Table of Contents
- Why Employment History Verification Matters for Enterprise HR
- How Employment Verification APIs Work
- How to Check Employment History Using UAN
- Is UAN Employment Verification Legal?
- DocuExprt's Employment Verification APIs
- Building an Employment Verification Workflow in DocuExprt
- Industry Use Cases
- Integration Guide
- Key Takeaways
- Frequently Asked Questions
Employment verification for HR and BGV teams
Employment verification APIs help HR teams, staffing companies and background verification providers compare a candidate's declared work history with records returned by supported verification sources. DocuExprt brings these checks into a configurable workflow, so your team can review discrepancies and pass results to its existing systems.

Use this guide to understand the available checks, the information needed to run them, and where a reviewer should step in. For the broader solution, explore background verification automation or HR document verification and onboarding.
HR operations
Compare declared employment with available source records and organize exceptions for review.
Staffing and BGV teams
Build a repeatable verification process across candidate batches and client requirements.
Integration teams
Connect verification steps to your HRMS or ATS using the supported API and workflow options.
Choose the check that fits your workflow
| Verification step | Business question | Review before use |
|---|---|---|
| UAN employment history | How do available employment records compare with the candidate's declared history? | Confirm source coverage, returned fields and gaps for the candidate. |
| PAN employment status | Is an employment-status check available for this case? | Confirm the supported source, inputs and meaning of the returned status. |
| Aadhaar-to-UAN and UAN checks | Can the supported lookup or validation help prepare the employment check? | Confirm required authorization, input requirements and source availability. |
| Name matching | Do names across the submitted and returned records align? | Review spelling variations and uncertain matches rather than rejecting automatically. |

What your team reviews
Illustrative review outcome — fictional example, not an API response or a hiring decision.
| Item | Example outcome | Next step |
|---|---|---|
| Employer record | A returned employer record matches the declared organization. | Record the source and the check timestamp. |
| Employment dates | The returned dates differ from the dates supplied by the candidate. | Ask the reviewer to reconcile the difference with the candidate. |
| Missing record | No record is returned for one declared role. | Request another verification method; a missing record alone does not prove false information. |
Coverage and exception handling
Source availability, candidate records and enabled checks affect what can be returned. Do not assume complete work-history coverage for every candidate. Plan for missing records, delayed updates, name differences and temporary source failures. Overlapping dates are a review signal, not proof of misconduct.
Confirm the required authorization and candidate-consent process before running checks. Route uncertain results to a designated reviewer; retain the evidence needed for your organization's process. For deployment and integration choices, see the enterprise document verification platform.
Planning an integration? Bring your expected monthly verification volume, required checks and HRMS/ATS details. Request an employment verification demo to review coverage, a sample result and the integration approach. Use synthetic or appropriately authorized sample data.
Review Your Employment Verification Workflow
Explore supported UAN and PAN checks for your HR or BGV process.
- Review available source records
- Flag discrepancies for review
- Plan for missing records
- Discuss your reporting needs
Loading the form… If it does not appear, open the demo page.
🔒 CERT-IN Certified🛡 ISO 27001🎟 Free trial tokens
Why Employment History Verification Matters for Enterprise HR
The Cost of Getting It Wrong
A single bad hire at the mid-management level costs organizations between $50,000 and $240,000 when you factor in recruitment costs, onboarding, lost productivity, severance, and rehiring. For senior roles, that figure can exceed $500,000.
But the real risk is not just financial. In regulated industries like banking, insurance, healthcare, government, an unverified hire can trigger compliance violations, regulatory penalties, and reputational damage that far exceeds the hiring cost.
Resume Fraud Has Reached Crisis Levels
The numbers tell the story:
| Metric | Data Point |
|---|---|
| Candidates who misrepresent resumes | 64.2% have lied at least once |
| Fraudulent candidates who receive offers | 63% get offered the job |
| Employers who never discover the fraud | 96% of lying candidates go undetected |
| HR teams with strong fraud-prevention controls | Only 31% |
| Candidates willing to use AI to fabricate resumes | 73.4% would consider it |
| Recruiters who have spotted candidate deception | 91% (Greenhouse 2025 study) |
The gap between detection capability and fraud sophistication is widening. Nearly two-thirds (62%) of hiring professionals believe candidates are now better at faking identities with AI help than HR teams are at detecting deception.
