採用調査・人事調査の企業サービス【昭和５４年創業】

社内でラッキー案件と呼ばれる調査がたまにある。一般的には採用調査であるが、一人の求職者が複数の企業に応募し、
弊社にその採用調査を別々の企業から依頼してくるケースである。ところが、今回のラッキー案件はそれと少し違い、
１ケ月ほど前に調査した被調査人が偶さか別の企業に応募し、その調査が弊社に来たのである。こんなケースは滅多にないが、
それでも年に１?２件はある。

担当調査員、案件を受け取るや否や「あれ・・、この人記憶あるでー」、「ラッキー、○○会社で１ケ月前に遣っている案件や」、
ところが暫くして調査員、「参ったまいった」と嘆くことしきり。被調査人は同一人物でありながら履歴書記載の職歴が大幅に相違している。
職歴確認は再度やり直し。前回の職歴に無かった職歴があり、有った職歴が無くなっている。
調査をしているうちに調査員も何がなんだか訳が分からなくなり、ラッキーどころか、かえって時間がかかってしまったと云うわけである。勿論、
前回の調査でも「問題あり、要検討」の応募者として報告しており、今回も同じく「問題あり、要検討」ではあるが、
報告書は一から書き直さなければならなかった。

履歴書ていったい何だ・・・、少し考えさせられた案件であった。

それでも今回の応募者は、職歴が中小企業中心であったという事もあり、結構取材先も調査に協力的であったが、
これが大企業や官公庁であれば先ず無理。「個人情報については一切お応えできません」で終わりである。

そんな事をヒントに、このブログを書きながらフッと考えた、こんな儲かりもしない難しい商売をしているよりも、
「絶対に合格する就職ガイダンス」　と名うってセミナー業でも遣ろうかと・・。
「貴方の過去は問いません、お好きな履歴をご用意します。今日から貴方は一流商社マン、本当の学歴なんて関係ない、貴方は今日から東大卒、
私は明日から京大卒。絶対に判らない履歴書詐称の記載方法を教えます・・」などと云うのはどうだろう。しかも、
就職の際の調査は差別につながる恐れがあるからしてはいけません」と、税金を使って必死に行政指導している厚生労働省と共催するというのは。

There are occasional investigations that are called “lucky cases” within the company. Typically, it is a hiring survey in which a single job seeker applies to multiple companies.
In this case, different companies asked us to conduct a recruitment survey. However, this time’s lucky case is a little different from that.
About a month ago, the respondent who had conducted the survey applied to another company, and the survey came to us. It’s not often that this happens.
Still, it’s one or two a year.

As soon as the investigator in charge receives the case, “Oh, this person has a memory”, “Lucky, it’s a case I did a month ago at a certain company”, and so on.
After a while, however, the investigator lamented, “I’m overwhelmed. Although the investigator is the same person, there is a significant difference in the work history listed on his resume.
The work history check is redone. You have a job history that was not in your previous job history, and the job history that was there is no longer there.
During the investigation, the investigator was at a loss as to what was going on, and it took him a long time. Of course.
In the previous survey, we reported that the applicant was “problematic and needs to be considered”, and this time, the applicant was also “problematic and needs to be considered”.
The report had to be rewritten from scratch.

What the hell is a resume…this case made me think a little.

Nevertheless, this year’s applicants were mostly from small and medium-sized companies, and the interviewees were quite cooperative with the survey.
If this is a large company or government office, it is impossible. It ends with, “We can’t respond to any personal information.

That’s when it occurred to me, as I was writing this blog, that rather than running such an unprofitable and difficult business, I should be doing something about it.
I’m thinking of doing a seminar under the name of “job-hunting guidance for those who will definitely pass.
We don’t need to know your past, we can provide you with a history of your choice. From now on, you’re a top trading company man, I don’t care what your education is, you’re a graduate of Tokyo University.
I’m a graduate of Kyoto University starting tomorrow. How about “I’ll teach you how to write a fraudulent resume that you’ll never understand…” and so on? Moreover.
I don’t understand why the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, which is desperately using taxpayers’ money to provide administrative guidance, is co-sponsoring the investigation into employment because it could lead to discrimination.

