I am writing about an apparent employment issue that I am experiencing. It has to do with the background-check policy that is run by many employers both large and small. It appears that one's history of residency is a factor that alone can deny someone a job, even though they have a clean criminal history. And so is the case for me.
I applied to a corporate cinema last month. The interview process seemed to go very well. I invested in a nice haircut and wore a tie to the interview. My university bachelor's degree and extensive work experience seemed to encourage my interviewer to ask me if I would be interested in attaining management positions in the future. I gladly confirmed this and felt quite positive about my chances of being hired once my background check came up clean.
However, about a week later, I received a piece of mail informing me that I had been declined. In the papers it noted that my residential history was inconsistent, hence, I was declined this entry-level job. Quite discouraging. Where did I go wrong?
I began working as a teen. My experience is extensive, ranging from public to private, administrative to labor. For only a few brief periods did I take time from work: once to tour the United States and once to tend to family matters. Yet, somehow, factors like these are recorded in a way that deems one unfit to work with a company — though, in actuality, I was behaving normally and responsibly with my personal life.
I can only imagine how many other businesses would decline someone so blindly. Is this just another worm in the can that is our nation's employment crisis? How does one get back into this game with so many disqualifications?
— Jason Hagan
Asheville
An inconsistent residency flag is generally returned when the previous places of residency on your background check do not agree with what was provided on a resume or job application. You might want to check your credit files for accuracy.