Manual Verification Is Broken
Traditional employment verification methods have fundamental limitations:
- Phone-based reference checks take 3-7 business days per candidate and depend on former employers answering
- Letter-based verification can take 2-4 weeks and is easily forged
- Manual EPFO checks require candidates to produce physical documents that can be fabricated
- No real-time cross-verification between claimed experience and actual records
For organizations processing 50+ hires per month, manual verification becomes a bottleneck that either slows hiring or gets skipped entirely creating the compliance gaps that regulators exploit.
Regulatory Compliance Is Non-Negotiable
In India's BFSI sector, RBI and SEBI mandate robust employee screening for anyone in positions of financial responsibility or with access to sensitive customer data. Key requirements include:
- Fit and Proper criteria for directors and key functionaries at banks and NBFCs
- KYC staff screening — employees handling KYC must themselves be verified
- Third-party vendor verification for anyone accessing customer data
- Audit trail maintenance — regulatory audits sample random employee records, and missing verification documentation triggers serious compliance findings
- DPDP Act compliance — explicit consent, purpose limitation, and data minimization for all candidate data processing
How Employment Verification APIs Work
Employment verification APIs connect your HR systems directly to government databases, returning verified employment records in real time. Here is the core architecture:
The Three Government Database Layers
Layer 1: EPFO / UAN
Database
Complete list of employers, dates of joining and leaving, member IDs, PF contribution history, and exit reasons for every formal-sector employee in India.
Layer 2: Income Tax / PAN Database
Form 26AS data showing TDS deductions by employers, current employment status, and income declarations that cross-reference with claimed salary history.
Layer 3: UIDAI / Aadhaar Database
UAN lookup when candidates don't know their UAN number, plus identity confirmation through demographic matching.
API vs. Manual Verification Comparison
| Parameter | Manual Verification | API-Based Verification |
|---|---|---|
| Turnaround time | 3-14 business days | 2-30 seconds |
| Accuracy | Depends on reference quality | Direct government database match |
| Scalability | 5-10 verifications/day/person | Thousands per hour |
| Fraud detection | Limited to obvious inconsistencies | Cross-database anomaly detection |
| Moonlighting detection | Nearly impossible | Overlapping PF records flagged for review |
| Cost per verification | Rs. 500 - Rs. 2,000 | Rs. 10 - Rs. 50 |
| Audit trail | Paper-based, inconsistent | Automated, timestamped, complete |
How to Check Employment History Using UAN
There are two routes. The candidate can view their own Service History on the EPFO member portal, or an employer or BGV provider can fetch the same record through a consent-based API check.
Both read the same EPFO data. The difference is who handles it on the way to you.
Route 1: The candidate checks it on the EPFO member portal
Every member can see their own record on the EPFO Unified Member Portal.
- Log in with the UAN, password and the one-time password sent to the registered mobile.
- Open the View menu and choose Service History.
- Read the list of establishments linked to the UAN, with member IDs and dates of joining and exit.
- Download or capture the page and share it with the employer.
That last step is the weak point. A shared screenshot or PDF is a document, not a source check, and it can be edited before it reaches you.
Treat it as a claim to verify, not as proof. If you must accept one, run it through a document tampering check first.
Route 2: The employer or BGV provider checks it through an API
The candidate approves the check, and the API returns the employment record straight into your system. No candidate-handled file sits in between.
The returned history is then compared against the resume automatically, so reviewers see only the mismatches.
| EPFO member portal | Consent-based API | |
|---|---|---|
| Who runs it | The candidate, with their own login | The employer or BGV provider, after candidate consent |
| What you receive | A screenshot or PDF | A structured record from the source |
| Tampering risk | File can be edited before you see it | No file passes through the candidate |
| Comparison with resume | Manual, line by line | Automatic, mismatches flagged |
| Scale | One candidate at a time | Batches through the API |
When UAN data will not answer the question
UAN records only show employment that was reported to EPFO. Plan a second check for these cases:
- Employers outside EPF coverage, such as smaller establishments, overseas roles and informal work.
- Older PF accounts never linked to the candidate's current UAN.
- Employees never enrolled in EPF, which can include some higher-salaried staff.
- Recent roles where the employer's filings have not caught up yet.
For these gaps, a PAN and Form 26AS check, forensic checks on relieving letters and salary slips, or direct employer confirmation fill in the picture.
