Here is a nice quick read on how criminal pardons work in Canada.  Pardons work a bit differently in the United States but this should give our readers a clear understanding of how they work up north.  Searching criminal records in various ways might identify these pardons when conducting an employment background check.  Its interesting also because there are actually different levels of pardons and some offenders may or may not receive all the full benefits.  One of the benefits could be allowing foreign travel, including into the United States.

Since 1970, more than 400,000 Canadians have received pardons. Of those, 4% have seen their pardons revoked, “indicating that the vast majority of pardon recipients remain crime-free in the community,” the board’s website says. In 2006-2007 — the year Graham James was pardoned — the board issued 7,672 pardons to people convicted of summary offenses and granted another 7,076 to applicants with more serious convictions. In that same period, the board denied only 103 applications. The latest data, for 2008-2009, show that the board granted a whopping 9,628 pardons.

Read More

Our neighbors to the north are decades ahead of us in passing legislation to curb workplace violence. Major changes to the provincial Occupational Health and Safety Act called Bill 168 create new rules to prevent violence and harassment in the workplace. The bill does not directly address background checks or employment screening, however, another provision obligates an employer to warn employees if its knows, or should know, that a worker could come into contact with a person with a history of violence. (Kind of sounds like the Negligent Hiring Doctrine) How would it know this; the answer is simple, comprehensive screening of their employees.

Ontario employers face tough new violence laws

There were plenty of warning signs of trouble in the months before nurse Lori Dupont’s final shift at Hôtel-Dieu Grace Hospital in Windsor, Ont.

In February of 2005, she had broken up with Marc Daniel, a 50-year-old married anesthesiologist, after he tried to kill himself. The two had met while working in the hospital, where Dr. Daniel had a history of harassing nurses, both verbally and physically.

When he was released from hospital after his suicide attempt, Dr. Daniel returned to work, where he intimidated and stalked Ms. Dupont, a 36-year-old single mother. He left compromising photos of her on her car and threatened to distribute them. He was suspended, but soon back at work again, on the recommendation of a psychiatrist.

On the morning of Nov. 12, when the pair were on a shift together, Dr. Daniel hid behind a pillar in the recovery room. Minutes later, he stabbed Ms. Dupont to death, plunging a hunting knife into her upper chest and back seven times. He was later found in his car, with a syringe in his arm and no vital signs. He died three days later in the same hospital.

Almost five years later, new workplace violence and harassment rules prompted by Ms. Dupont’s death are set to take effect in Ontario. On June 15, employers in the province will have to comply with the major changes to the provincial Occupational Health and Safety Act, contained in amendments known as Bill 168.

Other provinces, including Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, have some comparable legislation, but some legal experts say Ontario’s new rules are vague in places and leave questions that will likely have to be answered in court.

And employment lawyers in Ontario say that with the deadline now less than three months away, many of the province’s corporations are only now coming to grips with the changes.

Under the coming regulations, employers will have to conduct workplace violence risk assessments, draft new policies on workplace violence and harassment, and warn employees if they could be exposed at work to someone with a violent past.

Employees will also have the right to refuse to work if they feel they are at risk of workplace violence.

The reforms also broaden the definition of workplace harassment, which is currently limited to sexist, racist or other comments covered by the Ontario Human Rights Code. Now, harassment will be defined as including “course of vexatious comment or conduct against a worker in a workplace that is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome.”

More

There have been a few studies conducted in the United States covering recidivism rates of offenders and ex-convicts. Anything above .0001% is virtually why the employment screening industry even exists. We have written in the past about our own domestic recidivism rates but have yet to post anything outside the US. I found this article discussing these staggering rates in Canada. The Winnipeg Sun is reporting that the re-offending rate in some cases is as high as 100%. The article throws out some incredible, almost unbelievable numbers about recidivism. The author summarizes by saying if Manitoba’s corrections branch is to rehabilitate criminals, they’re not doing a very good job! Do you do background checks on your Canadian applicants? I hope so!!

Re-offending rates are staggering

If the main objective of Manitoba’s Corrections branch is to rehabilitate criminals, they’re not doing a very good job.

At least according to their own numbers released by the Opposition Tories Tuesday, which show the rate of re-offending in some cases is as high as 100% for young criminals.

The most recent data from the last three months of 2007 shows 75% of adult inmates released from provincial jails were charged with another offence within two years of completing their sentence.

The numbers include charges for new offences and for breaching conditions of release.

It’s an astonishingly high number and it confirms what many of us have observed anecdotally for years — our courts/corrections system has evolved into a revolving door of justice where criminals re-offend over and over again.

The 75% recidivism rate for the last quarter of 2007 is the highest in at least five years, according to the data. Which means the problem is getting worse, not better.

The recidivism rates for young offenders during the same period are even more staggering.

In the three-month period from April to June 2006, 100% of young offenders released from youth custody were charged with another offence within two years.

That means every young offender in Manitoba who completed a youth jail sentence between April 1 and June 30 that year was charged with another offence within the following two years.

That’s an incredible statistic and a glaring example of what a massive failure our justice system is.

What’s equally startling is not once has the recidivism rate for young offenders in custody dropped below 75% since 2002.

Most quarters it ranged between 80%-95%. It’s a horrible record.

The stated objective of the Youth Criminal Justice Act is to rehabilitate young criminals and help them transform their lives.

It’s obviously not working. Even in deferred custody cases — where young offenders serve their sentences in the community with conditions — the recidivism rate is as high as 85%-90%.

There are obviously no easy solutions to bring down recidivism rates for adults and young offenders. But whatever our courts and jails are doing now is not working.

More

The Canadian Criminal Records Bureau or CRB’s system for criminal records is not without flaws.  This is the system primarily used by Canadian employers to conduct background checks.

Wrong name! Trainee is accused of assault

A STUDENT nurse could be kicked off his course after a check by the Criminal Records Bureau wrongly accused him of assaulting an 11-year-old boy.

David Williams, 45, was due to start a placement at Meldreth Manor School as part of his course at Anglia Ruskin University but is having to defer his place after he was wrongly said to have assault convictions which are in the name of another David Williams.

More

A little resume fraud news from a Canadian blog on Trust in the Digital Era.

How should an employer deal with resume fraud?

The rise in résumé fraud can be traced to the rise in unemployment, coupled with tough competition among those competing in the labor market for what few jobs are available. Job seekers who don’t have a degree or specialized skills are inventing them out of desperation. For the employer, this translates into a significant problem since applicants who lie on their résumés often become employees who misrepresent issues on the job. It is estimated that résumé fraud costs employers approximately $600 billion annually.

More