Hacker News Reader

> They'll hide things like stretches in jail.

Why would a company pay someone less because they've been in jail?

There's the elevated risk of re-offending, or being less trustworthy. For example, if they did a stretch for embezzling, they'd be placed in a position where trust is less of an issue, which would likely pay less. I wouldn't want to hire someone to operate heavy machinery if he did a stretch for drunk driving. Would you?

> I wouldn't want to hire someone to operate heavy machinery if he did a stretch for drunk driving. Would you?

Funny enough, that comes back on a background check...if it was within 7-10yrs depending on source, if you want to pay for it, iirc. JP Morgan will go back as far as they can to seek out any sort of theft or fraud charge for ANY position. Ostensibly this is about transparency for developers, so alcoholics are pretty common in corporate jobs the higher up you go in salary.

If you invent a 4-year stint at respected company XYZ to cover your resume gap, the company might pay you based on the value that faked experience brought.

It’s not that I’ll pay less because you were in jail a while, but rather that being in jail likely makes you less competitive skills and experience wise compared to someone who worked straight through.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com