A missing record is a reason to verify another way. It is not proof that the candidate lied.
Is UAN Employment Verification Legal? Where the Data Comes From
UAN employment records come from the returns employers file with EPFO. Checking them is lawful when the candidate knows about the check, has agreed to it, and the data is used only for verification.
The legal risk sits with vendors who skip those steps, not with the check itself.
What the DPDP Act means for employment checks
Under India's Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, a candidate's employment and identity records are personal data.
The Act includes a "legitimate use" ground for employment purposes. Whether it covers pre-hire checks run by a third-party vendor is not settled, so most enterprises and BGV providers take explicit, check-specific consent anyway.
The DPDP Rules, 2025 were notified in November 2025, with most business obligations applying from May 2027. Consent records built today will need to hold up then.
Five questions to ask any employment verification vendor
Buyers serving multinational and regulated clients now ask these before signing. Any vendor should answer all five in writing.
- Where does each check's data come from? Ask for the route, check by check.
- Is consent captured before every check? And is it stored with the result?
- Does any check work without the candidate knowing? Treat that as a red flag, especially for Aadhaar-linked lookups.
- What is retained, and for how long? Documents, results and logs.
- What certifications cover the platform? Security audits and ISO 27001 at minimum.
DocuExprt runs employment checks on a consent-first workflow. The consent flag, source and timestamp are logged with each result, so your audit file shows who agreed to what.
During an evaluation, ask the team to walk through the source route for each check you plan to use.
Getting candidates to say yes to the consent request
Candidates hesitate when an unfamiliar company asks for access to their records. This is common when a BGV provider sends the request on an employer's behalf.
Deployments that get high consent rates do four things:
- Warn candidates early. HR mentions the check at offer stage and names who will send it.
- Name the hiring company in the request, not only the vendor.
- Say which records will be checked and why, in one or two lines.
- Never ask for an OTP or password. Candidates approve access themselves.
Pick what you need to establish about a candidate and what you already hold. The planner tells you which checks will stand up, which will only be partial, and what you are still missing — before you raise a single verification request.
Pick at least one thing to establish and one item you hold, then press Plan the checks.
This planner is a decision aid built from how each record type works. It does not contact EPFO, the Income Tax department or any employer, it stores nothing, and it is not legal advice. Confirm your own obligations under the DPDP Act before running checks.
Running these checks by hand, one candidate at a time?
Book a DocuExprt demoSee the verification APIs belowDocuExprt's Employment Verification APIs
DocuExprt provides five employment verification API endpoints that cover the full spectrum of employment history checks:
1. UAN-To-Employment-History API
The flagship employment verification endpoint. Input a UAN number and receive the complete EPFO employment history.
Input: UAN Number
Returns:
- Employee name (as registered with EPFO)
- All employer names and establishment IDs
- Date of joining and date of exit for each employer
- Member IDs across employers
- PF filing status and contribution history
- Exit reason codes
Primary use case: Validate a candidate's claimed work experience against official EPFO records. If a candidate claims 5 years at Company X but EPFO records show only 2 years, the discrepancy is flagged automatically.
2. PAN-To-Employment-Status API
Input a PAN number and verify current employment status through income tax records.
Input: PAN Number
Returns:
- Current employment status
- TDS deduction history (Form 26AS data)
- Income declarations cross-referenced with employment claims
Primary use case: Detect moonlighting and dual employment. If a candidate claims to be unemployed but Form 26AS shows active TDS deductions from another employer, you know immediately. Since the pandemic, moonlighting investigations have grown 4X since 2019 — this API catches what HR interviews cannot.
3. Aadhaar-To-UAN Lookup
When a candidate doesn't know their UAN number (common for blue-collar and early-career workers), this API bridges the gap.
Input: Aadhaar-linked details
Returns: Associated UAN number(s)
Primary use case: Enable employment history verification for candidates who only have their Aadhaar number available. Chain this with the UAN-To-Employment-History API for complete verification.
4. UAN-To-UAN Verification
Validates that a UAN number is genuine and active within the EPFO system.
Input: UAN Number
Returns: UAN validity status, associated details
Primary use case: Quick validation before running the full employment history lookup. Filters out fake or inactive UAN numbers.
5. Name Match API
Cross-references names across multiple documents and database records to catch identity discrepancies.
