MEMBERS
Password Required!
Biz Opportunity
Special Offer!
|
 TIP of the Month!
Contacting former employers, supervisors and co-workers about an applicant
Former employers, supervisors and co-workers can be contacted about an applicant, provided that the employer’s communications and inquiries comply with applicable legal restrictions. The employer should first request the applicant’s written consent to contact such individuals. If the applicant refuses such consent, the employer should ask why and may wish to decline further consideration of any such applicant. Because a court would likely find that job applicants have diminished expectations of privacy with regard to investigation of their prior employment histories, founded on "broadly based and widely accepted community norms, " this form of background investigation probably entails the least likely risk of liability. Inquiries directed to former employers should include not only verification of dates of employment and positions held, but also information concerning such factors as the employee’s reliability; tendency, if any, to engage in violent conduct; and any instances of insubordination, dishonesty, or other potential problem areas.
Why and how an employer should contact prior employers
Many employers follow a policy of not providing references beyond verification of dates of employment, position held, and most recent pay rate. To protect itself from lawsuits by coworkers, clients, customers, or visitors who may be harmed by a prospective employee, an employer must nevertheless document its reasonable attempts to obtain relevant information that may have prevented such harm. In this regard, a release of claims signed by the applicant and forwarded to each reference contacted may prove helpful. Another practical approach to obtaining information from references is to encourage networking by human resources employees with their colleagues and counterparts in the same industry, trade, or profession. Personal relationships among human resources personnel often result in greater accessibility to information. Some employers may not strictly enforce their policies limiting authorization to provide references and the nature of references permitted, even though a lax approach to this subject is likely to invite litigation for defamation and violation of applicable statutory law.
The Crookie Jar™ is featured in the Loss Prevention Newsletter called "The Combat Journal™." Some of the topics include: background checks, interrogation techniques, interviewing tactics, loss prevention, shoplifting, hiring questions, termination techniques, employee hotline programs, fraud investigations, theft investigations, internal theft, external theft, analysis of actual handwritten confessions and more! The Combat Journal™ shown below is an actual sample of the
type of newsletter you will receive.
Please click here to subscribe and receive The Combat Journal™!
NOTE: If you click on any links in the following Combat Journal™, you must use your BACK KEY to return to this page!
|
-
-
-
Providing Targeted
Loss Prevention Solutions since
1972
-
-
1-877-226-6228 |
|
|
:: THIS ISSUE
::
-
Don't take the bait!
- Crookie Jar!
-
- LIAR!
- Bullet Points
Background
Checks
Caught in the
act
!
-
CCTV: Call
-
1-800-825-5572
Click
here to learn more
about...
SweepAlert™
-
All 50
states
-
All 50 Sex offender
registries
-
Monthly arrest
monitoring
-
Save Time &
Money
-
Need-to-know
data
-
Post-employment Investigative
tool
-
Inexpensive as a standalone
product
-
Secondary names as low as $1.00!
-
SweepAlert™ is an investment—not
just another background check component!
SweepAlert™ is not a replacement
for a legally compliant background check—it is an "Early Warning"
tool!
SweepAlert™ allows you to narrow
your list of qualified job candidates without the time and cost of a
full background check. And, secondary names (i.e., Sara Jones
who was Sara Smith) will be searched for as low as
$1.00!
SweepAlert™ is a "filler" that helps to 'plug' the
holes that exist with many of the background check procedures you
may be using. If you are not using a real-time background check— using Court Record Retrieval Specialists— SweepAlert™ is
a must!
SweepAlert™ combines the resources
of mulitple sources of data to give you the most information
possible—RIGHT NOW—
to help you make
truly informed decisions—at a price that is
incredibly low!
Get up to 15 FREE
SweepAlert™ background checks!
New members
only!
Call
1-800-825-5572 for more information or to place
your order for SweepAlert™
-
-
|
|
"Dictate," "goals," "extract" and
other forms of "word bait" have the appearance of "innocent" sounding
words...
The following testimony is taken directly
from court
transcripts pertaining
to a case that involved four different employees
who, in total, stole over $87,500 from
their employer. The
testimony was given by the investigator who
interrogated the four suspects. Pay careful
attention to the words being used by the attorneys
who tried their best to make the private
investigator who conducted the interrogation to appear
as some "made for TV" special ops
villain.
