Using pseudonyms on resumes

[PayrollHRGuy]

Agreed - heck, with e-verify it's pretty much instant.

I almost specifically excluded e-Verify from my statement. And didn't because LdiJ didn't mention it in her post. She was specific with New Hire and SSA.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

That may be true in your state but I got notifications quickly in mine when I was an employer...and we get notifications quickly here as well.

Who notified you?

 

[quincy]

I agree that details matters.

Very few legal questions can be answered definitively. There are almost always exceptions.

It is well known by most on this forum that I have a real problem with definitive answers, especially on a forum where we never have access to all of the facts.

 

[cbg]

I would not consider using Bob instead of Robert as a pseudonym.

 

[LdiJ]

I almost excluded e-Verify from my statement. And didn't because LdiJ didn't mention it in her post. She was specific with New Hire and SSA.

Do you find e-verify to be working well for you? We tried it some years back and felt it was too unwieldy to deal with. If you find it working well for you we might try it again. Our problem with it was that we didn't use it frequently enough (we are only hiring new hires during a limited period of time each year) and the passwords always expired and it was a hassle to get re-enrolled.

 

[quincy]

I would not consider using Bob instead of Robert as a pseudonym.

I already said it was a bad example.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

We don't use it. I couldn't for the longest time because they didn't understand the co-employment relationship we have with our clients.

The new HR/Payroll software we are going to be switching to around the first of the year as direct access so we will probably start then.

 

[LdiJ]

We don't use it. I couldn't for the longest time because they didn't understand the co-employment relationship we have with our clients.

The new HR/Payroll software we are going to be switching to around the first of the year as direct access so we will probably start then.

Thanks for the info.

 

[LdiJ]

I agree that details matters.

Very few legal questions can be answered definitively. There are almost always exceptions.

It is well known by most on this forum that I have a real problem with definitive answers, especially on a forum where we never have access to all of the facts.

What I have a problem with is how you handle your responses to definitive answers. When I think that an answer has been make too definitive my response is generally that I have a slight or small disagreement with the answer and then outline why I think that.

When you have a problem with a definitive answer, you just say "not true" or other similar phrasing. I don't think that those kind of answers are fair to the posters, because you give the impression that an answer that is substantially true, or true with exceptions/qualification is wrong. You even do it to me sometimes when I have qualified an answer.

 

[quincy]

Why don't you take your complaint to the senior discussion forum, LdiJ.

Geez, I am so happy this forum does not as a rule answer hypothetical questions. They tend to veer off in all sorts of directions.

I think this thread should have ended with Zigner's first post.

 

[MarkJones]

Thank you all for your response. They were very helpful.

 

[quincy]

I am glad you found the responses helpful.

As one additional note: Although you might find employment/legal documents under the real names of Emmanuel Radnitzky, Malcolm Little, Earvin Johnson, Lawrence Peter Berra or Choo Yeang Keat (and others like them), it would not be surprising to find their resumes might have used their better-known nicknames/pseudonyms. Many people in many different fields are better known and recognized by their "false" names than their real names.

Now I am off to find a few buddies, some beer and a campfire to discuss some hypothetical something or other.

 

[CTU]

I am glad you found the responses helpful.

As one additional note: Although you might find employment/legal documents under the real names of Emmanuel Radnitzky, Malcolm Little, Earvin Johnson, Lawrence Peter Berra or Choo Yeang Keat (and others like them), it would not be surprising to find their resumes might have used their better-known nicknames/pseudonyms. Many people in many different fields are better known and recognized by their "false" names than their real names.

Now I am off to find a few buddies, some beer and a campfire to discuss some hypothetical something or other.

David Dennison?

 

[quincy]

David Dennison?

He has also been known as John Miller and John Barron.

Some people find the need to have many pseudonyms.

 

[cbg]

Elsewhere the OP has indicated that this is, in fact, due to a real situation and not hypothetical at all. But for some reason he appears to find it difficult to understand that there are shades of grey and exceptions and when we attempt to answer questions with no context, we may give him incorrect information.