EmployeeScreenIQ Blog

Online background checks have been a controversial topic with many who wonder if these websites deliver legitimate results. From accuracy to efficiency, there are always questions as to the best method of conducting a background check at the lowest cost, but also with the best results.

Nebraska has announced a new online background screening system by the State Patrol, and it sounds like they might be making it seem easier than it should be. If you know anything about the background screening industry or really, any industry, if something seems “too good to be true“, it probably is. According to Gov. Dave Heineman, “We live in an electronic age. We need to provide these services online to be relevant.” While this might be true, there are several factors to take into consideration when it comes to online background checks.

One reason to be leery of this service is the claim of “instant” results. For a thorough background check, there should never be instant results, especially when it comes to criminal records. The term “instant” might be used loosely in this case, and could simply mean that employers have easier access to results online as opposed to receiving them via mail or fax. However, there should be concern over posting instant results of a criminal records search. Due to the wording used, it seems too good to be true:

“Pop in a name, a date of birth and your credit card info and you can get the skinny on someone.”

For full confidence that you’re receiving the complete results in a criminal history search, typically a verification of some sort should be done to ensure that a criminal record matches the job candidate, including full name, date of birth and Social Security Number. While full details are not given on the process of this online system, it is possible that no one is verifying the records found, therefore giving employers instant results that might be flawed.

[...]

Continue Reading

Earlier this month, we released our official 2013 Employment Background Screening Trends Survey report.  The report includes findings from nearly 1,000 HR professionals in various industries across the United States, who responded to our survey on employee background checks at the end of 2012 and the beginning of 2013.

Among this year’s key findings were the types of criminal records found on an employment background check that would disqualify a candidate from employment.

Given the legal and privacy issues that abound in today’s business world, employers continue to engage in a delicate balancing act—juggling the needs and protecting the interests of shareholders, partners, customers and their workforces. As we have reported in past years, criminal conduct (e.g., workplace violence, fraud, theft, sabotage of computer systems, etc.) can have profound effects on an organization’s reputation, its ability to compete for talent and its bottom line.

Therefore, it’s not surprising that respondents showed greatest concern over felony convictions related to crimes of violence, theft and dishonesty. It is worth noting, however, that their concern dropped substantially regarding drug/alcohol felony convictions. This same drop off occurred related to misdemeanor convictions, with respondents showing significantly greater concern for misdemeanor convictions regarding crimes of violence, theft and dishonesty as opposed to drug/alcohol misdemeanor convictions.

Here’s some quick advice for employers when it comes to evaluating candidates with criminal records:

• Avoid to the extent possible any automatic disqualifiers or brightline hiring decisions
• Evaluate how the negative information relates to job in which the candidate is being considered
• Consider the recency and severity of the offense and whether the person is a habitual offender
• Conduct an individual assessment which includes allowing the candidate to provide further explanation
• If you still chose not to hire the candidate, make sure to follow the proper Adverse Action procedures

Download the entire 2013 Trends Survey Here

Continue Reading

What’s happened since our last Weekly Wrap Up? EmployeeScreenIQ released our survey report available for download here. We also released the March issue of By The Way, our compliance resource featuring articles from our VP of Compliance and General Counsel, Angela Preston. Our cover story, Snoop No More: New Social Media Policy Introduced in Congress reveals the latest update with a new social media policy. You can read additional articles including an update on “ban the box” and a K-mart background check claim in the newsletter. Lastly, we talked about the need for 20,000 workers in the health care industry in California, find out more in the full post.

Survey Says: Criminal Records Aren’t Automatic Disqualifiers for Employers 

Last week, we released our official 2013 Employment Background Screening Trends Survey report. The report includes findings from nearly 1,000 HR professionals in various industries across the United States, who responded to our survey on employee background checks at the end of 2012 and the beginning of 2013. Read More

Snoop No More:New Social Media Policy Introduced in Congress

The social media privacy debate continues to rage – and now Congress has taken up the reins. Recently we blogged on a handful of states that have passed laws that restrict employers from accessing passwords to private social networking accounts. Now Representative Elliot Engel (D-N.Y.) has introduced H. R. 537, the “Social Networking Online Protection Act.” Read More

[...]

Continue Reading

For those of you interested in keeping up with the latest in pre-employment background screening compliance and the laws that affect your use of  employee background checks, check out our latest publication, “BTW: Your Guide to Staying Out of Hot Water“.  This compliance resource has been crafted by our VP of Compliance and General Counsel, Angela Preston and is a must-read for human resources and security professionals.

