The recent headlines dealing with background checks demonstrate that to some extent, Americans are conflicted about the whole topic of background checks.

On one hand, as reported in past blogs by Employment Screening Resources (ESR), discrimination and privacy advocates feel that background checks are too intrusive and unfair. The EEOC has filed a test case alleging that a large national employer used credit report and criminal records to unfairly discriminate against members of protected groups. The state of Oregon and others are considering limitations on credit reports. Scientists from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Southern California have succeeded in taking their complaints all the way to the United States Supreme Court that government mandated security checks revolving around background checks and entry into facilities are overly intrusive and an invasion of privacy. A recent study conducted at a major university suggested that after a relatively short period of time, criminal records are not a predictor of future misconduct.

Conversely, the recent tragic shootings at University of Alabama-Huntsville and Ohio State University have lead to many to question if background checks should be even more in-depth. Those shootings had horrific impacts on the victim’s families and the communities involved and questions have been raised if even more background checks should have been done. 

In  the case of the Ohio State University workplace violence, a top notch and highly respected background screening firm performed what appeared to be a standard entry level criminal record search and found what any screening firm would likely have found, which was no record. However, critics note that a 30 year old conviction for receiving stolen property should have been unearthed, even though old records have been destroyed, and there was some confusion about the date of birth that should have been used.

Of course, to find a thirty year old prison record under those circumstances would normally require an employer to retain private investigators at the cost of many hundreds of dollars for each and every potential new hire, as opposed to public record background screenings. And ironically, even if the screening firm had located the 30 year old criminal record for a non-violent offense and was able to establish the record belonged to the shooter, any use of it would have been soundly criticized as unfair and discriminatory. It seems that employers cannot win either way. 

As it turns out, in the Ohio State University case a past employment verifications may have raised the red flags that would any have alerted the employer to take a closer look at the hiring decision.  It underscores that employers need to use a number of overlapping tools to evaluate a potential hire, and that no one tool, such as a criminal background check, can be used to make hiring decisions.  In addition, background checks are just one component of an overall workplace violence prevention strategy.

The bottom-line is that background screening occurs at the intersection of competing and compelling societal interests. On one hand, no one wants to see workplace violence, or to have unqualified people get jobs with fake credentials. Safety, security and honesty are core values. On the other hand, society is also rightly concerned with fairness and privacy and as well as efforts to combat discrimination. The issue is reaching the right balance.

It is interesting that nearly every time there is an objection because there is too much screening, there is often a call for even more screening after it is revealed that some crime or offenses occurred or where an inappropriate applicant was hired without a sufficient background check. With all due respects to the JPL scientists, one would assume their position may be different if it ever turned out that a failure to perform background checks resulted in a terrorist hurting the U.S., someone with fake credentials getting hired and obtaining access, or workplace violence occurring that could have been prevented.

Employment Screening Resources (ESR), a leading national employment screening firm announced today the release of a web site focused on providing quick and easy access to legally comliant essential background checks to small and medium businesses.  The service is available at: http://www.esrcheckdirect.com/ 

The new service, called ESRDirect, provides small and medium business with a simplified online ordering system that is as easy as ordering a book online.  Employers have full control over their budgets since the exact final cost is available before the employer approves the request.  Users of ESRDirect also receive unlimited consultation with background screening specialist so that employers are not on their own in fulfilling this essential function.   

The new site is aimed at removing roadblocks faced by small and medium business that do not hire in large numbers but need to avoid hiring applicants  that are dangerous, unfit, unqualified or dishonest.  A small or medium business may not always get the attention they need and may need to use a complicated ordering system that is difficult to remember if not used frequently. The cost can be a big surprise, if extra fees are added on for court costs or other third party fees.  

“With ESRDirect, small and medium employers enjoy the convenience of a simplified, cost-effective and intuitive system that does not drain their time, energy and budgets,” commented Jared Callahan, Director of Client Services, and a national speaker on topics related to safe hiring. “Small and medium businesses now have available the resources and tools enjoyed by Fortune 500 firms to keep their firms safe and profitable and the security of knowing they are conducting legally compliant background checks.” 

ESR further protects small and medium business by not sending data offshore beyond U.S. privacy laws, which endangers applicant privacy and can lead to identity theft. Furthermore, ESR does not expose employers to claims of discrimination by engaging in automated decision making.  ESR supplies information to employers so they can determine if there is a business justification to utilize a criminal record in hiring, taking into account the nature of the crime, the nature of the job and the age of the criminal record.

Employment Screening Resources (ESR) is the firm that literally wrote the book on background checks, The Safe Hiring Manual, and provides pre-employment screening services and drug testing internationally.  The firm specializes in legal compliance expertise and industry leading technology, service, accuracy and turnaround. 

