allowed to ask a previous employer why you are no longer with them"

Still wrong. See above.

Criminal records kept by the court system are public records and are generally available to employers. The only restriction given by the FCRA is that an arrest record that is over 7 years old cannot be included in an employment check. However the FCRA gives no time restriction on an actual criminal conviction.

Employers may request court records from every jurisdiction where the candidate has lived. Typically employers use a consumer reporting agency to do the criminal check for them. Laws on checking criminal history vary from state to state.

The answer to this question depends in large part on the state you live in. State laws differs on what they allow previous employers to communicate to prospective employers about employees. Some states, in fact, have passed laws protecting previous employer from liability when the make a good faith effort to communicate to a prospective employer the factual reasons why an employee was terminated, even if it reflects poorly on the employee.

Most claims filed by employees against previous employers for giving out information to prospective employers are based in defamation (libel, if in writing, or slander, if spoken). Fact is an absolute defense to a claim of defamation. So, if what a previous employer says about an employee is true, the defamation claim will likely not succeed. One of the reasons employers have moved away from divulging information about prior employees is not because they will violate the law by doing so, but because the cost of litigating defamation claims of former employees can be very expensive, even if the employer did nothing wrong. Many employers just don't think it is worth the cost of litigation to share unfavorable information about an former employee.

It is generally not against the law for employers (in most states) to give out any information about past employees, regardless of whether they left on good or bad terms. However, most companies will not give out any information other than employment dates, title, and sometimes their salary. The reason for this is because so much weight is given to what a past employer may say that if the company giving out the information makes some kind of mistake, they can open themselves up to a lot of liability from both the prospective employer or prospective employee and then gives rise to costly litigation that companies want to avoid.

If, for example, you were terminated for theft and the company you worked for called and asked what the reason for discharge was and the company said you left on good terms, and then you go on to the new company and embezzle them and they find out later that you were discharged for misconduct, that previous employer has opened themselves to liability because they did not give out the correct information. It works vice-versa too, whereas your past employer mave have said something unfavorable about you that gave your prospective employer reason enough to not hire you. This opens them up to a liability as well.

Therefore, the vast majority of companies will not release anything more than what I said above. I have worked for both very large and some smaller companies in HR where we try to get this information from past employers. They simply do not want to open themselves up to this liability and make it company policy to only give out the very basic duration of employment, title, and if you're lucky, salary.

Sometimes some companies will make a exception to some of this if they have a written authorization signed by you. But usually this is only done for high level positions and they still will not give out any valuable information regarding your particular job performance or reason for termination. The only additional information you might be able to get is was the reason for separation voluntary or involuntary, or they might indicate whether or not you're eligible for rehire (if they say "no", that's a dead give-away that you were involuntarily terminated without actually saying it).

If a company is asking you for a Social Security Number prior to hire (which is the key to this question), it needs to be on a form where you are actually granting permission for that employer to run a background check in the first place. If they are just simply asking for a Social Security number without you granting some type of permission for a check, the employer does not realize the liability involved with collecting such information on all of their applicants. It is not unlawful for an employer to collect SSN on the application, but this is usually accompanied by the collection of your date of birth as well, since both will be needed to verify that you are who you say you are when a background check is run.

The Department of Labor has a guideline that basically states that the employer truly should only collect information on the application that is directly related to your ability to perform the requirements for the position. If the SSN and Date of Birth are on the application itself, then this is strongly discouraged by the Department of Labor. The form where Social Security and Date of Birth are collected should always be on a separate document granting the permission as described above and should be kept in a secure place by the employer (to avoid the liability of losing this information into the hands of others). If an employer is asking for this information and you do not have an offer on the table or you are not a finalist in the interview process, avoid it altogether. There are many scam artists out there today that use this common hiring process to trick applicants into providing this information on the application itself, but again most employers do not do this because of the liability involved in having personal information for candidates they end up never hiring. The other challenge is that if hiring managers see the application and this information is a part of the application, then this is giving your personal information in an accessible way to people in the organization that should not have access or be able to see this information to begin with. So before providing this type of information, think about these main questions:

• Is this information being asked on the main application, or a separate form?
• Am I the final applicant or do I have an offer on the table that warrants the need for this information for the company to run a check?
• Have I even been interviewed yet by the organization, since a check is typically not needed until my qualifications for the role have been verified first?
• Does the form I am filling out actually have wording that describes the fact that I, as the applicant, am granting permission for a check to be run?

Department of Labor guidelines are found here for reference: http://www.dol.gov

In conclusion, keep in mind that employers are obligated to verify that you are who you say you are, and depending on the role, may require that you have a clean record, so ultimately if this information is requested, it is a good sign that the employer is very interested in you as a potential hire, so it makes sense to provide this information to finalize the process and get yourself a job!

Skills are only a fraction of the person. I would consider the job requirements; physical and mental, the attitude of the prospective employee, and first impression of the two individuals.

Gender is irrelevant when selecting suitable people for the job. There must be some difference in skills and suitability between your two candidates, and if you cannot find one, interview them again.

Its absolutely fine if both the sexes have equally good skill set for a company, but they have a different temperament of handling situations! The one whose good enough to do time, human management better is eligible to be selected for the respective position in the company!

This is actually a really good question. I work in a mostly male dominated trade. Roughly only 4% of my trade is women. It's not about gender. It's about the over all package. Being a woman in a trade that is dominated by sometimes rough, gruff, sarcastic, rude, crude, insecure, nasty, sometimes you have to hire the person that is not just fit for the trade but going on the same path as the company it's asking to work for. If you are totally qualified to do a job.... that doesn't mean you are the person for the job. Sometimes it's just not a good fit. I would have to say in a situation like this I would start to dig into character, what they have to offer the company besides their skill. Anyone can come in and do some mundane job, but it takes that extra somebody to come in everyday and show up with that edge and make it a different.

It does not matter what sex they are, but by the skils they need to accomplish the job you are giving. If they have equal skills, it all comes down on how well their personal skills are. for example: the might have all of the reqiremnts for your job, but are they easy to talk to and a good representative of your company? Ex. They can help you with all of your marketing and planning, but when it comes to presenting your product they are worthless, it is better to go with the other intern.

If you would like to see a perfect, easy example of this, watch the movie RV. It has robin Williams in it. In the end it shows how one of the employees write great presentations, but is horrible at presenting them. I think you should watch this movie to get a better Jist of what i am trying to explain to you.

Good Luck, I hope you make the right choice! :)

INFORMAL LETTER

Seva main,

Receivers name,

his/her address

subject(vishay)....................................................

manniya mahoday (माननीय महोदय),

introductory paragraph

body

conclusion

dhanyavad

bhavdiya Your full name

date

Yes, companies can offer it online. That does not mean that Predictive Index is available for the public to take online. Like all good behavioral assessment tools, PI is a tools that requires training to interpret, so only those with the proper background can give you access to it.

If you are a company who is interested in learning more, you can visit either predictiveresults.com (Florida) or piworldwide.com (all others).