Input: Name strings from different sources
Returns: Match confidence score, variation analysis
Primary use case: Verify that the name on the resume, PAN card, Aadhaar card, and EPFO records all belong to the same person. Catches identity fraud where candidates use another person's employment history.
See an API Check Run Live
One candidate, UAN lookup to verified history.
- Aadhaar-to-UAN resolution
- Full employment history returned
- Only mismatches need review
- Plugs into your existing ATS
Or book a demo on your own files.
🔒 CERT-IN Certified🛡 ISO 27001🎟 Free trial tokens
Building an Employment Verification Workflow in DocuExprt
DocuExprt's visual workflow builder lets you create a complete employment verification pipeline using five node types without coding. Here is a production-ready workflow architecture:
Workflow Architecture: Employee Background Verification
- Resume / CV
- PAN Number
- UAN Number
- Aadhaar
- AI Extract name, exp
- UAN → History API
- PAN → Status API
- Name Match
- Resume vs EPFO data
- Match? → Verified
- Mismatch? → Flagged
- PDF Report
- Pass/Fail Status
- Flag List
- Audit Log
- Confidence scoring
- Anomaly detection
- Auto-decisioning
Step-by-Step Workflow Setup
Step 1: Configure Input Node
Set up the Input node to accept candidate data from multiple sources:
- File upload: Resume/CV in PDF, image, or scanned document format
- Form fields: PAN number, UAN number (optional), Aadhaar number (optional)
- Bulk upload: CSV file with multiple candidate records for batch processing
- API trigger: Incoming webhook from your ATS (Applicant Tracking System)
Step 2: Configure Processing Nodes
Add four processing nodes in parallel:
- AI Document Extraction — DocuExprt's AI extracts candidate name, claimed employers, job titles, tenure dates, and education from the uploaded resume. Works with 20+ languages including Hindi, Telugu, Tamil, and Gujarati.
- UAN-To-Employment-History API — Fetches the complete EPFO employment history using the candidate's UAN number.
- PAN-To-Employment-Status API — Checks current employment status and TDS history via the PAN number.
- Name Match — Cross-references the candidate name from the resume against names in EPFO and PAN records.
Step 3: Configure Conditional Node
The Conditional node is where DocuExprt's agentic AI makes autonomous decisions:
- IF resume claims match EPFO records (employer names, dates within ±30 days) → Route to "Verified" output
- IF minor discrepancies exist (date differences of 30-90 days, minor name variations) → Route to "Review Required" output
- IF major discrepancies exist (missing employers, fabricated tenure, identity mismatch) → Route to "Failed" output with flagged issues
- IF PAN-To-Employment-Status shows active employment elsewhere → Flag "Moonlighting Detected"
Step 4: Configure Output Node
Generate structured verification reports:
- PDF verification report with pass/fail/flag status for each check
- Discrepancy summary highlighting specific mismatches between resume and records
- Compliance audit trail with timestamps, data sources, and API response logs
- Integration output — push results back to your HRMS or ATS via webhook
Step 5: Configure Evaluation Node
Set confidence scoring thresholds:
- High confidence (>95%): Auto-approve, no human review needed
- Medium confidence (70-95%): Route to HR team for manual review with pre-populated discrepancy notes
- Low confidence (<70%): Auto-reject with detailed reason codes
Industry Use Cases
BFSI Employee Onboarding
RBI and SEBI mandate background verification for all employees with financial responsibility. Verification turnaround drops from 7-14 days to under 2 minutes. HR teams process 100+ verifications per day instead of per month.
IT/ITES Mass Hiring
500 candidate verifications that would take a 5-person team 2 weeks complete in under 4 hours. Moonlighting detection catches dual-employment cases that interviews never surface.
Government & Defence Contractors
Complete 10-year employment history verified and documented in minutes. Audit-ready reports satisfy defense procurement compliance requirements. Immutable audit logs for every verification.
Background Verification Companies
BGV companies reduce per-verification costs by 60-80% while delivering results in seconds instead of days. API-first architecture means zero manual intervention for standard checks. Token-based pricing, not per-seat.
BFSI Employee Onboarding Workflow
The challenge: RBI and SEBI mandate background verification for all employees with financial responsibility. Banks and NBFCs processing 100+ new hires per quarter need verification that is both thorough and fast.