About Employment Screening Resources: Employment Screening Resources (www.ESRcheck.com)  is a safe hiring partner and provides REAL background checks, not cheap database shortcuts or off-shoring or the use of home operators that endangers privacy. Contact:  Jared Callahan for additional information at 415-898-9944 or by email jcallahan@ESRcheck.com

The Employment Screening Resources (ESR) online course for “safe hiring” has been approved for recertification credits by the HR Certification Institute (HRCI) for 2010. 

The internationally recognized certifying body for the Human Resources profession, HRCI has awarded more than 116,000 credentials in more than 70 countries in the field of human resource management to HR professionals who are recognized throughout the world for their high standards of competence. 

ESR’s “Safe Hiring Certification Training” is an intensive, self-paced online educational and professional development course designed for employers, human resource and security professionals, and anyone responsible for risk management and due diligence in hiring and pre-employment background screening. The course may be accessed at any time from anywhere, including while at work.  The entire course provides 20 hours of credits, or the course can be taken in four 5 hour modules.  

Since employee problems are usually caused by problem employees, employers realize that hiring workers with criminal records, falsified credentials, or otherwise undesirable backgrounds can create legal and financial nightmares. Without due diligence in hiring, employers may make hiring decisions that could lead to lawsuits for negligent hiring, workplace violence, theft, embezzlement, and various other workplace problems. 

However, employers and human resources and security professionals face numerous challenges when it comes to safe hiring policies, including:

• Heavy regulation by federal and state laws;
• Numerous privacy and discrimination issues;
• What information is available and how to get it, and;
• How to utilize and analyze information in a cost-effective manner. 

Participants in the course will obtain the knowledge and skills necessary to implement and manage a legal and effective safe hiring program. For more information about ESR’s “Safe Hiring Certification Training” course – which is free to ESR clients – please visit http://www.esrcheck.com/ESRonlineSafeHiringCourse.php. 

ESR is pleased to be an approved provider by HRCI.

A federal District Court decision issued in August of 2009 in the Western District of Arkansas contains a valuable lesson for a consumer that believes that a background check was inaccurate. In that case, a Court held it was the consumer’s own behavior after the background check that caused the job loss, and not an inaccuracy caused by human error that was quickly corrected.

The plaintiff in the case was seeking employment at a college to teach courses on psychology and domestic violence. During her background check, the court research firm made a clerical error that falsely labeled the plaintiff ironically as a person who was convicted of assault and family violence in Texas. The case was before the court on motions for summary judgment, which is a procedure where a party asserts that even if the evidence was viewed in a light most favorable to the other party, there is insufficient evidence as a matter of law for a jury to find against them.

The facts showed that the college utilized the services of a background screening firm (called a Consumer Reporting Agency or “CRA”) to conduct a background check, including a check for criminal records, and the CRA in turn used other researchers. Due to simple human error, the court researcher made a clerical mistake, resulting in mixing up someone else’s criminal records with the plaintiff’s, who in fact had no record.

Three days later the Plaintiff learned that the background report was negative and reported a criminal conviction. The plaintiff immediately contacted the college and the CRA. The screening report was promptly corrected and the plaintiff received a “clear” report. The college indicated they were ready to proceed with the hire.

However, the plaintiff was still apparently unhappy even though the report was quickly corrected and she was going to get the job. In a conversation with college personnel, the consumer talked about how the college had “put her through hell, they had put her family through stress, and that (the college) had tarnished her reputation.” The plaintiff also indicated that she had interviewed elsewhere. The college then decided not to hire her based upon her demeanor after the matter was cleared up, and took the position that the decision was not related to the initial report. The plaintiff also claimed emotional distress even though the report was promptly corrected.

The Court dismissed the claim for loss of employment because the evidence clearly showed the incorrect report was not the reason she lost the job. The job loss was due to how she reacted to the situation. Given that the report was promptly corrected and the college was intending to hire her, she could not blame the screening firms for her own behavior. The court did find however, that she was entitled to continue with her claims for emotional distress based upon the brief period of time before the report was corrected, and it was a jury issue as to whether the screening firms involved exercised an appropriate level of care.

This case demonstrates the old adage that how someone chooses to react to events is sometimes more important than the event itself. Even though screening firms go to great lengths to ensure that every report is accurate, as with anything that involves human beings, errors can occur. That is why under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, (FCRA), there are extensive provisions for re-investigating and correcting reports. It is certainly understandable that an applicant that teaches about domestic violence would be upset at being inaccurately portrayed as a violator. However, the mistake was caused by human error and the report was promptly corrected. It was only the consumer’s own reaction that caused the job loss.

