Steps to Follow When Making an Adverse Employment Decision

 

On occasion, employers must make the difficult decision to withdraw a job offer or terminate employment based on the results of a background check report. As a best practice and to fully comply with local, state and federal laws, the following steps are recommended.

Making an Adverse Employment Decision
Determine whether the criminal record or discrepancy in the background screening report will present an unacceptable business risk or impact the person’s ability to meet the expectations of the job. Consider the relevancy of the crime to the job requirements, for instance a “driving while intoxicated” violation may have no impact on an office job where driving is not required. Review the severity of the crime, such as misdemeanor versus felony and; the time that has passed since the crime was committed (e.g.,1 versus 15 years ago).

Individualized Assessment
Once a decision has been made to withdraw the job offer or terminate employment, it is best to contact the person as quickly as possible. Let them know the results of the background screening report, and give them the opportunity to explain any perceived discrepancy. If there is evidence that there is erroneous data in the report or other mitigating circumstances, tell them you will re-evaluate the data. If the report is accurate, state that you will be withdrawing the offer or terminating their employment.

Pre-Adverse Action Notice
Let the person know that you will be sending them a pre-adverse action letter. This will give them the opportunity to contact First Contact HR directly if they believe the background screening report is incorrect. This letter will also provide them with a copy of the background screening report, and a summary of their rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Adverse Action Letter
After waiting seven (7) days, you should send an adverse action letter, which confirms that you made the final decision to either withdraw the job offer or terminate employment.

Changes in Law
Generating pre-adverse and adverse action letters are generally easy and straight-forward. Many  organizations utilize a template or an automated process for inserting the subject data into the letters. However, recent changes in laws for some jurisdictions require that for pre-adverse and adverse action notices an employer provide specific information relating to the reasons they are making an employment decision or other documents or information be provided. In these cases, employers will need to customize the letters for each subject in the following jurisdictions to ensure compliance with local laws: CA, MA, NJ, Seattle (WA), Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties (MD), Philadelphia (PA), Portland (OR), Austin (TX), Chicago (IL) and New York City (NY).

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

An Inside Look at Properly Conducting a Background Check (Part 1)

00013790In 2014, nearly 90% of all employers performed some sort of background screening on potential job applicants.[1]  The industry really began booming after 9/11 in an effort to, among other things, ensure workplace safety and protect companies from lawsuits for negligent hiring. Unfortunately, many background screening companies are transactional in nature and work within a “big box” mentality, which leads to increased quantity of screens but with a decreased quality review and follow-up.  Recently, one of these larger background screening companies was successfully sued for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), having misidentified an individual on two separate occasions as a convicted felon. Because of these mistakes, that individual lost two job opportunities.  According to court documents, the large screening company failed to follow its own procedures pertaining to persons with common names and failed to implement a practice with respect to individuals previously misidentified. The background investigators also failed to utilize publicly available information which would have led them to discover that – in one instance – the man they identified as the job applicant was actually in jail at the time the actual applicant applied for the position.  Although this individual won in court and received a hefty award from the jury, the outcome of similar situations is often times less satisfying, and the burden unfortunately falls on the job applicant to “clear his good name.”

Here’s an inside look at properly conducting an employment background check by an HR Investigator at a reputable background screening firm.

Upon running a criminal background check with a name and date of birth provided by the job applicant, a serious sex offense was discovered. However, the names did not match up and the middle initial of the job applicant matched only the first name of the convicted sex offender. Additional research led the HR Investigator to discover several alias names, one of which matched the applicant, with a matching date of birth.  The sex offender registry listed an address that, although similar, did not match with the information the applicant provided.  Rather than giving up, the HR Investigator grew resourceful. She forwarded a copy of the sex offender’s photo from the registry website to the client and asked them to confirm whether it was their applicant or not. Sure enough, the convict and the job applicant were the same person.  These extra steps positively identified a rapist who went out of his way to avoid detection, including providing an invalid zip code. Had the HR Investigator run the sex offender search and nothing more, this applicant’s record would have been returned as clean, and the client may have made a hiring decision without critical information about the applicant’s character and past crimes. This situation can easily happen when background checks are run by inexperienced in-house staff, or when the background screening firm relies totally on technology to push data to its clients or end users without properly reviewing the results.