久々に営業マンが新規開拓に成功。１件の人事調査を受件し、意気揚々と帰社。その案件というのが採用調査であって採用調査でない。
被調査人は既に入社し半年を経過している従業員である。新規客に多いケースであるが、ハローワークの指導よろしきを得て、
試験と面接だけで社員を採用した。

ところがどうもおかしい、当初２?３ケ月は良かったが慣れるに従い動きが不透明でよく判らない。再度、入社時の履歴書を見直すが、
履歴は中々のもの。一流国立大学卒で一部上場企業に18年勤務。妻有り、扶養家族２人とある。職務経歴書を覗くと、
何年何月財務部課長に就任、○○業務を主に担当、○○の実績を上げ云々とあり、書類上では望んでいた人材とピッタリ一致している。
これでは採用しないほうがおかしいほどである。ところがあにはからんや・・・。

調査依頼は、「採用調査の一般的な形でいいから、履歴書に基づいて遣って欲しい」とのこと。早速履歴書を基に調査に入るが、
またもや個人情報保護の壁。大学は同窓会名簿で何とか確認ができ、結果は申告通りOK。ところが職歴がサッパリ。18年勤めた○○会社。
最初は正面から、「就職の為の在籍確認」という事で照会をお願いするが、人事担当者曰く、「個人の事は保護法の関係で一切お応えできません」
。こんな応答は最近はごく当たり前、腹を立てるだけ損。そこで調査員は直ぐに、「いや、
期間まではともかくとして居たか居なかっただけでも教えて頂けませんでしょうか・・？」、「それもお応えできません」。中々ガードは固い。
こんな優秀なマニュアル人間を相手にしていてもらちがあかない。そこで調査員は考えた。職務経歴書に財務部課長として云々とあるのを基に、
早速財務部にアプローチ、「山田課長（被調査人の仮称）さんお願いします。」「エッ、何か間違いでは御座いませんか、
山田課長という人は財務にはおりませんが」、「山田さんですよ・・・。エッ、そうしたら変わったの・・・」「いえ、
以前にも内に山田という課長はおりません・・」「あっそう、聞き間違いかな・・。経理とか、
庶務とかにも山田課長という人はおりませんでしたか・・」、「私は15年ここに居ますが山田さんという人は記憶にありません」。
これは何時ものパターンだな・・。先ず間違いなく職歴詐称。そこで、一端職歴調査を断念して、現住所へ。淀川区十三○丁目０ー００、
戸建住宅を感じさせる住所だが、所番地に該当するのはワンルームマンションでオートロック式。
郵便受けにも疎らに名前があるが大方は記載なし。勿論「山田」の名前は見当たらない。そこで、近くの不動産屋に入り、
該当地番のマンションに入居したい旨を告げ、空き状況や家賃、部屋の状況などをたずねる（調査で聞き合わせをしても不動産会社は、
個人情報を理由に一切応えない）。結果判ったことは、妻子4人家族が住むには無理があり、単身の可能性が高いこと。また、
ワンルームの住人をつかまえて聞いても、「判らない」と云うに決まっている。半ばお手上げ状態。

調査は振り出しに。結果判った事は、被調査人　山田某は、国立大学を卒業し新卒で履歴書記載の企業に勤めたが1年半で退職し、
以来企業を転々とする、ただ、何れでも経理財務を担当し知識はそこそこに持っている。が、
糖尿病の持病があり体調不良で何れの企業でも長続きせず、常に嘘の履歴で就職しては半年、
1年でボロを出し転職を繰り返している人物であることが判った。

結果を出すに至った経緯はここには書けないが、最近は普通の手段では中々採用調査もままならない。
「採用調査は差別につながるおそれがあるからしてはいけない」と指導しているのが厚生労働省。

ここで私が言いたいのは、山田と一緒に応募した求職者のことだ・・・。
選考段階で採用調査をしていれば当然山田以外の応募者が採用になったはず、ところがハローワークの行政指導（調査否定）のお陰で、
他の応募者は不採用となり嘘でかためた山田が採用になった。これが事実である。私が参加した、大阪府の「公正採用調査システム検討会議」
でもこのことは強く主張したが、人権論者には全く受け入れられなかった。嘘で固めた履歴書などで公正な採用が出来る訳などないと思うが、
「調査をすることは差別につながる恐れがあるからダメ」（厚生労働省）。なんと素晴らしい理論であろう・・。これこそまさに本末転倒である。

以前であれば、勤務先に確認すれば大体の事は判った。勤務期間は勿論、就業態度から能力、資格、性格、
退職理由など仕事に関わることは大体聞けた。また、居住地は現地調査は勿論、
住民票を確認することで何時からそこに住み家族は何人で世帯主は誰か・・・等々。調査料金は殆ど変わらないが手間は倍かかり、
得られる情報は僅か。結果、クライアントにはいい顔はされない。

日陰者の調査業者ではあるが現在の個人情報保護や個人主義の行き過ぎに警笛を鳴らし続け、
少なくとも経歴確認くらいは大手を振ってできる社会を取り戻したい。相手は、法務省、総務省、厚生労働省。
自己保身に固まった役人を説得する方法は・・。

A salesperson succeeded in developing new business after a long time, received one HR survey, and returned to the office in high spirits. The case was a hiring survey, not a hiring survey.
The Respondent is an employee who has been with the company for six months. This is often the case with new customers, but with the guidance of Hello Work.
They only hired employees through tests and interviews.

However, it was strange, it was good for 2 or 3 months at first, but as I got used to it, the movement was unclear and I couldn’t understand it well. Again, I’m reviewing your resume from when you joined the company.
The history is decent. He is a graduate of a prestigious national university and has worked for a partly listed company for 18 years. He has a wife and two dependents. I looked at my resume.
In what year and month did you become the manager of the finance department, mainly in charge of _______________ business and achieving _______________ results?
It would be ridiculous not to adopt it. But there’s no way…

The request for a survey was “I don’t want it to be in the general form of a hiring survey, I want it to be based on my resume. I’m going to go ahead and do some research based on my resume.
Another privacy barrier. I managed to check the university’s alumni list and got the results as reported, but I can’t seem to find out anything about my work history at the company where I worked for 18 years.
At first, we ask you to make an inquiry in the form of “confirmation of enrollment for employment”, but the HR person says, “We can’t respond to any personal matters due to the protection law.
. This kind of response is so common these days, you can’t help but be offended. So the investigator immediately said, “No.
Could you tell me if you were or were not there for any period of time at all…? I can’t respond to that either. He’s now working a closed guard.
It’s no use dealing with such an excellent manual person. So the investigator thought. Based on the fact that your resume mentions you as the head of the finance department.
I immediately approached the Finance Department and said, “Mr. Yamada, Chief of the Yamada Division (tentative name of the investigator), please. Huh, there’s a mistake, sir.
The person named Yamada Section Chief isn’t in finance, but it’s Yamada-san…. I’m not sure what to do about it.
It’s a great way to get a good idea of what’s going on in your life. You know, accounting.
I’ve been here for 15 years, but I don’t remember anyone named Yamada-san.” “Didn’t you have a manager named Yamada in the general affairs department?
This is the usual pattern, isn’t it? First of all, it’s definitely a job falsification. So, I gave up on the background check and went to my current address. 13-0-0, Yodogawa-ku, Tokyo
The address gives the impression of a detached house, but the address corresponds to a studio apartment with an auto-lock system.
The mailboxes are also sparsely named, but mostly unlisted. Of course, there is no “Yamada” name in sight. So I went into the nearest real estate agency.
Tell them that you would like to move into an apartment with the relevant address, and ask them about the availability, rent, and room conditions.
(I will not respond at all on the grounds of personal information). As it turns out, it’s too much for a family of four to live in and it’s likely to be a single person. Also.
If you get a tenant who lives in a one-room apartment and ask him about it, he’s bound to say, “I don’t understand. I’m halfway out of the game.

The investigation is back to square one. It turns out that the respondent, Yamada, graduated from a national university and worked for the company listed on her resume as a fresh graduate, but resigned after a year and a half.
Since then, I’ve moved from one company to another, but I’ve always been in charge of accounting and finance, so I have some knowledge. but
I have diabetes and my health is not good enough to work for long at any company.
It turned out to be someone who had been out of shape for a year and had changed jobs repeatedly.

I can’t tell you how I came to get the results, but these days, it’s hard to do a recruitment survey by ordinary means.
The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare has instructed that “recruitment surveys should not be conducted because they may lead to discrimination.

What I’m talking about here is the job seekers who applied with Yamada….
But thanks to the administrative guidance (denial of the investigation) from the Hello Work, we were hired.
The other applicants were rejected and Yamada, who had lied, was hired. This is a fact. Osaka Prefecture’s “Fair Employment Survey System Study Conference” in which I participated.
But I argued this strongly, and it was not accepted at all by human rights theorists. I don’t think there’s any way you can make a fair hire with a false resume or anything like that.
‘No, you can’t do an investigation because it could lead to discrimination’ (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare). What a great theory….. This is exactly what is at stake.

I used to be able to get a general idea of what I was doing by checking with my employer. The length of time you work, of course, but also your ability, qualifications, personality, and work attitude.
I was able to ask about most things related to work, such as the reason for leaving the company. In addition, the place of residence is of course a local survey.
By confirming the certificate of residence, you can find out how long you have been living there, how many family members you have, who is the head of the household, etc. The cost of the survey is almost the same, but it’s twice as much work.
There is very little information available. As a result, the client doesn’t look good.

He’s a shady investigator, but he continues to sound the whistle on the current excesses of privacy and individualism.
I want to bring back the society where we can at least do a background check with the major companies. The opponents are the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare.
How to persuade a self-protective official…