<p>
</p>
<p>But again, why exactly would you be fired which implies losing your job for cause? After all, what’s the cause? You never provided any cause for firing because you never actually lied. If the company continues to assert that you were indeed fired for cause, they will have to demonstrate cause. Merely feeling ‘deceived’ is insufficient. </p>
<p>Now, granted, I agree that any firm can lay you off (without cause) at any time. But that happens all the time. More importantly, that’s easy to explain particularly in this economy, as millions of people have been laid off for entirely benign reasons. You can simply say that you employer decided to downsize staff, and you unfortunately happened to be one of them. </p>
<p>Besides, again, one has to compare having to explain why you lost your previous job vs. why you don’t even have a job at all. Seems to me that the latter is a far more difficult story to sell. At least with a job, you are able to develop valuable experience and networking contacts with which you can leverage to find another job. Sitting around unemployed provides you with none of that. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And I must continue to ask - why must we continue to invoke concepts such as integrity or morals? This is business, this ain’t beanball, and whether we like it or not, success in business is largely based on the strategic disclosure of information. When a movie studio deliberately omits the worst scenes of a movie to construct a trailer, is that “scary”? (If so, then I suppose all of Hollywood marketing is scary). When Apple, prior to the launch of the Ipad, secretly signed long-term supplier contracts for key manufacturing facilities to ensure that nobody else could quickly launch a strong tablet competitor, was that ‘immoral’? When a hedge fund refuses to disclose its trading strategy - and indeed, leverages dark pool trades and other obfuscatory schemes to disguise its trades - does that demonstrate a ‘lack of integrity’? I suspect that most of us would concede that, like it or not, that’s just the way that business is conducted. </p>
<p>Given that, I continue to ask: what exactly is so wrong for a potential employee to also strategically choose to withhold certain information about themselves? The act of hiring is a business transaction, no different from any other business transaction. Business ain’t beanball.</p>
<p>I might be convinced if I see Paramount Pictures + Dreamworks refund all of the ticket money they made for Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen that they drew for an epic series of trailers for a movie that has been widely derided as one of the worst movies ever made, having won the Razzie for Worst Picture and such that even director Michael Bay himself later openly admitting that the movie was “crap”. But hey, that movie turned out to be one of the highest grossing films of all time, and the studios are clearly not giving any of that money back. They’re laughing all the way to the bank. Nobody seems to be accusing them of “dishonesty”.</p>
<p>I find that one of the great ironies in the business world that when somebody strategically leverages information to market himself to obtain a job, he’s immediately castigated as behaving immorally or deceptively, when the money at stake is at most a few hundred thousand dollars a year. But when companies strategically leverage information through savvy marketing campaigns to influence hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen generated over $800million in revenue), the companies never suffer the slings and arrows of moral indignation.</p>