- Would that
indicate to you that it took her [the suspect]approximately
ten minutes to hand write out whatever it was
that you dictated to
her?
- Did you not
tell her [dictate]
what words to write down?
- As part of your
training classes,
[infer
the suspect
will be tricked by using seemingly unlawful
techniques] have you
taken any classes on how to conduct
interrogations with the goal of obtaining a confession [not a truthful statement, but a
"confession" conjuring up thoughts of Gestapo
techniques] from somebody?
- And the goal when you interview
somebody is to get
them [this infers
that you are willing to do anything short of
waterboarding to gain a confession] to
confess to doing something wrong [clearly inferring that the
suspect did nothing wrong at all];
correct?
- And is one of
the elements [the defense attorney was tired of
using the word "goal"] of interrogations
that he [John Reid]
taught you [again, inferring that
"he" is evil to teach such
black ops
techniques] was to convincingly accuse [that is "convince" the suspect
that he or she actually stole when in fact they
did not] the
suspect?
This is a
continuation of the most recent issue of the
Combat Journal.The above
questions are just a very small sampling of
the types of questions two attorneys asked of the
investigator who conducted interrogations
of four
thieves—two of whom nearly
two years later attempted to fight the charges
against them.
For the record
[AGAIN!]: Corporate Combat®
does not support the use or misuse of
interrogation techniques that would compel an
innocent person to confess. The utmost care must
be exercised when conducting an interrogation.
Never use threats, deception, misdirection,
manipulation, coercion or duress to obtain a
confession from a suspect.
If we have left out any
other legal descriptions of what not to do we
apologize—just don’t do any of them. If in doubt,
check your training resources for
questionable techniques. Do not "dictate"
what the suspect should write in their confession.
What the suspect writes must be in their
own words, and own
handwriting
—not
yours.
Do you anticipate the
likelihood that [up to two years after you conduct
that interrogation] you may be called into a court
of law as a witness to what you
said and how you
behaved? It happens with some
frequency and you must be prepared.
Next
Issue:
More
Court transcript revelations
If you have had a courtroom
"experience" or have "courtroom experience" and
you would like to share tips or insight, please
call us toll-free at
1-800-825-5572 or email us
at contact@corporatecombat.com.
Please submit only those cases that
relate to loss prevention or human
resources. |
| Return to Top of
Page |
-
|
Corporate Combat®
members have full access to
the Crookie Jar™
Click here to see a
partial transcript of the hearing that took place where
two attorneys worked real hard at finding 'evidence' to
make the witness appear to be anything but
professional. Keep in mind, it is their job to
win at any cost, even if it is at the cost of your
character and
reputation.
|
Return
to Top of Page
-
Liar!
Liar!
|
This is a new year and
although they often start with good intentions, they
also start with untruths. In other words, we
lie to ourselves and others. If we were to consider the
value and impact of our words, our promises, our
declarations we'd more likely stick to what we promise.
If we write our declarations on paper and post them next
to the "promise to diet" on the fridge, we might stick
to our word.
We call them New Year's
resolutions. A promise, declaration or decision to do
this or that better, to exercise more, eat better, be a
better mom or dad, brother or sister, treat each other
more humanely, to provide better customer service and a
host of other promises to self or others.
How seriously
do we take our own words; our own promises? How
quickly do we forget our New Year’s resolutions? The
promise or declaration often fades as others forget the
promises we made; as you forget the promises you made.
An excuse or rationalization takes the place of the
well-intentioned promise.
"Walking your talk is a
great way to motivate yourself. No one likes to live a
lie. Be honest with yourself, and you will find the
motivation to do what you advise others to
do."
—Vince Poscente
(Invinceable Principles)
- Who or what is being
robbed of the benefit of that promise or declaration?
- What if you follow
through with your word—will 2007 be any different?
- Will you be better off
in 2008?
- Will your friend,
relative or coworker be better off?
- Will others be surprised
that you kept your promise?
- What if everyone who
makes a resolution kept it—how would the world appear
in 2008?
"In every
stated resolution lies a seed of hope and change. In
every kept resolution hope is realized and change is
experienced."
