Cruise Ship Captain Facing Manslaughter Charges, Steered Ship Off Course

The Costa Concordia, after the cruise ship ran aground and keeled over off the Isola del Giglio. January 14, 2012. Photo: AFP

The Costa Concordia, a luxury cruise ship sailing across the Mediterranean Sea, ran aground just off Italy’s western coast January 14, 2012 and tipped over, leaving 11 dead and 21 still missing as of Wednesday.

News of this incident has left the rest of the world to question how this devastating event occurred and who is to blame. At the forefront of the investigation and a media whirlwind is the stricken ship’s 52-year-old captain, Francesco Schettino. Currently under house arrest, Schettino is facing criminal charges for allegedly steering the Costa Concordia off course and then abandoning ship once the vessel struck land.

Prosecutors suspect Schettino deliberately went of course, endangering the lives of passengers and crew on board, but now are left to wonder about the cruise line’s hiring process. Costa Cruises, recognizes that Schettino may be the one at fault, stating on its website, “While the investigation is ongoing, preliminary indications are that there may have been significant human error on the part of the ship’s master, Captain Francesco Schettino, which resulted in these grave consequences.”

Who does the hiring for these ships? What are the policies and procedures put in place to make sure only the best captains are hired? These questions are still pending answers as an investigation is underway, however Maritime Lawyer, Jack Hickey observes that “[you] want to screen out the risk-takers, [you] want to screen out the ‘hot-doggers,’ [you] want to screen out the people who are not willing to take responsibility.” Some background screening companies can provide industry-specific skills, knowledge and aptitude testing, which can measure requirements for certain jobs.

When the Costa Concordia was launched in 2006, Schettino was described as a favorite with the ship’s passengers, especially its women. Viewed as a debonair, yet a risk taker, its not surprising that all evidence points blame on the ship’s captain for responsibility for the accidents.

In the wake of the accident, Italian Coast Guard Captain, Gregorio De Falco said to Schettino in firm words, “Go to the bow. Climb up the emergency ladder and you co-ordinate the evacuation.” He continues, “You must tell us how many people, children, women and passengers there are and the exact number of each category.”

Schettino ignored policies dealing with emergency situations (leaving passengers being is regarded as the “first law of the sea”) and orders from Port Authority to go back to the ship to coordinate operations. As a result of the captain’s poor choices, a reported $450 Million luxury cruise ship is destroyed, a company’s reputation is tarnished and more importantly, life is lost.

 

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Pepsi Beverages pays $3.1M to Settle Discrimination Charges

PepsiCo Inc.’s bottling unit, Pepsi Beverages, has agreed to settle federal racial-discrimination charges as well as pledged to provide job training and new roles, according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

PepsiCo Inc. provided a statement that said the EEOC did not find any intentional discrimination. However, the company’s former criminal background check policy disproportionately barred approximately 300 black job applicants from employment. The EEOC, which enforces employment discrimination laws, said in a release that based on an investigation, “found reasonable cause to believe” that PepsiCo Inc.’s former criminal background check policy discriminated against black people.

The former policy and practice exercised by the company used the checks to screen out job applicants who had arrest records – even if they were never convicted of a crime. The policy resulted in limiting job opportunities for minorities, who statistically have higher arrest rates than whites.

The monetary settlement is being allocated in part to the claims process but primarily to division amongst black applicants for new positions at Pepsi. The company has also agreed to submit regular reports to the EEOC on its hiring process and offer anti-discrimination training to hiring managers.

Read EEOC press release: http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/1-11-12a.cfm

 

HR Professional Opinion:

(The comments below are part of First Contact HR’s opinion column where we offer the writer’s opinion on this post’s specific topic and thus should not be taken as legal advice.)

While it is unfortunate, PepsiCo Inc. was faced with claims of discrimination; it is commendable that the company has recognized its discriminatory policy and is taking steps towards creating a more diverse work environment. In the case of hiring, the EEOC clearly states: “There is no Federal law that clearly prohibits an employer from asking about arrest and conviction records. However, using such records as an absolute measure to prevent an individual from being hired could limit the employment opportunities of some protected groups and thus cannot be used in this way.”

Pepsi overlooked this guideline, which could have been avoided had their HR department worked with a background screening company that could make sure their screening policies were aligned with the EEOC guidelines. Pepsi’s former policy not only limited employment opportunities for minorities by considering arrest records as a component of background screening, it also failed to take into consideration the applicant’s arrest as it related to the specific job.

