It’s not as big a deal as it used to be, according to a recent Society for Human Resources Management survey. Nearly all (90%) of HR managers say online degrees are viewed more favorably than they were five years ago. And individual courses taken online are as credible as traditional courses, according to 68% of HR managers.

Still, more often than not, companies would rather hire someone who went to a traditional college: 63% said, everything else being equal, their organization would hire someone who went to a traditional college over someone with an online degree.

What’s your company’s take on applicants with online degrees? Does it make a difference to you? Let us know your opinion in the comments section below.

That dilemma’s at the heart of a controversy surrounding the police force in Washington, D.C., which may lead to the force’s Human Resources director losing her job. Here’s the skinny:

The Capitol Police have a policy against hiring cops with prior criminal convictions and conducts background checks to make sure all applicants are clean.

But recently, a batch of 60 officers-in-training were hired — and it turns out 15 of them had criminal records or “other irregularities” and lied about them. Apparently the convictions appeared on the background checks but the applicants were hired anyway.

How’d they slip through the cracks? No one’s sure yet, but a thorough investigation is planned by the D.C. government.

In the meantime, the force’s HR director has been put on administrative leave. Many government officials and members of the public have called on the force’s HR director to resign, or be terminated.

Regardless of the role nerves play in interviews, some statements just make you wonder how candidates made it this far.

Here are 15 of the most memorable interview responses from real people, compiled by CareerBuilder.com:

1. Q: Why did you leave your last job?
A: “I have a problem with authority.”

2. Q: What are your hobbies and interests?
A: [He said] ‘Well, as you can see, I’m a young, virile man and I’m single — if you ladies know what I’m saying.’ Then he looked at one of the fair-haired board members and said, ‘I particularly like blondes.’”

3&4. Q: Do you have any questions?
A: “Can we wrap this up fairly quickly? I have someplace I have to go.”
A: “If I get an offer, how long do I have before I have to take the drug test?”

5.  Q: Why should we hire you?
A: “I would be a great asset to the events team because I party all the time.”

6. Q: Why are you leaving your current job?
A: “Because I (expletive) my pants every time I enter the building.”

7. Q: Why are you looking for a job?
A: “Cigarettes are getting more expensive, so I need another job.”

8. Q: Why do you want to work for us?
A: “Just for the benefits.”

9. Q: What are your assets? (as in strengths)
A: “Well, I do own a bike.”

10. Q: What are your weaknesses?
A: “I get angry easily and I went to jail for domestic violence. But I won’t get mad at you.”

11. Q: When have you demonstrated leadership skills?
A: “Well my best example would be in the world of online video gaming. I pretty much run the show; it takes a lot to do that.”

12. Q: Use three adjectives to describe yourself
A: “I hate questions like this.”

13. Q: Tell of a time you made a mistake and how you dealt with it
A: “I stole some equipment from my old job, and I had to pay for its replacement.”

14. Q: Have you submitted your two weeks’ notice to your current employer?
A: “What is two weeks’ notice? I’ve never quit a job before, I’ve always been fired.”

15. Q: Random responses
A: “May I have a cup of coffee? I think I may still be a little drunk from last night.“

Competition for jobs is high, and many candidates will go to great lengths to stand out — including lie to you.

Here are some of the latest resume tweaks, according FakeResume.com, a Web site that advises job seekers on how to bend the truth and get away with it:

1. Covering up employment gaps

Many candidates are concerned about explaining periods when they were out of work. FakeResume’s recommendation: Pretend you were volunteering.

It’s a lot tougher to verify volunteer work than employment history. But if you’re suspicious, don’t brush over the issue. Ask probing questions about the work and, if possible, check references at the organization.

Another tactic to cover employment gaps or inflate experience is the so-called “functional resume,” which lists experience and accomplishments grouped by type, followed by a list of previous employers, rather than a chronological list of past positions. Not everyone who uses a functional resume is lying — but it might put you on alert.

2. Fake references

Most resume lies can be caught by checking references — so candidates who are serious about their dishonesty will provide references that are fake or impossible to check.

FakeResume recommends candidates provide the name and phone number of a fictitious supervisor at a large company. The number actually belongs to a friend who pretends to be an admin and tells the caller the company only provides references via letter. The candidate then mails a fake reference letter.

Candidates also place “typos” in a former employer’s address or phone number, hoping HR won’t bother when they can’t contact the person.

If you’re concerned about the references someone gives, experts recommend finding the company’s Web site and contacting the supervisor through the main phone number.

3. Phony responsibilities

Most fraudulent resumes don’t contain outright lies. More often, candidates stretch the truth, beefing up previous titles and exaggerating the responsibilities they had in previous positions.

The best way to catch those fibs is to ask detailed questions and not let the candidate off easy if you get vague or suspicious answers. Another tactic: Bring in somebody who’s already doing a job similar to the one the person’s applying for. Dishonest applicants will try to fake their way through an interview using buzzwords and generalities but break down when someone who’s actually experienced in the field asks for details.

One or none, according to most managers. One-fifth said they throw resumes away after spotting a single mistake, according to a survey by temp agency Accountempts. Another 28% said two typos would cost applicants an interview.

So there are plenty of sticklers out there, but surprisingly, 19% of supervisors said they’d still consider a resume with four or more errors.

The survey also revealed some of the most common mistakes employers see, such as:

• “Dear sir or madman”
• “I’m attacking my resume for you to review,” and
• “Following is a grief overview of my skills.”

Where do you stand on spelling and grammar mistakes? How many do you have to see before dropping a resume in the trash can?

Let us know in the comments section below.

Here are the 10 most common phrases candidates use too often, according to Liz Ryan of Yahoo! HotJobs:

1. results-oriented professional
2. cross-functional teams
3. more than (x) years of progressively responsible experience
4. superior communication skills
5. strong work ethic
6. met or exceeded expectations
7. proven track record of success
8. works well with all levels of staff
9. team player
10. bottom-line orientation

You’re probably familiar with some or all of those stock terms. But the question is: Does it make a difference?

Some HR folks worry about candidates who need to fall back on cliches to describe themselves. Others realize they’re overused, but focus on the skills and experience listed instead of the candidates’ inflated self-marketing.

How do you feel? Let us know your opinion in the comments section below.

When done properly, performance reviews will motive employees to do their jobs better and give them a concrete idea of how to do that. But too many managers fail to give the process the attention it deserves.

The majority of employees (57%) say they’ve never had a useful performance review, according to a survey by Harris Interactive. Those employees report their performance reviews have done little to motivate them or help them improve their work.

So what’s wrong? Here are the three most common mistakes managers make that limit the value of employee assessments:

1. Missing a key motivator

What do employees want out of their reviews? Aside from a raise, the main thing employees want to know is what career path they’re on, says consultant Laura Ford, speaking at the Society for Human Resources Management Annual Conference in New Orleans.

But one thing many reviews are missing is a discussion of what advancement opportunities may be available in the near future, and what the employee needs to do to make it happen.

2. Not going the distance

Too often, reviews for well-performing employees congratulate them on what they’ve accomplished and let the story end there. For example:

An employee meets a predetermined goal of boosting production by 10%. Her manager writes in her review: “Your production was lifted by 10% and you’ve met your goal.”

While that’s true, wording it that way makes it sound like she’s reached the end of the line. Instead, the manager should say: “You lifted production by 10%, which is a great accomplishment. You should continue the progress and try to reach 15% — or even higher — next year.”

That congratulates the employee on a job well done, while reinforcing the fact that there’s always room to move forward.

3. Failing to properly separate performance and pay discussions

Reviews are generally intertwined with a talk about salary. But raises should always be the last thing the manager talks about.

If pay comes up before the review is fully completed, it’s more likely employees will start arguing about the assessment instead of taking responsibility for their work. When the review is completed first, employees are more receptive to the manager’s critique.

