Singaporean terminated after 3 months worries what former employer will say during background check

SINGAPORE: A Singaporean who was terminated just three months into a new job is now worried about how the abrupt departure could affect his chances of landing another role, particularly if it comes up during a background check.

On Wednesday (Sep 23), the man posted on the r/singaporejobs subreddit, saying he was told by his bosses that his employment would end with immediate effect, although the company would pay him in lieu of his notice period.

The explanation given to him verbally was that the company was facing business or budget constraints. He said he was also specifically assured that the decision was “not performance-related.”

That explanation might have been easier for him to accept had the company not advertised a role shortly afterwards that was “very similar” to the one he had been doing.

Adding to his confusion, he said there had been no indication beforehand that his work or behaviour was an issue.

“Prior to this dismissal, there was no feedback/warning on my performance or behaviour,” he wrote.

“Till now, I am not sure what the real reason is and what they didn't like about me.”

Worried about future interviews

The man added he was somewhat at a loss over how to explain the abrupt termination to prospective employers.

He said leaving the three-month role off his CV was not really an option, as he had already been laid off from his previous job. Removing this latest position would leave an even longer gap in his employment history.

“I can't omit this experience in my CV, as I was laid off from my previous job, and leaving this role would create a longer employment gap. Fighting it in court also requires time/money and very clear evidence,” he wrote.

"In my interviews, I said that the role ended due to a business reason, which was what was verbalised to me. But my concern is whether my previous employer would give a different explanation during the background check, hindering my next move. But I also don't know what else I could reasonably say when I was not given another explanation."

Seeking help, he asked: “For those who were fired/terminated, what explanation did you give to your future employers, and how did you handle background checks? Thanks.”

‘Don't volunteer the info, but also don't lie when asked’

Many users believed the best course of action would be to leave the three-month stint off their CV. Given how short his time at the company was, they felt it was unlikely to raise too many questions, particularly in a difficult job market where employment gaps are becoming more common.

One user said, “Just say that you were on sabbatical leave and the job economy is really difficult outside. That’ll do the trick mostly. Stay strong.”

Another commented, “Don't mention it at all. Most hiring companies can only do background checks on roles that you put in your resume.”

A third added, “In this economy, it's common to find people laid off before. It doesn't really carry the same stigma as, say, a decade ago. I wouldn't worry about mentioning it to employers. Don't volunteer the info, but also don't lie when asked.”

A few others, however, went against the grain and suggested that he include the three-month role on his CV, particularly if leaving it out would create a lengthy employment gap.

One told him, “If the gap is close to a year, then add it in, but tell the truth, which is the business reason. Usually most companies will not share why you were terminated. They would just verify the duration you worked.”

In other news, a diner has questioned whether water is becoming an expensive commodity after being charged S$0.50 for a small glass of warm water at a local eatery.

Posting in the Complaint Singapore (Anonymous) Facebook group on Friday (Sep 18), the diner uploaded a picture of the receipt and expressed disbelief at the extra charge.

Read more: ‘Go home and make your own hot water’: Singapore diner slammed over 50-cent charge complaint