First Contact HR advises its clients to only consider criminal conviction records that are job related before taking any adverse action against job candidates. Further, First Contact HR recommends employers always exercise good judgment and proposes the following ten (10) criteria for employers to consider when criminal record hits are discovered in background screening reports:

  1. The nature, extent and seriousness of the conduct /conviction;
  2. The circumstances surrounding the conduct;
  3. The frequency of the conduct;
  4. How recently the conduct occurred;
  5. The individual’s age and maturity at the time of the conduct;
  6. The presence or absence of rehabilitation and other pertinent behavior changes;
  7. The potential for pressure, coercion, exploitation, or duress;
  8. The likelihood of continuation of the conduct;
  9. How, and if, the conduct bears upon potential job responsibilities; and
  10. The individual’s employment history before and after the conduct.

 

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Tennessee wants to Drug Test Welfare Recipients, why not Lawmakers?

In response to a bill that would require welfare recipients in Nashville, TN to take a drug test, some lawmakers want to add politicians to the mix and submit them as well. What seems like a fair way to balance the scale could turn out to be an expensive response since drug tests (resulting in negative outcomes) are paid for by tax payers.

Those individuals with positive results (guilty of using drugs) will be held responsible for the cost of the drug test. Welfare recipients who test positive will lose their benefits.

Video by WVLT-TV:

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

You Ask, We Answer

First Contact HR staff answers common questions we get on background checks, drug testing and other HR industry practices. Got a question? Ask us at info@FirstContactHR.com

Question #6: How long do drugs stay in an individual’s system?

Drugs do not typically remain in the body for very long. Often no more than 24 – 72 hours, depending on the frequency of use and the individual’s body functions. Marijuana is the exception, staying sometimes from several days to several weeks, again depending on the circumstances. However, through hair analysis, drugs are detectable up to 90 days after drug use.

For more questions and answers, visit www.FirstContactHR.com and just Ask!

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

No Background Checks for Holiday “Red Kettle” Volunteers

It’s well into the holiday season now, and a familiar sight to see while shopping for those last minute holiday gifts are the Salvation Army Red Kettle bell ringers. If you’re feeling the spirit of the season and you decide to donate to the cause, it may surprise you to hear that the Salvation Army did not perform a background check on the volunteer taking your money. See video below by WKYC:

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Juaniata College Conducted Background Check, Sandusky Denied Job

After applying to a volunteer coaching position in May 2010 at Juaniata College in Huntingdon, PA, college officials who did their due-diligence turned Jerry Sandusky down. Hiring personnel at the college denied Sandusky the position after conducting a background investigation and were made aware of the ex-Penn State assistant coach’s alleged improper behavior at a previous school.

Sandusky is currently at the forefront of a sexual abuse scandal, where he is being charged with 40 counts of molestation charges towards young boys over a 15-year period.

Although he failed a background check and was told by the Pennsylvania college’s administrators that they did not want him associated with their sports program, Sandusky still managed to serve as a “consultant.” Read more

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

You Ask, We Answer

First Contact HR staff answers common questions we get on background checks, drug testing and other HR industry practices. Got a question? Ask us at info@FirstContactHR.com

Question #5: Should I fire an individual for having a positive drug test result?

Every company has different policies. Some find termination as the only answer for a positive drug screen, as drug use is an immediate breach of company policy. On the other hand, many companies now offer Employee Assistance Programs (EAP), which include drug and alcohol counseling and treatment.

For more questions and answers, visit www.FirstContactHR.com and just Ask!

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Background Screening and Minors, Concerned Parents

In light of the events that have unfolded at Penn State and Syracuse Universities, it is important to recognize the unfortunate events that occurred, but also shed light on how the scandals happened. The incident has shocked the country – Penn State University’s former football coach, Jerry Sandusky is being charged with 40 counts of sexual abuse towards minors and the university’s revered football coach, Joe Paterno was fired.

Sandusky is the pinpoint in a wide-ranging investigation that involves eight boys over a 15-year period. Similarly, Syracuse University authorities allegedly ignored sex abuse allegations in 2002 against basketball coach Bernie Fine. A former ball boy for Syracuse University, Bobby Davis, and his girlfriend at the time, claim to have gone to university police back in 2002 with child-molestation allegations. The two have decided to come forward again in response to the media spectacle at Penn State – this time, hoping they will be heard.

The allegations facing administrators at both universities are cause for any parent or school to worry especially when the trust and care of minors are involved. The reaction to these two events by parents is overwhelming – many are questioning the hiring process for the administrators, teachers, coaches and the like who spend time with children. The incidents that have occurred also highlight the lack of background checks performed on individuals who work closely with children.