Return to Top of
Page |
|
-
|
"In fact, there is no other form
of larceny that annually costs American citizens more
money than employee
theft
"
-
Richard C.
Hollinger, director
of Florida University's Security Research
Project
Bullet Points!
By CAROLYN SHAPIRO, The
Virginian-Pilot
Within three
months, a cashier at Farm Fresh in Chesapeake slid
about $1,000 worth of groceries past her scanner and
into the bags of friends and family members without
ringing the sales.
When her
mother came through her checkout line, the cashier
gave her unauthorized discounts and meat for free. She
would let her co-workers grab soda, chips or candy
bars at no charge - and they would do the same for
her.
Store
investigators caught some of the stealing on videotape
and examined electronic cash register journals,
according to documents Farm Fresh filed in Chesapeake
General District Court in 2004 to collect money from
the cashier. A judge ordered her to pay back $2,000 to
the supermarket chain, double the amount stolen, as
allowed under state law.
Farm Fresh
took similar civil court action against at least two
other cashiers that year for the same practice, which
retailers sometimes call "sweethearting." It's one of
many ways that employees steal from stores where they
work.
They stuff
such things as steak or clothing in their jackets and
bags and walk out with it. They swipe gift cards and
hide iPods in trash bins in hopes that managers won't
notice.
"They're using
cell-phone technology, they're using hand signals and
they're doing significant surveillance in advance of
their hits on stores"
Joseph
LaRocca of the National Retail Federation
Employees are responsible for the
largest amount of money that retailers lose every year
to "shrinkage," or inventory shortfalls, the
industry's most oft-cited statistics show. In the end,
retail experts said, consumers pay the cost in the
form of higher-priced goods to make up for stores'
losses.
Nationwide,
employee theft accounted for $17.6 billion in
retail inventory in 2005, according to the
National Retail Security Survey released annually by
the University of Florida. The 156 retailers that
participated in the survey, considered the industry's
standard for data on the subject, attributed 47
percent of their lost merchandise last year to
employees.
That's far
more than the 33 percent of total shrinkage attributed
to shoplifting. The proportion of losses from employee
theft has stayed close to 50 percent in the survey for
the past several years. The figures reflect only the
theft of products - not cash, which would add an
additional $234 million to retailers' losses reported
to the survey in 2005.
"In fact, there is no other form of
larceny that annually costs American citizens more
money than employee theft," Richard C.
Hollinger, director of the university's Security
Research Project, wrote in the survey.
Yet retailers
tend to raise more public concern about shoplifters
and lobby for more legislation to address shoplifting
than they do employee theft. They simply don't
like to talk about that.
Click
here to see a sample
confession from a convenience store clerk
that stole in excess of $7,500 by
sweethearting to her coworkers and
friends.
Return to Top of
Page
|
|
NOTE: If you are receiving the
Combat Journal as a "forwarded" version from a friend or
colleague, you may find it missing
graphics or formatting issues.
This is due to the forwarding process
and not the result of Corporate Combat's newsletter
distribution process. If you want to receive a 'clean'
version, please email us at
info@corporatecombat.com and simply ask to be added to
the recipient
list.
Corporate Combat®
is a Federal Registered Trademark of
Corporate Combat, Inc.
| |
|
|
|
-
Submit:
-
Articles
-
Tips
-
Techniques
-
Ideas
-
Suggestions
Submit HERE!
-
Certified Since 1993
-
-
-
1-877-226-6228
-
NOTE: The information
contained in the Combat Journal is a
small sampling of the types of information
available to Corporate Combat®
members!
Share
Your LP Tips! info@preventloss.com
"The entrepreneur in us sees
opportunities everywhere we look, but many people see only problems
everywhere they look. The entrepreneur in us is more concerned with
discriminating between opportunities than he or she is with failing
to see the opportunities." -
Michael Gerber - Author of The E-Myth
To set up a private
business opportunity consultation email us
at: biz@corporatecombat.com
| | |
Home |
DEMO |
Downloads |
Membership |
Background Checks |
Hotlines |
Video |
Newsletters |
Ebooks |
Links |
Main Site
Privacy & Terms of Use
Copyright ©
|
If you see a topic with a bullet before and after its title, it has been updated!
Check back frequently for new and updated articles! The following keywords indicate the type of content found in the selected newsletter.