A recent article in the Connecticut Law Tribune re-enforces what ESR has been telling employers for some time—that lawsuits for negligent hiring and negligent retention are among the most common claims against employers.

Per the articles, “The difference between the hiring and retention claims is when the employer became aware of a threatening employee; often, the arguments are that employers inadequately screened job applicants or failed to act on complaints about an employee who later committed a violent act.”

The story concern workplace violence and employee behavior that can be hostile, threatening or violent.  This can lead to lawsuits seeking damages for emotional distress, a hostile workplace all the way to damages stemming form violence where a person is the victim of a workplace crime.  The article noted that, “In a bad economy, stress increases and people’s fuses get shorter.”

The article cites a study in the 1990s, where “liability expert Norman D. Bates conducted a study that found workplace violence tort cases averaged $500,000 per settlement and a $3 million per jury verdict.”

According to the article:

“The potential for litigation seems to be high, based on U.S. Department of Labor statistics. On average, more than 2 million acts of violence occur in the workplace every year. When it comes to assaults, women are targeted at a much higher rate than men, both in Connecticut and nationally. From 2005-07, the U.S. Department of Labor tracked 1,250 non-fatal workplace assaults in Connecticut, and women were the targets in 77 percent of those cases. On the national level during the same period, women were targeted in 63 percent of the more than 47,000 non-fatal assaults.”

The article discussed that while many employers are focused on preventing workplace homicides, there are many lesser acts of hostility, such as workplace intimidation, bullying, sexual harassment and psychological abuse that can be red flags for future violence that also need to be addressed.

The article suggested solution that employers can utilize to minimize the chances of a lawsuit stemming from workplace hostility and violence.

See:   Taking Aim At Workplace Disputes at http://www.ctlawtribune.com/getarticle.aspx?ID=35073

According to the web site for the California courts, there will be monthly court closures.  The site indicates that: 

Due to the unprecedented statewide fiscal crisis, the Supreme Court of California, the Courts of Appeal, and all superior courts will be closed the third Wednesday of every month, beginning September 16, 2009. See: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/courts/supreme/ 

The impact for employers is that California background checks will be delayed by one day where a search is required for a California court.  Where an employer is also waiting for an educational or employment verification as well, the closure hopefully will not delay the overall report, since a report can only be completed as fast as each of the individual components.  Nevertheless, the court closures may potentially affect some employers seeking to fill a job quickly.

ESR will keep employers notified of any changes in the court’s policy, Employer may also encounter similar recession caused court decays elsewhere in the U.S.

Employment Screening Resources,  a leading international employment screening background checking firm headquartered in the San Francisco area, announced that its president, Lester Rosen, will be presenting before the combined KennedyInfo/Onrec 2009 Recruiting Conference and Expo in Chicago, Illinois on November 3, 2009. 

This national recruiting conference brings together online recruiting leaders and productivity solution providers from around the globe to push the boundaries of online recruitment solutions.  See: http://www.onrec.com/conferences/031109/schedule.html

Mr. Rosen will be addressing, “Don’t Play Recruiting Russian Roulette: Hot Issues, Trends and Current Developments in Background Check.”  

 “Ensuring that candidates are qualified and bona fide are critical element of the recruiting process,” commented Rosen. “I am very pleased to have the opportunity to participate in this prestigious conference and to share information on the latest trends and developments relating to due diligence in hiring to assist recruiters in avoiding hiring lawsuits just waiting to happen.” 

Mr. Rosen, who is also an attorney, is a nationally recognized, expert, on employments screening background checks.  He is a writer and speaker on the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), pre-employment screening, and safe hiring issues. In addition, Mr. Rosen is the author of the first comprehensive book on employment screening background checks, “The Safe Hiring Manual Complete Guide to Keeping Criminals, Imposters and Terrorists Out of Your Workplace.” He also wrote, “The Safe Hiring Audit.”

 Mr. Rosen’s speaking appearances have included numerous national and statewide conferences.   He has testified in the California, Florida  and Arkansas Superior Court as an expert witness on issues surrounding safe hiring and due diligence. Mr. Rosen was the chairperson of the steering committee that founded the National Association of Professional Background Screeners (NAPBS), the professional trade organization for the screening industry, and served as the first co-chairman in 2004. 

More information about Employment Screening Resources can be found at www.ESRcheck.com

In the never ending efforts by employers to identify candidates that are a good fit and qualified, a new internet tool has been developed to allow employers to utilize email to accelerate the process of obtaining references and assessments from past supervisors and others that know the applicant. The best example is www.Checkster.com

Questions have arisen as to how such a tool is related to the background screening process that employers utilize in order to exercise due diligence.  In fact, the two processes, although related in some ways, are entirely separate workflows that occur at different times in the hiring process and for different reasons.

Internet based references can be utilized by an employer to whittle down the field of candidates and to help an employer decide whom to hire.  Background checks occur after an employer has made a tentative decision, and needs to determine whether there is any reason NOT to hire an applicant.

When past employment checks are done as part of the background check process, the purpose is to verify that the employer actually exists and to independently verify the core details of employment, such as job title and dates.  In other words, there is a large difference between obtaining references before a hiring decsion is made, which are a qualitative measure of an applicant’s fit and abilities, and factual verification of an applicant’s employment history, which is a critical due diligence task.  Both processes can be useful in the quest to select the best candidates to hire and to avoid bad choices.  However, electronic references cannot be considered due diligence, given that they are so easily faked and depends entirely upon the applciant giving good data in the first place.

The California legislature has once again passed a bill restricting the use of credit reports, even though a substantially similar measure was vetoed by the Governor in 2008. See; http://www.esrcheck.com/newsletter/archives/September_2008.php 

The bill, AB943, seeks to severely limit the use of credit reports in California for employment purposes.  For private employers, a credit report could not be utilized unless “the information is (1) substantially job-related, meaning that the position of the person for whom the report is sought has access to money, other assets, or confidential information, and (2) the position of the person for which the person is sought is a managerial position…”  There is an exceptin where the “ position for which the information contained in the report is required to be disclosed by law or to be obtained by the employer.”

The problem for employers is that individuals working in accounting departments or other areas of a business that have access to cash but are not managers could not be the subject of credit reports.  A credit report is a tool that can help employers avoid embezzlers and identity thieves.  On the other hand, there are a number of reasons that employers should approach credit reports with caution, and only use them where there is a clear business justification in a manner that is fair and resonable. It should be noted that employment credit reports do NOT contain a credit score. 

ESR has written a long article about the current use of credit reports. See: http://www.recruitingtrends.com/article/ART637372?C=96gBTrVyd3KtvBhw

As soon as the Governor makes a decision on this bill, ESR clients will be notified immediately.