After running the story: ‘Why wasn’t I hired’? – Should you answer?, we got feedback from our readers on what they have done. This is what we heard:

“I do not tell candidates the specifics of why they are not hired. I typically just thank them for their interest in our organization and tell them that they have an interesting (or diverse or impressive) work background but someone else was a better fit and came out on top.” — Jill Beighley

“We generally don’t respond to these kinds of follow-up questions for the reasons noted in the article. In the rejection letter we send to applicants, we state, ‘After carefully reviewing all resumes and applications, we interviewed a small number of applicants. Based on background, qualifications, skills and experience, we have selected the candidate that we feel will best fit the position.’ We don’t discriminate in our hiring process, but it’s best to keep answers to these kinds of questions short and sweet.” — R. Bond

“I have two schools of thought: one for Management candidates and one for Hourly candidates. I never send rejection letters to Management candidates I interview and do not offer the job. I always call and tell them that even though they have good credentials, we are seeking someone with more management experience in the specified area. I have always been thanked for calling them and allowing them to move on. Too often people are left in the dark after an interview; management candidates should be spoken to and given the courtesy of your decision. This just may create referrals down the road for future employment or business!

“As far as hourly candidates go, I always send rejection letters to those candidates not being employed. I have received a few phone calls after the fact as to why wasn’t I hired. I simply state we found a candidate with either more years of experience or more relative experience/skills for the job.” — Dan

To read more comments from the readers please go to the story page.

As HR pros know, it’s not out of the question for candidates to inflate their past job titles and duties, or add academic degrees that were never completed.

But these days, many out-of-work managers are looking for stop-gap jobs and stretching the truth in a different way — by “dumbing down” their credentials so they don’t appear overqualified.

A lot of formerly high-up employees are willing to step a few rungs down the ladder just to get a steady paycheck. Often, that requires them to convince hiring managers they won’t jump ship the moment the market improves and something better comes up.

One way they’re doing that: changing job titles to look less impressive, according to the Wall Street Journal. For example, one marketing exec changed her previous jobs as “manager” and “trend researcher” to “staff” and “office support.”

Candidates are also hiding degrees and other academic achievements. One woman looking for temporary clerical work said she received no calls from employers until she stopped listing her master’s degree on her resume.

The best ways to spot this new type of dishonesty? The same ways HR and hiring managers catch other applicant lies — by asking probing questions during the interview and when checking references.

How concerned should employers be?

Many are worried because they want to avoid hiring overqualified employees, who might be disgruntled in lower-level work and may constantly have one foot out the door.

Others are less concerned about overqualification — but a lie is still a lie. If people are dishonest before they’re hired, how reliable will they be as employees?

What do you think? Have you caught any candidate with a “dumbed down” resume? Give us your opinion and experience in the comments section below.

A summary of the case:

The fire department in New Haven, Connecticut, used a standard test to choose which firefighters to promote to lieutenant and captain. In one round of testing, 19 white employees and one Hispanic employee passed. No black firefighters passed the test.

According to the employer’s policy, the 20 employees who passed should have been promoted. But, viewing the test as biased against the black employees — and fearing a lawsuit from them — management scrapped the results and based the promotions on other factors.

In a classic case of “you’re damned if you, you’re damned if you don’t,” the department was hit with a lawsuit — from the 20 employees who passed the test and weren’t promoted. They claimed they mere most qualified for the jobs — according to the department’s policy — but weren’t promoted because of their race.

Two lower courts threw the case out before the Supreme Court reversed.

What does it mean to HR?

The case has gotten a lot of attention, mostly because the decision overturns one made by High Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. But what does it mean for HR pros?

The Court’s ruling stressed two points:

1. Employers do need to be careful about using selection procedures that have a disparate impact against a protected class, but
2. It’s not just a numbers game — if a test is job-related and consistent with business necessity, there’s no reason to suddenly change a selection procedure based on how many people of a certain race, gender, religion, etc., pass.

So basically if the test is legal, employers should stay consistent, rather than using the results in some instances and not in others.

Of course, few employers base hiring and promotion decisions solely on one thing, so deciding whether or not to scrap a test’s results likely wouldn’t have as big an impact as it did for the New Haven fire department.

But the case does contain a general lesson managers should be reminded of: Fear of being sued by members of one protected class is not a defense for discriminating against another.

Cite: Ricci v. DeStefano