Our advice to employers is simple: properly conducting the background screening PROCESS is critical. A bad hire can lead to theft, violence, high turnover, or unqualified staff. If information is simply pushed through in an effort to add one more transaction to the company books, without any quality control measures, you may want to get yourself a good lawyer… or a better background screening company.

 

 

[1]http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/background-checks-make-mistakes-applicants-left-little-recourse/

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

Do Background Checks Contribute to Unemployment?

Photo: http://newsonia.com/

With the unemployment rate under constant review, one of the most important questions being asked is: “what factors are causing unemployment?”

Gaining occasional attention is the notion of background checks leading to higher unemployment since they can bar applicants with a criminal record from landing a job.

Continue reading

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

Philadelphia Eagles Player Targeted in Bank Fraud Scheme

Ed Hille/Philly.com

A Philadelphia Eagles player was the victim of theft by a person he trusted – an employee of a security firm. Late last month, Eagles offensive lineman, Todd Herremans made news headlines, but not for an Eagles victory. A 37-year-old man named Robert von Ryan is charged with bank fraud, allegedly stealing more than $225,000 from Herremans’ bank account.

Continue reading

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

Anatomy of a Background Check

Lately, there has been quite a bit of discourse on the topic of background screening in the news. Between the EEOC suing Dollar General and BMW over their alleged discriminatory screening practices, the Philadelphia building collapse in June,and the Snowden/NSA information leaking case, there’s certainly plenty to discuss. But what exactly is a background check?

Continue reading

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

Top 10 Background Check Trends for 2013

The rising popularity of background checks has given rise to new trends for vetting new hires and employees by organizations across the U.S.The growth of background checks also permeates other areas such as screening of volunteers, contractors, business partners, board members, housing tenants and even purchasers of guns. Here’s a list of the latest 10 ten trends for 2013 complied by First Contact HR.

Continue reading

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

Why You Need To Background Check [Infographic]

Your new potential hire has just left your office following a final interview. You feel great about their attitude and they appear to have the pedigree of a top candidate. They have all the signs for success: a resume full of great experience, stories about converting tough clients, and the charisma/charm and character you’ve only ever read about in hiring books.

Continue reading

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

More Nonprofits Conduct Background Checks, Criminal Hits Decrease

Over the past five years, the hit rate for criminal background checks has been on the decline as more nonprofit organizations background check their new hires. A recent study’s, data showed that from 2007 to 2011, more than 5.4 million background checks we conducted by nonprofits and 22 percent of those checks resulted in criminal hits.

Of that 22 percent (approximately 479,000), background checks revealed very serious kidnapping, murder, sex-related and drug-related offenses. While it is shocking to know that criminals who have been convicted of kidnapping or molestation could be working amongst children, elders and people in need, we know that criminals go where they know they can get in “under the radar” – organizations [they know] do not conduct background checks.

In organizations working with children, such as the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, background checks are a must; the study found that 1,021 of the criminal hits were registered sex offenders, 603 convictions for kidnapping and 1,176 murder offenses.

What’s more is that between 2007 and 2011, 22 percent of those criminal hits also included 91,607 drug-related offenses including possession and distribution and 10,438 sex-related offenses. These figures are certainly eye-opening, but the good news is that these were hits, and thus these individuals were barred from employment at the nonprofits where they applied to work. Additionally, the number of criminals has declined over the past five years by 7 percent, according to the study.

The drop in criminal hits is attributed by the nonprofits’ use of background screening programs. When criminals know that nonprofits are conducting background checks, they seek employment somewhere else, so it is important for nonprofits to speak with background screening providers in order to mitigate risk, protect their reputations and those they seek to help.

 

 

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 at FirstContactHR dot com

Question #8: 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