(Note: Employment Screening Resources has adopted a practice of not indentifying the names of parties to lawsuits unnecessarily in blogs and newsletters, since it does not add anything to the lessons learned, and there can be more to the story. However, if a reader has a reason to review the actual case and cannot locate it themselves, please contact the author.)

Employment Screening Resources (ESR)  is now providing background checks to members of the Northern California Human Resources Association (NCHRA), the second largest Human Resources Association in the country, as an added member benefit to NCHRA members.   Employment Screening Resources is  a leading national employment screening background checking firm located in Novato, CA and a long time me supporter of the NCHRA.  

NCHRA has been advancing organizations through human resources since 1960 and is dedicated to connecting human resources professionals with resources and quality service providers for members.  

Employment Screening Resources (ESR) is the firm that literally wrote the book on background checks, The Safe Hiring Manual,  and provides pre-employment screening services and drug testing internationally. ESR specializes in legal compliance expertise and industry leading technology, service, accuracy and turnaround time.

“We are honored that an organization as prestigious as the NCHRA would select our firm as a value-add for member benefit,” commented Jared Callahan, Director of Marketing.  “Background screening has become mission critical for employers of all sizes and we are pleased to offer a variety of services to help employers identify the best candidates and to exercise due diligence in hiring.”

About NCHRA:  The Northern California Human Resources Association (www.nchra.org ) is the Northern California affiliate for the Society of Human Resources Management (SHRM) and is nationally recognized for providing the highest quality continuing education and services to its members.  They can be reached at: 415-291-1992.

About ESR:  Employment Screening Resources (www.ESRcheck.com) is a safe hiring partner that provides REAL background checks with no short cuts. ESR specializes in legal compliance and provides industry leading technology, service, accuracy and turnaround time. ESR promotes data protection and does not offshore data or use home-based operators.  ESR also offers expertise in complex California laws, through its headquarters in the San Francisco area.  Contact: Jared Callahan for additional information 415-898-9944 or at jcallahan@ESRcheck.com

A research company has found that E-Verify – the employment eligibility verification system that the U. S. government would like employers to use to help control illegal immigration – has failed to catch over half of the number of illegal workers it checks.

According to Westat, a research company evaluating the system for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), E-Verify wrongly cleared illegal workers 54 percent of the time after failing to detect identity theft and fraud. While the Westat report indicated E-Verify correctly identified legal workers 93 percent of the time, previous studies did not reveal how many illegal workers fooled the E-Verify system with identity theft and fraud.

Westat’s report – completed in December 2009 using data from the previous year – also stated in a summary that E-Verify, while not perfect in detecting identity theft and fraud, was “much more effective” than the I-9 paper forms used by most employers. The results come at a time when President Obama’s administration has made cracking down on U.S. employers who hire illegal workers a central part of its immigration enforcement policy.

However, just using E-Verify gives an employer a powerful defense in the event that a worker is later found to have committed identify theft. E-Verify is a free, Internet-based system operated by DHS in partnership with the Social Security Administration (SSA), and allows participating employers to electronically verify their employees’ employment authorization. Employers run a prospective employee’s information against DHS and SSA databases to check whether that worker is legally permitted to work in the United States. Results are returned online within seconds.

Despite any drawbacks, the E-Verify employment eligibility verification system remains a powerful tool for employers to verify the employment authorization of employees. E-Verify virtually eliminates SSA mismatch letters, improves the accuracy of wage and tax reporting, protects jobs for authorized workers, and helps U.S. employers maintain a legal workforce. Approximately 184,000 U.S. employers currently use E-Verify.

E-Verify/I-9 form compliance is merely one aspect of a thorough and comprehensive hiring strategy that can help employers uncover identity theft and fraud committed by jobseekers by using background checks and employment verifications. Employment Screening Resources (ESR) is an authorized E-Verify Designated Agent. For more information about E-Verify, please visit http://www.esrcheck.com/formi9.php

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100225/ap_on_hi_te/us_immigration_e_verify

Oregon may be following Hawaii and Washington as states placing limits on the use of credit repots for employment purposes when the Oregon legislature passed Senate Bill 1045 and sent it  to the governor on February 22, 2010.

The bill would prevent employers from utilizing credit reports in employment including hiring, discharge, promotion, and compensation except in the following circumstances: circumstances:
1.  Employers that are federally insured banks or credit unions;
2.  Employers that are required by state or federal law to use Individual credit history for employment purposes;
3.   The employment of a public safety officer, or
4.  Employers that can demonstrate that the information in a credit report is “substantially job-related” AND the employer’s reasons for the use of such information are disclosed to the employee or prospective employee in writing.

For the actual code language, see <a href=”http://gov.oregonlive.com/bill/SB1045/”>http://gov.oregonlive.com/bill/SB1045/</a>

Private employers in Oregon, assuming the bill is signed into law, would need to carefully review their justification for a credit report and be prepared to state those reason in writing to an applicant before a credit report is requested or obtained.

The arguments over the use of credit reports in Oregon mirrors the national conversation on the relevance and fairness of credit reports for employment.  The primary argument against credit reports  is that a credit history has no relationship to the ability to perform the job and in fact can result in unlawful discrimination.  In addition, credit reports are criticized for being inaccurate.   The argument is also made that applicants whose financial situation has been severely impacted by the recession are victimized again when a credit report makes it even harder to get a job, creating a  Catch-22.

The argument in favor of credit reports is that businesses need the flexibility to hire appropriate employees, and that a credit report can be critical to prevent embezzlement or other problems where someone is hired to a position that has access to cash or assets.   Furthermore, an employer does not see the credit score.  It is an urban myth that credit scores are used for employment.

It should be noted that Employment Screening Resources ( ESR) and many other background screening firms consistently recommend that credit reports be reserved for positions where there is  a clear business justification, and to keep in mind that credit reports can contain information that is old, incorrect, or not relevant to the job. 

If passed, Oregon would be the third state to have placed limits on credit report.  Washington was the first state, which required that employers.  Under a Washington  law passed in 2007, employers cannot obtain a credit report as part of a background check unless the information is: substantially job related and the employer’s reasons for the use of such information are disclosed to the consumer in writing; or (ii) Required by law.  See: 
http://www.esrcheck.com/newsletter/archives/June_2007.php

In 2009, Hawaii also placed limits on credit reports by amending the Hawaiian Fair Employment Practices Act and making it an unlawful discriminatory practice for any employer to make an employment decision based upon an individual’s credit history or credit report, unless the information directly relates to a bona fide occupational qualification.  The law also requires that here fist be a conditional job offer.  Hawaii Revised Statues Sec. 378-2(8).

Similar to the proposed Oregon law, there are certain carve-outs in the Hawaii law. The law makes exceptions for employers that are expressly permitted to inquire into credit history or a credit report by federal or state law, financial institutions that are insured by a federal agency or to managerial or supervisory employees. The law sets out a specific definition of what constitutes a “Managerial” or “Supervisory” employee.  See: 
http://www.esrcheck.com/wordpress/856/hawaii-latest-state-to-put-limits-on-use-of-credit-reports

Other states are looking at similar measures.  California has passed a law twice that would have severely curtailed the use of credit reports, which were both vetoed by the Governor.  Employers, Human Resources and Security professionals should expect to see more activity on this issue.

Employment Screening Resources (ESR), a leading national employment screening firm, announced completion of its integration with Taleo Business Edition™. This new integration provides a simplified, paperless technology solution to perform legally compliant employment background checks.

Taleo Business Edition™ is the leading on-demand talent management solution for companies with up to 5,000 employees. Taleo Business Edition helps small to mid-size organizations around the world find, develop and retain top talent by simplifying recruiting, performance and compensation management with unmatched flexibility.

The integration of Taleo Business Edition and Employment Screening Resources allows employers to initiate a completely paperless background checks with the click of a mouse, allowing for the fastest possible turn-around time with the least amount of effort. Featuring single sign-on and the ability to view report status in real-time, employers, HR departments and recruiters can leverage the Taleo solution with the latest legally-compliant background screening technology.

Employment Screening Resources (ESR) is the firm that literally wrote the book on background checks, The Safe Hiring Manual, and provides pre-employment screening services and drug testing internationally. The firm specializes in legal compliance expertise, as well as industry-leading technology, service, accuracy and turn-around.

“Through the Taleo Business Edition integration, Employment Screening Resources can provide the most advanced and legally compliant screening solutions to our mutual clients,” commented Jared Callahan, Director of Marketing for ESR, and a national speaker on topics related to safe hiring. “Employers can harness this advanced technology and no longer need to handle physical pieces of paper, go to different software systems or worry about legal compliance.”

About Employment Screening Resources: Employment Screening Resources (ESR), is a safe hiring partner and provides REAL background checks, not cheap database shortcuts or off-shoring that endangers privacy. ESR specializes in legal compliance and provides industry leading technology, service, accuracy and turnaround. Contact: Jared Callahan for additional information at 415-898-0044 or by email jcallahan@ESRcheck.com.