 'Careers ' Viewpoint Concerning Background Screening, From S.F. ExaminerPublished Date: 2009-06-12 15:59:32 WorkOnInternet.com
The fact is, however, that background screenings of job applicants benefit employers and employees alike. Furthermore, with the recent changes in the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, job applicants have a great deal of legal protection. For applicants, the advantages of working for a company that requires screening is that the utmost efforts have been made to ensure all co-workers will have the qualifications and credentials they say they have. In addition, employers typically screen for criminal records, especially those involving violence or dishonesty. For the employer, screening saves the time and money wasted in recruiting, hiring and training the wrong candidates and eliminates potential difficulties in the work force. Of course, a background screening is not a full-fledged FBI-type investigation. Screening companies are typically looking for red flags indicating potential problems or resumes that are not factual or omit important information. Job applicants have recently been afforded substantial new legal rights to ensure the accuracy and fairness of the process. Congress amended the Fair Credit Reporting Act effective last September 30 to allow consumers to know exactly what is going on and to assert their rights in case of errors or mistakes. An applicant’s rights are listed in detail on the Federal Trade Commission Web site at http://www.ftc.gov. Under the FCRA, when an employer uses a background screening company to prepare a report, several steps must occur: • The employer must clearly disclose to the applicant in a separate document that a report is being prepared. The disclosure can no longer be buried in an application in the fine print. • A signed release is required before checking records such as criminal convictions or pending criminal cases, driving records, credit reports or educational credentials. • An additional notice is required when a background firm checks references, such as asking previous employers about job performance. • If an employer intends to deny employment based upon information in the report, the job applicant must receive a copy of the report and a notice of legal rights. • If an applicant believes the information is wrong, the applicant can inform the screening agency, which must remove or correct inaccurate or unverified information, usually within 30 days. • Applicants have the right to inspect their files. The law is designed to strike a balance between an employer’s need to exercise due diligence in hiring and an applicant’s right of accuracy and privacy. For applicants who are genuinely the victims of mistaken identity or bureaucratic errors, there is an opportunity to know what is being said about them and to fix the record so they are not denied opportunities unfairly. For a job applicant, honesty is always the best policy. Negative information honestly disclosed in an interview with an explanation may well have no effect. However, if the employer discovers it through a third party, then the lack of honesty may be the reason for not getting the position. Even a criminal conviction cannot legally automatically disqualify a person from employment, without considering the nature of the offense, when it occurred, what the applicant has done since and whether it is related to job performance. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Lester S. Rosen is an attorney at law and President of http://www.esrcheck.com">Employment Screening Resources , a national background checking company located in California offering employment screening services such as http://www.esrcheck.com">employee background screening, job verification, and http://www.esrcheck.com">credential verification. He is the author of, “The Safe Hiring Manual--Complete Guide to Keeping Criminals, Imposters and Terrorists Out of Your Workplace.” (512 pages-Facts on Demand Press), the first comprehensive book on employment screening. He is also a consultant, writer and frequent presenter nationwide on pre-employment screening and safe hiring issues. He has qualified and testified in the California, Florida and Arkansas Superior Courts as an expert witness on issues surrounding safe hiring and due diligence. His speaking appearances have included numerous national and statewide conferences. He is a former deputy District Attorney and criminal defense attorney and has taught criminal law and procedure at the University of California Hastings College of the Law. His jury trials have included murder, death penalty and federal cases. He graduated UCLA with Phi Beta Kappa honors, and received a J.D. degree from the University of California at Davis, serving on the Law Review. He holds the highest attorney rating of A.V. in the national Martindale-Hubbell listing of American Attorneys. Mr. Rosen was the chairperson of the steering committee that founded the National Association of Professional Background Screeners (NAPBS) a professional trade organization for the screening industry, which now has over 500 members. He was also elected to the first board of directors and served as the first co-chairman in 2004.
The website has been upgraded. You are reading the article via the old version of the site, the url for the article is now at http://www.workoninternet.com/article_archive/26763.html Home | Submit Article| Article Topics | Article Archives | Newsletter | Business Directory | Contact US |
