My answer is based simply on the question relating to the title.
I would ignore the lie. Good employees are worth their weight in gold.
Great employee? Leave well enough alone.
Quite frankly, I want to hear more about this. More details, please…
You can write it yourself. Let’s pretend Robin & Anne are Robert & Andrew.
So the thing in question is nothing more than the dates that Mickey worked at Imagine, and not even if they worked at Imagine at all?
As Judge Judy might say: RIDICULOUS!
Nunya had plenty of time to check references before hiring Mickey. If they had called Imagine to do the usual reference checks, Imagine would have said “Mickey worked here from X to Y.” and if Nunya’s HR people were paying any attention, they could have addressed the discrepancy then.
Now, if there was a more substantial fact in doubt such as whether or not a person may have lied or stretched the truth about criminal histories or academic degrees that would have made a material difference in whether or not they git hired, that would be the time to start raising questions. In this case, the discrepancy could be very easily waved away as a typo.
Confront Mickey; if he confirms her suspicions, tell him she’ll keep his secret but not protect him.
I voted for #2, because Mickey seems like a Team Player, a Go-Getter, and in this economy, unless he’s channeling Charles Manson or Jack The Ripper, he’s an asset.
But I’d talk to (not confront) him off-the-clock in a purely social setting, say, over a pitcher of beer at happy hour on some Friday. And, make him explicitly aware that the conversation we are about to have, never happened.
And if Mickey is happy where he’s at/with what he’s doing, I’d leave well enough alone; get him his pay bump come review time, and leave well enough alone otherwise.
If it weren’t for Anne’s mystery about why he was fired from the first company, I’d say leave well enough alone. I have to agree with somebody upthread that I would be concerned about his 2 year absence as it relates to criminal activity that was related to his previous employer. Unfortunately, con artists can be very charming and good at what they do.
If Anne won’t give up what she knows or Robin doesn’t have any way to do a criminal background check, then my vote would be to let it go but be diligent about checking Mickey’s numbers.
Oh no you don’t. No chuckles or knowing grins without dishing. Closet or no closet, that’s against the lesbian code.
Note to self: next time it’s Robert & Andrew, no question.
This raises the question: what are the odds that Mickey will end up going to work for two Skrulls in a row, never mind two that are in a relationship with each other?
In the UK, after a job offer, the hiring company will contact the HR departments of other companies on the CV (within a certain time period, I guess. I was recently hired and the time period was five years) and gain confirmation that the person worked there for the time period they have stated. The job offer is typically subject to these references checking out.
Does that not happen in the US?
I still don’t get the connection.
How important is not outing Anne to Robin? If she acts on the info, and things go ugly, her deposition could go something like this:
Q: How did you first learn the information?
A: I…uh…googled…yeah…I googled.
Q: Are you sure that’s how you learned about this for the first time?
A: Yes.
Q: You are aware that you are under oath, right?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you know what perjury means?
OBJECTION!
<lawyers mutter–mostly about where to go for lunch after the depo, but the clients don’t know that>
WITHDRAWN.
Q: Robin, you’re out as a lesbian, isn’t that right?
A: Yes.
OBJECTION. <more muttering. Do we need reservations there? What’s the special?>
Q: Robin, who is this woman?
<shows picture of Anne>
Q: Robin, why would a married woman, known to have formerly been employed at Imagine, happen to be photographed entering the home of a known lesbian, and then leaving several hours later?
<shows pictures taken by investigator><probably including one of the goodbye kiss at the doorway. Cuz lawyers like to twist the knife on cross examination>
So now Robin is fired, because her boss knows she lied about material facts and may have caught herself in an obvious perjury trap. Also, she’s destroyed Anne’s life, all with no obvious gain for herself. Robin then either mixes herself a stiff Zanex and Bourbon cocktail or twenty, and the building super finds the body while investigating a smell, or Robin grows old, lonely, bitter, and owns too many cats.
OR, maybe Robin has a big steamy mug of STFU, and none of those things happen.
Another vote for blackmail, it really is the only ethical option.
I guess this comes down to how much this is one lie or simply the first one you’ve caught, as discussed above, ie conman potential etc.
You also need to consider how good a liar you are if it does come out and ‘did you know anything’ comes up, and how much you care about the company in question and any potential financial risk you’re exposing it to.
Otara
There’s also the possibility that he got picked up by another part of Imagine Inc. in 2003 and left them in 2005 (for example, I had a contract with a company’s Manchester office, then when that finished, after a short break went to work for a subsidiary in Milton Keynes). Or he went to a place that got taken over by Imagine Inc. There’s also the possibility it’s a simple typo.
Innocent explanations abound.
But I think the key question is, “What is the risk to Robin here?” And the answer is, “Significant.” So check with Imagine Inc’s HR dept and get Mickey in for an explanation and take it from there.
And how sure is Robin that Anne’s information is both complete and accurate?
I’m currently in a hiring process; it’s for a case in which previous experience is not a requirement, so I won’t have to provide proof that I was employed where I was, but if I did…
- A copy of the contract. Oh boy am I screwed, several of my jobs were in the US so no contract.
- Notarized copies of pay slips. Are you shitting me? What, from 17 years ago, which is when I started working? Who in God’s green earth keeps that?
- Aha! My Social Security History! Oh. I did mention working in the US, right? Does the US have something like the Spanish SSH? And Switzerland? Oi vey.
- Lots of my jobs have been through temp agencies or subcontractors. The company which appears in the contract (and, if applicable, in the SSH) is not the people I actually worked with, the people who set my vacations, etc.
I’ve seen someone get fired and come back next week - via a temp agency. I’ve worked for a same company in two countries; of course, legally it’s not the same company. I know companies which get huge sales/employee ratios by the procedure of subcontracting a ridiculous amount of jobs; a same worker can be there for years without ever working “for” the company officially, and while rotating through several subcontractors. When this specific ratio suddenly got in fashion, many companies did things such as fire complete departments but informing them that they would become self-employed and work for the company - as subcontractors: if that ain’t a bullshit reason for a firing…
And how sure that the resume doesn’t have a typo?
For the last 8 years, I’ve been working in consulting. I think of those years as “the second RH year, the Philadelphia year, the last RH year, the Costa Rica year, the Vitoria year, the Swiss year, etc.” I need to think hard in order to put numbers to those same years; there have been times when I’ve typoed/miscounted one year in my resume. There are also cases where two jobs overlap. It’s not a typical resume, I’m afraid, but I can’t list things as “the Costa Rica year” (pity).
Forgot to write this… :o
At one of my jobs, we did have someone get fired about a lie on her resume.
The lie was that she had added ten years to it. It was detected when two of the bosses remarked, within the receptionist’s hearing, how ThisWoman looked several years younger than her 35; the receptionist pointed out that she was not 35 but 25. It was her who had photocopied ThisWoman’s ID for the personnel file, and she had noticed how she was unusually young for a Project Manager job.
Her whole career was a fabrication. She had three months’ experience, not ten years. Suddenly, the messages from her subordinates saying “not meaning to stir anything, but ThisWoman seems to be a bit lost, maybe someone could give her a hand?” went from being Stupid Subordinates Stirring Shit to “gee, I guess she was lost!” She had gone to great pains to hide her age, but that photocopy of her ID is a legal requirement. The lie was both huge and easy to prove (even though I understand she had contacts who could and would provide references).
It’s none of her nosy business. Mickey has been through the hiring process and passed, and he’s been a model employee. If it’s on anyone it should be the HR person who failed to adequately do their job. Frankly, I don’t care if Mickey is a pathological liar so long as he does his job well.
You obviously missed this bit: