Lying on resume - veteran

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a former service member, I'm also still trying to figure out what OP thinks is two ranks lower than O-2.

Exactly, there is no such thing as an O-zero
Generally an officer will start at O-1 and two years later get promoted to O-2, then two years after that get promoted to O-3.

Exactly. My son is at Officer Candidate School (Navy) right now. He’s getting paid at E-5 rate until he completes OCS, and he is not a commissioned officer until he graduates. He will then start as O-1. ROTC graduates start immediately as O-1. And, I may be wrong, but I think my son signed to serve minimum four years.

OP has no clue what she’s talking about. Send an email to HR and see if they have a DD-214 on file. If he received any kind of veteran’s preference during the hiring process, I’m guessing HR would have this document.

[Anonymous]

OP here, thanks for the tip about asking for the DD 214.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here, thanks for the tip about asking for the DD 214.

OP do not do this without involving your HR. You could really piss off this employee and end up with the employee filing a complaint against you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, thanks for the tip about asking for the DD 214.

OP do not do this without involving your HR. You could really piss off this employee and end up with the employee filing a complaint against you.

You are right, we’ll ask HR to screen the package. It’s technically in their swim lane as part of the process.

[Anonymous]

The OP is putting together a proposal. One of the key personnel is an existing employee who, the OP thinks, has inflated his/her rank on the resume. OP thinks this for unknown, possibly gossipy, reasons. OP then proceeded to do a deep Google dive to produce some kind of corroborating information that the person is lying on the his resume. She found an archived record stating the person's promotion to some rank that is 2 levels below the rank on the resume. OP thinks this is illegal, pretending to be of higher rank, even though she does not know the person's actual rank (either current or when he left the service).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The OP is putting together a proposal. One of the key personnel is an existing employee who, the OP thinks, has inflated his/her rank on the resume. OP thinks this for unknown, possibly gossipy, reasons. OP then proceeded to do a deep Google dive to produce some kind of corroborating information that the person is lying on the his resume. She found an archived record stating the person's promotion to some rank that is 2 levels below the rank on the resume. OP thinks this is illegal, pretending to be of higher rank, even though she does not know the person's actual rank (either current or when he left the service).

Op here: Didn’t have to do a deep dive. The archived record identifies the person by rank. The resume states a higher rank. I don’t have a mil background which is why I am asking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a former service member, I'm also still trying to figure out what OP thinks is two ranks lower than O-2.

Exactly, there is no such thing as an O-zero
Generally an officer will start at O-1 and two years later get promoted to O-2, then two years after that get promoted to O-3.

And the minimum commitment after commissioning is three years, so this person is likely a little bit higher than entry level.

Not if they were discharged early. If they serve one day they can claim veteran status.

[Anonymous]

My BIL was in ROTC in HS a few weeks before Vietnam War ended and technically is a Vietnam War Veteran.

Shoes you how crazy ex army titles can be.