I don't know about this one...


He served his time.
His crime had nothing to do with kids.


If he lied on his job application, he should be fired.
If he just didn't fill in that particular question, he didn't lie, and there's no ground to fire him.

The article isn't clear about what he actually did.

2-1 ruling?? they only had 3 people voting?

As the thread head stated: He pleaded guilty to the 1990 beating death of his common-law wife.

Lying by Ommission is still lying.
Beating someone to death would indicate he has anger issues.

I think we disagree there, his employee's should've asked why he didn't fill in the question (if that was the case)

society thinks the anger issues are dealt with by serving his time.....otherwise they shouldn't have set him free.
I know that's a moron thing to say, but that makes us all morons for having a legal system that doesn't deal with the problem...not his fault.

Actually it is generally considered a deception or fraud if you omit something from your resume. Just as much as if you out right lie on it.

In this case he failed to offer this information, and with most employers failing to admit to any criminal record is grounds for termination if it should show up in a check.

Maybe I'm not familiar with the Canadian Penal System, but here in Merkuh, even with time served and therapy in jail, I know very few ex-cons re-enter society with less anger than before.

I can see why he would omit it though. Once you have a criminal record, everyone thinks it is their job to punish you.

Who the h*ll downvoted that?


Anyway...IMO if the question asks to LIST criminal incidents and he left it blank then he was lying. For an employer to ask why they didn't fill it out is nonsense unless there's a yes/no that they left blank. I guess it depends on the wording.

And even though this guy was "rehabilitated" I still don't think he should work someplace where a person doesn't have the option to avoid them if they feel it's unsafe. As a parent you have to trust your school has hired teachers safe for your children..and you have NO say....And we all know how easy it is for a kid to work on your nerves and make you want to kill somebody. :)

True, just taking it from the other person's viewpoint. Simply omitting the record could have been his way of rolling the dice. If they find out, he is no worse off than before. If they don't, then he has a job. If he put that offense on his application, he would be virtually guaranteed a rejection. Therefore, he didn't have anything to lose by omission and a job to gain, so he did it.

Again, calling for arbitration would be rolling the dice with nothing to lose. I can see why he did it, but still disagree with the arbitrator's decision.