The workflow:
- New hire submits resume + PAN + UAN via the HRMS integration
- DocuExprt extracts claimed experience and runs parallel API checks
- Employment history is cross-verified against EPFO records
- Active employment status is checked to ensure the candidate has resigned from their previous role
- Verification report is generated with compliance-ready audit trail
The result: Verification turnaround drops from 7-14 days to under 2 minutes. Compliance documentation is auto-generated for regulatory audits. HR teams process 100+ verifications per day instead of per month.
IT/ITES Mass Hiring Workflow
The challenge: Large IT companies process hundreds of candidates per week during campus recruitment drives and lateral hiring cycles. Manual verification at this scale either becomes the hiring bottleneck or gets skipped.
The workflow:
- Batch upload candidate CSV from ATS (500+ candidates)
- DocuExprt processes all candidates in parallel using bulk API calls
- Candidates are auto-sorted into Verified / Review / Failed categories
- HR team only manually reviews the 10-15% flagged candidates
- Results are pushed back to ATS with verification status
The result: 500 candidate verifications that would take a 5-person team 2 weeks complete in under 4 hours. Moonlighting detection catches dual-employment cases that interviews never surface.
Government & Defence Contractors Workflow
The challenge: Security clearance requires complete employment history cross-verification for 10+ year periods. Every gap must be accounted for. Audit trails must be tamper-proof.
The workflow:
- Extended employment history pulled for the full EPFO tenure
- Every employer in the candidate's history is verified against EPFO establishment records
- Gaps between employments are flagged for follow-up
- All verification data is stored with immutable audit logs
- Role-based access control ensures only authorized personnel view sensitive records
The result: Complete 10-year employment history verified and documented in minutes. Audit-ready reports satisfy defense procurement compliance requirements.
Background Verification Companies Workflow
The challenge: BGV companies are intermediaries that need to process verifications at scale for their enterprise clients. They need API-first architecture, white-label capabilities, and token-based pricing.
The workflow:
- Client submits verification requests via API
- DocuExprt processes UAN, PAN, and Aadhaar lookups
- Results are returned via webhook or API polling
- Token-based pricing means BGV companies pay per verification, not per seat
The result: BGV companies reduce per-verification costs by 60-80% while delivering results in seconds instead of days. API-first architecture means zero manual intervention for standard checks.
Integration Guide
REST API Endpoints
DocuExprt's employment verification APIs follow standard REST conventions with JSON request/response formats:
Authentication: API key-based authentication with workspace-level isolation
Available Endpoints
| Endpoint | Method | Input | Response Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| UAN-To-Employment-History | POST | UAN Number | 2-10 seconds |
| PAN-To-Employment-Status | POST | PAN Number | 2-5 seconds |
| Aadhaar-To-UAN | POST | Aadhaar Details | 3-8 seconds |
| UAN-To-UAN (Validation) | POST | UAN Number | 1-3 seconds |
| Name-Match | POST | Name Strings | <1 second |
Illustrative API Request (UAN-To-Employment-History)
The examples below illustrate a possible integration. Confirm the current endpoint, authentication, request fields and response schema with DocuExprt before implementation. They are not a guarantee of fields returned for every candidate.
{
"uan_number": "1001XXXXXXXX",
"consent": "Y",
"reason": "employment_verification"
}
Illustrative API Response
{
"status": "success",
"data": {
"employee_name": "Rajesh Kumar",
"uan": "1001XXXXXXXX",
"employment_history": [
{
"employer": "ABC Technologies Pvt Ltd",
"establishment_id": "DLCPM0012345",
"member_id": "PY/DLH/0012345/001/0001234",
"date_of_joining": "2019-06-15",
"date_of_exit": "2022-03-31",
"exit_reason": "resignation"
},
{
"employer": "XYZ Financial Services Ltd",
"establishment_id": "MHBAN0067890",
"member_id": "PY/MH/0067890/001/0005678",
"date_of_joining": "2022-04-18",
"date_of_exit": null,
"exit_reason": null
}
],
"total_employers": 2,
"pf_filing_status": "active"
},
"request_id": "req_abc123xyz",
"timestamp": "2026-03-05T10:30:00Z"
}
Integration Options
- Direct API calls — Use from any language/framework with HTTP support
- Webhook callbacks — Register webhooks for async processing of bulk requests
- No-code workflow builder — Build complete verification pipelines without writing code
- Cloud storage integration — Input from and output to Amazon S3, Azure Blob, GCP, or local folders
- HRMS/ATS connectors — Push/pull data from your existing HR systems
Pricing Model
DocuExprt uses token-based pay-per-document pricing. Each API call consumes tokens based on the complexity of the verification:
- No monthly minimums or seat-based licensing
- Volume discounts for enterprise accounts
- Free trial tokens available for testing
Key Takeaways
- Resume fraud affects 64%+ of candidates — manual verification cannot keep pace with AI-generated fabrications
- API-based verification reduces turnaround from weeks to seconds by connecting directly to EPFO, Income Tax, and UIDAI databases
- DocuExprt provides 5 employment verification APIs — UAN-To-Employment-History, PAN-To-Employment-Status, Aadhaar-To-UAN, UAN validation, and Name Match
- The visual workflow builder lets you create end-to-end verification pipelines with conditional logic and auto-decisioning without coding requirement
- Moonlighting detection through PAN-To-Employment-Status catches dual employment that interviews and reference checks miss
- BFSI compliance — auto-generated audit trails satisfy RBI and SEBI verification mandates
- Bulk processing handles 500+ candidates in hours, not weeks — critical for IT/ITES mass hiring
- Token-based pricing means you pay per verification, not per seat — cost-effective at any scale
Frequently Asked Questions
1. How accurate is employment history verification via UAN?
UAN-based employment verification pulls data directly from the EPFO government database, making it the most authoritative source for formal-sector employment records in India. The data returned - employer names, joining/exit dates, member IDs - comes from official PF filings made by employers. Records are only as complete as those filings, so roles with employers outside EPF coverage, unlinked older accounts and delayed filings will not appear. Treat a missing record as a reason to verify another way, not as proof of a false claim. DocuExprt's Name Match API adds an additional layer by cross-referencing names across documents to catch identity discrepancies.
2. What data is returned by the Employment History API?
The UAN-To-Employment-History API returns: employee name as registered with EPFO, a complete list of employers with establishment IDs, dates of joining and leaving each employer, member IDs for each employment, PF filing status (active/inactive), and exit reason codes. It covers employers that filed PF returns against the candidate's UAN; older accounts never linked to the current UAN may not appear.
3. Can I verify employment history in bulk?
Yes. DocuExprt supports bulk verification through two methods: (1) CSV batch upload through the web interface - upload a spreadsheet with hundreds of UAN numbers and receive a consolidated verification report, and (2) API-based batch processing - submit multiple verification requests programmatically and receive results via webhooks. Organizations processing 500+ verifications routinely use the bulk workflow to verify entire recruitment batches in a single operation.
4. How does DocuExprt detect moonlighting and dual employment?
DocuExprt's PAN-To-Employment-Status API checks income tax records (Form 26AS) to reveal TDS deductions from multiple employers simultaneously. If a candidate claims to be available for full-time employment but their PAN records show active TDS deductions from another organization, the system flags it as a moonlighting indicator. This is combined with UAN-based checks that reveal overlapping PF contributions from multiple establishments during the same time period.
5. How does DocuExprt's employment verification compare to manual background checks?
The core differences are speed, cost, and reliability. Manual background checks take 3-14 days per candidate, cost ₹500-₹2,000 per verification, and depend on former employers responding to phone calls or letters. DocuExprt's API-based verification completes in 2-30 seconds, costs a fraction of manual checks through token-based pricing, and returns data directly from government databases - eliminating the reliance on third-party responses. For enterprises processing 50+ hires per month, this translates to 95%+ time savings and significantly higher detection rates for resume fraud.
6. Is it legal to check someone's employment history through UAN?
Yes, when the candidate knows about the check, has agreed to it, and the data is used only for verification. Under the DPDP Act, 2023 employment records are personal data, so most employers and BGV providers take explicit, check-specific consent and store it with the result. Be wary of any vendor that claims to run checks without the candidate's knowledge.
7. Can a candidate check their own UAN service history?
Yes. The candidate logs in to the EPFO Unified Member Portal with their UAN, opens the View menu and selects Service History. It lists every establishment linked to the UAN with joining and exit dates. A screenshot of that page can be edited, though, so employers should verify it at the source rather than accept the file.