[x0x0]

If it's going to come up, either via references provided by the employee or via a backchannel, you're smarter to directly address it in the interview with the hiring manager. At least that way the hiring manager hears your side of the story too.

We hired someone who came within a hair of (deservedly) being charged with a felony by the FBI. He basically said he did something stupid 10 years ago, had learned a lesson, made amends, etc. Had he not addressed it during the interview, we would definitely have not hired him when it later came up during a formal background check.

[monoideism]

> within a hair of (deservedly) being charged with a felony by the FBI. He basically said he did something stupid 10 years ago, had learned a lesson, made amends, etc

Was it a work-related alleged offense? If not, sounds a little extreme to not hire someone because of an allegation that happened 10 years ago that they weren't even charged with.

[shrimpx]

That makes sense but the question at hand is about the past employer unfairly being a dick, not a legitimate issue with the applicant.

I think it's a tossup whether it should be mentioned in interviews because it can easily be misinterpreted/misread even by good employers to mean there's an issue with this applicant.