warning how background checks can get your staffing agency in big trouble
DESCRIPTION
The highly unregulated background screening industry has peddled extremely low quality background checks by relying on incomplete databases, limiting the scope of the search to 7 years or not including alias names. Now, there is a fast growing movement to restrict the use of criminal background checks. It is critical that staffing companies understand how to conduct legally compliant criminal background checks that align with: • Ban the Box • EEOC 2012-2016 Strategic Plan • Fair Credit Reporting Act • Social Media Background ChecksTRANSCRIPT
Warning! How Background Checks Can Get Your Staffing Agency in Big Trouble
The Webinar will begin shortly. While you are waiting please sign up for our blog: http://info.safehiringsolutions.com
Select speakers or Phone on Webinar tab
Background Founder/CEO Safe Hiring Solutions Co Founder/ CEO Violent Crime Detective Metro Nashville PD 2,600 clients Provide violence prevention training/ consulting:
U.S. Dept of Justice U.S. Dept of Defense U.S. Homeland Security Federal Law Enforcement Training Center National Sheriff’s Assoc Indiana Law Enforcement Training Academy Numerous State Attorney General Offices
Truth about background screening industry
Highly unregulated Historically low quality product/service
No standard of care Reliance on incomplete databases FCRA provides consumer protection but no
standard of care beyond up-to-date information Limit reporting to 7 years Alias names
Why Should You Be Concerned? Your Brand Reputation Legal Consequences Selecting the right screening partner critical We can provide integration to your systems
AND provide high quality checks & service
Best Practices in Background Screening
Core Criminal Package SSN Verification National Criminal Database National Sex Offender County Criminal Search
Additional Solutions BMV Records Federal Criminal Search Employment Credit Report Child Abuse Registry Employment Verifications Character Reference Checks eReferenceCheck
Due Diligence Negligent Hiring Doctrine: If an employer hires someone
that they either knew or should have known was dangerous or unfit for a position and it was foreseeable that someone could have be harmed then they could be sued for negligent hiring. It is the "should have known" that creates problems for employers.
Negligent Retention Doctrine: If employer becomes aware or should have become aware of problems with an employee who demonstrated unfitness and employer takes no corrective action (investigating, reassignment or termination). It is not enough to just screen new hires. Due diligence must be exercised in an ongoing safe workplace program.
4 Hot Button Areas in Background Screening
#1 “Ban the Box” Removes questions on application concerning criminal history Removes valuable integrity tool for employers who compare
screening reports against applications Theory-
Ex- offenders being disenfranchised Criminal history preventing opportunity to interview
Does NOT: Prevent asking about criminal history during interview Conducting criminal background checks
Numerous municipalities (Indianapolis studying) Several bills pending in state legislatures
#2 EEOC 2012-16 Strat Plan
EEOC approved 4/25/12 by 4-1 vote
Guidance effective immediately
No public comment Game plan for the EEOC
field offices
Guidance replaced:
1987 EEOC Policy Statement regarding conviction records Zero tolerance policies 3 pronged approach
1990 Policy Guidance on the Consideration of Arrest Records
Commissioner Constance Smith Barker Lone Dissenter…
“Utter lack of transparency” “Public has been intentionally
shut out of this process” Places a burden on business
owners Exceeds the authority for a
regulatory commission Not congress Not courts
Disparate Impact EEOC demonstrates the
employer’s facially neutral policy has disparate impact on a protected group
Burden is on employer to show policy is: Job related Consistent with business necessity
EEOC interested in who is being denied based on background check
Case law… Green v. MO Pacific
Railroad (1977) Zero tolerance
convictions 3 pronged approach
El v. SEPTA Murder 40 yrs ago Policy no violence 3rd Circuit Ct in favor of
SEPTA
Old Guidance…Employer could demonstrate Title
VII compliance by using 3 factors with background checks:
1. Nature & gravity of crime;
2. Time that has passed since conviction/completion of sentence; and
3. Nature of job held or sought
New Guidance
Now employers may satisfy Title VII by using internal policy if it is “narrowly tailored”
Not clear what this looks like Guidance references “targeted
screens” based on Green factors (3 prongs)
Allow applicant/employee to explain the circumstances of the conviction
Guidance list several considerations: Facts & circumstances
surrounding the offense or conduct Self reporting from candidate? How to verify?
Evidence candidate performed same type work, post conviction, with same or different employer with no incidents of criminal conduct
Employment or character references
Arrest records require further investigating….
Arrest alone should NOT be used to deny employment
Certain minority groups arrested at disproportionately higher rates
FCRA restricts reporting of arrest records to 7 yrs
Considerations…. Review criminal background screening
policies Use of arrest/ non-convictions Green 3 pronged test Zero tolerance policies
#3 Fair Credit Reporting Act Yes it does apply even if you don’t use credit info FCRA applies if you pay a 3rd party vendor like SHS Specific requirements:
Disclosure & Authorization (written or electronic)
If taking adverse action based in “whole or part” on a background screening report:
Pre-Adverse Action Letter, Copy of Report, Summary of Rights under FCRA
Adverse Action Letter
Willful Non- Compliance of FCRAHunter, et al v. First Transit
Inc. Failed to provide
disclosures to applicants BEFORE running background check;
Failed to follow two-step adverse action process when denied employment
$5.9 Million Settlement
Several recent lawsuits for FCRA violations Domino’s Pizza $2.5 Mil
Running checks without authorization Not providing Pre-Adverse Action information
HireRight Allegedly providing inaccurate information $2.6 million settlement
K-Mart $3 Mil for FCRA Violations
Selection of Screening Firm Critical
#4 Social Media Background Checks
Be careful….there can be legal implications: Discrimination- seeing protected information like
marital status, age, race, etc. Privacy- Yes even the internet has a reasonable
expectation of privacy since most sites require friending
Authenticity-How do you know it is your candidate? Common names?
Social Media Concerns How do you verify information? How do you know it is your candidate? How do you know that your candidate is not
operating online under an assumed identity? 21 states have restricted use of social media checks Congress HR 537 would make it illegal to ask for
social networking & email passwords
Questions?
Mike McCarty
CEO
Safe Hiring Solutions
Danville, IN 46122
317-745-6946
www.safehiringsolutions.com