Our March issue focuses on issues of consumer privacy particularly as it relates to employers request of their candidates’ social media passwords.  While we don’t believe many employers engage in this practice as part of their employment background check policies, congress seems poised to create a federal law banning such a request.  We also take a close look at a recent $3 million FCRA settlement and the trend of local/state governments adopting “Ban the Box” measures.  For a preview of this issue, check out Angela’s video below.

Review March Issue

Continue Reading

In the near future, many in the United States are expecting a drastic change in health insurance. The future of insurance is looming over not only those receiving it, but also employees of health insurance companies. With these changes, there will be a lot of new information and the necessity to hire extra hands to assist with the transition. In addition, working with health insurance means coming into contact with private information on a daily basis, including social security numbers, dates of birth, income data and tax returns. This also means that insurance agencies should require background checks of some sort for the new employees they will soon have.

In California, this is the issue causing controversy in the health insurance industry as well as the state. California needs to hire 20,000 employees that will assist with insurance enrollment throughout the state, starting in October. The employees will not be government employees, but rather will work for nonprofit and other community groups that are working with the state on outreach and enrollment; it’s these groups that will be responsible for recruiting and hiring these employees.The main argument is that screening all of these individuals will “create barriers for a lot of communities of color and disproportionately exclude African American and Latino men from participating. We need a massive amount of people to help with outreach,” according to Carla Saporta, health policy director at the Greenlining Institute. Additionally, they need to hire 20,000 in a matter of months, making one wonder if that is enough time to thoroughly screen each candidate.

[...]

Continue Reading

The movement to “ban the box” shows no signs of slowing down. New Jersey, Rhode Island, North Carolina, Minnesota and Michigan are all considering new bills for statewide bans on the practice of asking applicants to check a box on their job application indicating whether they have a criminal conviction. We can hardly keep up with the influx of proposed new laws limiting criminal history in one way or another. Here is a run-down:

New Jersey
The most comprehensive and far-reaching proposal is in the State of New Jersey. On February 7, 2013, three New Jersey Senators introduced “The Opportunity to Compete Act,” (“OCA”) which would eliminate the check box that requires job applicants to disclose their criminal history and would also prohibit advertisements discouraging those with criminal records from applying. The bill is modeled after the recent ordinance that was passed in the city of Newark. The bill, as proposed, will significantly complicate the hiring process in the State of New Jersey.

[...]

Continue Reading

Last week, we released our official 2013 Employment Background Screening Trends Survey report.  The report includes findings from nearly 1,000 HR professionals in various industries across the United States, who responded to our survey on employee background checks at the end of 2012 and the beginning of 2013.

Among this year’s key findings was sentiment that criminal records are not necessarily deal-breakers when it comes to hiring candidates. [...]

Continue Reading

Employment Screening Practices & Trends:The Era of Heightened Care and Diligence

Last week, EmployeeScreenIQ released the recording of our webinar, “992 Heads are Better than One: Balancing Applicant Rights & What Employers Need To Know” reporting the findings of our 2013 Employment Screening Trends Survey. And now…we have the survey report hot off the presses! The report includes findings from hundreds of HR professionals in various industries across the United States, who responded to our survey at the end of 2012 and the beginning of 2013.

[...]

Continue Reading

The social media privacy debate continues to rage – and now Congress has taken up the reins. Recently we blogged on a handful of states that have passed laws that restrict employers from accessing passwords to private social networking accounts. Now Representative Elliot Engel (D-N.Y.) has introduced H. R. 537, the “Social Networking Online Protection Act.”

Engel’s bill would make it illegal for employers to ask job applicants and employees for passwords to access their social networking sites and email accounts. If passed, it will address the concerns of 21 states that have similar legislation pending, and provide a national legal standard that has already been adopted in California, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, and New Jersey. [...]

Continue Reading

EmployeeScreenIQ polled nearly 1,000 HR professionals to uncover how background screening practices within their organizations have evolved in order to incorporate these new regulations into their program while balancing the need to protect their company.

Last week we held a webinar to discuss our top findings, “992 Heads Are Better Than One: Balancing Applicant Rights and What Employers Need to Know”, and we invite you to download the recording.   Be among the first to hear the results of this survey and benchmark our findings with your policies and practices.

Download the Recording

Continue Reading