In one case, a group of parents whose children participate in Baltimore County Department of Recreation and Parks programs are demanding the adoption of background checks for all coaches and volunteers (Read more). In another recent case, Hollywood casting assistant, Jason James Murphy has caused anxiety amongst the parents of child actors who worked under Murphy. Murphy is a convicted child molester who served five years in prison for kidnapping and molesting an 8 year old boy. Parents of child actors are especially concerned since the casting process is typically a time where a child would be unsupervised by a parent or guardian (Read more).

Had background checks including federal court criminal records searches, statewide criminal records searches and criminal history reports, been performed some of these events could have been avoided. It is important to question whether or not background checks are performed amongst those our society trusts with minors to help eliminate the chances of pedophiles and predators preying on children.

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Education Background Screening and Human Resource Stories in the News Last Week

Pennsylvania takes retroactive steps to prevent convicted felons from working in school districts.

A new law signed by Pennsylvania Governor, Tom Corbett, mandates background checks on public, private and vocational school workers. School district administrators must notify all employees of the law and return a form reporting any criminal history to the Pennsylvania State Education Association completed by employees. Certain convictions will lead to employment suspensions or even termination including first-, second-, or third-degree felonies, aggravated assault, kidnapping, and other crimes. Read more

How background checks are conducted in Clark County, Nevada Schools.

The Las Vegas Sun investigates how background checks are done, after a teacher in a Clark County school was arrested on suspicion of drug possession and theft of school property. In an investigative interview, the chief human resources officer and former interim chief human resources officer of the Clark County School District answered questions on their background check procedures. Read more

Update: Background Checks Dealing with School Workers Clarified.

A new law, §1-111 Act 24 of 2011, mandates that all Pennsylvania elementary schools must background screen all new hires and existing staff for criminal history. The form that current staff must fill out asks employees to check “arrested,” “convicted,” “never been arrested,” or “never been convicted,” however the law states that only convictions of employees need to be reported. In a response to concerns surrounding this contradiction, a statement was released to clarify the law.

A publication from Fox Rothschild LLP states that “these amendments restrict those people that a school is allowed to hire, but they have almost no direct impact on the employment of those already employed. Some school administrators have mistakenly stated that these amendments require schools to fire a current employee where a prior conviction for a barred offense comes to light. While this may be true in some limited cases, it is generally not so, and neither this statute nor the companion provision in §5-527 requires termination of employment.” Read more

Convicted felon employed at middle school steals jewelry, computers

After a middle school janitor was charged in connection to jewelry and computer thefts, the School Committee Chairman of a Massachusetts school wants to know more about the school’s criminal background screening procedures. Court documents showed that the janitor pled guilty to assault and battery and breaking and entering charges in the past. Also, he was allegedly in an outpatient drug treatment program for an opiates addiction. Initial reports in the same case were for stolen MacBook Computers, iPads and other equipment. How did a criminal get employed at an elementary school? Read more

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

You Ask, We Answer

Each week we will be answering common questions we get on background checks, drug testing and other HR industry practices. Got a question? Ask us at info@FirstContactHR.com

Question #4: What is the difference between a ‘diluted’ specimen, a ‘substituted’ specimen and an ‘adulterated’ specimen?

A ‘diluted’ specimen is when an individual has either intentionally ingested high levels of liquid or added a liquid to the collected specimen in order to decrease the concentration of the specimen. If a specimen is sufficiently diluted, it makes it difficult for the lab to identify any drugs that might be present. Specifically, a diluted specimen has a creatinine reading less than 20 mg/dL, but greater than 5 mg/dL, and a specific gravity less than 1.003, but greater than 1.001.

A ‘substituted’ specimen is when something other than human urine has been submitted as the candidate’s collected sample. Simply stated, such specimens do not exhibit the clinical signs or characteristics associated with normal urine. Specifically, a substituted specimen has a creatinine of less than or equal to 5mg/dL and a specific gravity less than or equal to 1.001 or greater than or equal to 1.020.

An ‘adulterated’ specimen is when an individual has introduced a foreign substance into the collected sample to intentionally disguise drugs in the urine. There are numerous products on the market, such as Klear, that are easily purchased online and have been designed for just this purpose. Specifically, an adulterated specimen is when the nitrite concentration is equal to or great than 500 cg/mL.

For more questions and answers, visit www.FirstContactHR.com and just Ask!

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon