Criminal data searches have come under a great deal of scrutiny lately, most often due to their inaccuracy and (sometimes) questionable quality. Employers wonder how criminal records can be missed, why specific infractions don’t turn up when they should, and more. There are answers to these questions; the most important thing to remember, though, is that criminal data searches are not perfect.

The biggest misconception is the belief that there is a searchable, national database of criminal data. There is not. Several states (Massachusetts and Louisiana among them) do not allow the sale of their criminal data. Some states don’t maintain records in bulk format, while others provide only department of correction data, meaning that searches are effectively limited to those who are (or have been) incarcerated in one of the reporting state’s facilities.

Human error can also lead to erroneous results. A mistyped letter or transposed date of birth—two mistakes that are easy to make—can yield a false positive, meaning the applicant shows up as having no criminal record.

If you think social security numbers offer a measure of security against these data entry errors, remember that names and dates of birth are typically the only searchable information. And in a few cases (Pennsylvania and New Jersey are just two examples), some criminal records may only contain a name and no date of birth.

To help alleviate concerns you may have regarding the validity of criminal data, make sure you use a legitimate provider of criminal data. In most cases, applicants will note the existence of criminal records on their applications. In these cases, if no records are returned by your search, contact your vendor and ask for additional research. Most vendors provide this service, and although it may cost a little extra, you’ll rest easy knowing that you’ve done your part to ensure a safe working environment.

Recently, the so-called ‘Ban the Box Legislation’ is picking up momentum all across the country. Massachusetts was one of the first states to enact a state-wide ban on this type of information gathering and now locally, the city of Philadelphia has passed its own version.

Basically, the legislation states that an employer may not ask if the applicant has a criminal history by placing a box on the application to be checked yes or no. Advocacy groups have fought long and hard to protect criminals who are attempting to enter society after a time of incarceration and hit a brick wall when they apply for a job and are required to disclose their criminal history on the application.

The employer can and should inquire into an applicant’s background once the initial interview is completed. After the interview is completed, the employer may deny the applicant employment based on the fact that there is a confirmed criminal history.

A significant point to make is that some employers who used the box on their application were using this as a form of rejection and never following through on investigating the applicant’s background. With this legislation, it would be strongly advised that a criminal history check along with the other parts of the background investigation be completed. And it is very important to know that all applicants must be treated the same so if a criminal background is performed on one applicant, it must be done on all applicants.

Failing to perform a background check on your applicant could cause your world to turn upside down. Take this case for example. A trucking company hires a driver who knowingly has a history of motor vehicle violations did not fully disclose this information on his job application. The company does not conduct a thorough background investigation and hires the applicant as a truck driver.

The truck driver collided with two vehicles sitting at a traffic light causing injuries to one driver. The driver sues the trucking company and comes out with $581,000 in damages from the lawsuit.

Lesson to be learned. Do a thorough background investigation on any job applicant to ensure you are hiring qualified and truthful people for your company. Even though this applicant omitted the fact he had multiple motor vehicle violations, a background check on the applicant that verified this information would have clearly shown his poor driving record. And for the mere fact he lied on his application would have been enough to deny this applicant employment.

I often see websites advertise free background checks and for whatever reason when I click on more information, a price comes up which begs the question, how can these sites offer free background checks and then charge someone a price for the information?

I always question how valid something is when I see a ‘free offer’. If it were free, would everyone buy it? Then again, if it’s too good to be true, it probably is.

Nothing of value is ever given to someone for free. Plain and simple. With criminal data and how important the information is to employers, why would you consider putting your company at risk by using a free service which probably uses outdated information and then charge you for the meat and potatoes which in most cases would cost the same as if you went to a legitimate service?

Here’s how I look at it. I can go to websites today and spend the time looking up criminal data on my job applicants. A perfect example is the commonwealth of Pennsylvania. They have a site where you can search district justice records and court of common pleas dockets for no price. Well, how do you know if the person lived in PA and not in NY or NJ for most of their life? How do you know if the person doesn’t have a different last name or maybe the date of birth may be off by a day or two? These are just a couple of the nuances that criminal data has and not using a vendor that can provide a multi-state report with capabilities of searching on aliases ultimately puts your company in a predicament. Let us know if you need a vendor that can give you the information you need to make a sound hiring decision on a prospective employee.

One of the most important forms of identification to request during the background investigation process is the Social Security Card. Provided by the United States Social Security Administration, it is the most definitive way to confirm a person’s identity. Knowing that the number provided to each citizen is unique, it’s the most authentic form of identification and used in pretty much every financial transaction during the course of your life.

The SS card is provided to every person shortly after birth. The hospital usually provides you with the forms before you leave with your newborn and in a couple of months, your child now has a 9-digit number that all American legally possess. Emphasizing the word legal is another story and the reason for this blog entry.

Identity theft has gone out of control in the last 10 years. Identity theft crimes are up and punishable by jail time along with hefty fines. The process to verify social security numbers has only become a necessity recently as job applicants may not truthfully represent who they seem to be. There are several ways to verify someone’s social security number in a matter of minutes and usually at a minimal or no charge.

Using your background screening vendor, inquire on a social security verification search or trace. What this search reports is a collection of addresses by each credit bureau that is compiled and sold wholesale to companies who in turn resell to background screening vendors. The accuracy on this type of search is fairly high however there could be situations where no information is returned in a search. This is not a cause for concern and it could very well be that your job applicant has little or no credit and there are no address records associated with the social security number.

Another way to verify the number is to use the service provided by the Social Security Administration, Business Services Online website. This service requires you to register online however the information you will receive is extremely valuable and the time it takes to register and learn the system will greatly benefit your organization since you will know the social security number is valid.

A real simple way to make sure your applicant has a valid social security number is to ask for the original card and match the name against another government-issued form of identification, such as a state driver’s license card. Copies made by your applicant should not be accepted as the copy could have been altered and if the appropriate steps are not taken to verify the authenticity of the number, your company could be in violation of federal and state laws governing the employment of legal employees.

It is extremely important to realize how important the social security number is when using to verify an applicant’s identity. People today have become extremely talented in altering documents and your company should be cognizant when it comes to making sure the applicant has a legal and valid social security card.

Job applicants are required to provide certain types of documentation to verify their identity and are part of the employment verification process. In many cases, employers tend to ask for a driver’s license and social security card, which is sufficient. With identity theft running rampant throughout the nation, it is wise to get as many documents as you can to verify the job applicant’s identity and confirm they are telling the truth so you know that the person who is applying for a position in your company is really the person and not someone else.

Legible copies of a state-issued driver’s license and social security card are the most popular forms of identification. One way to know you have a legitimate copy is to make the photocopy yourself. Having the applicant provide copies or having them faxed could be problematic since the originals may be damaged and any further copying could make the copies unreliable.

The driver’s license is also important because you know the applicant is permitted to legally drive. Positions such as operating a tractor trailer or making deliveries would constitute a requirement to have a valid driver’s license and verifying this information would be critical prior to offering the position to your applicant.

Another important document is a birth certificate. An original or certified copy can be used to verify an applicant’s date of birth and true name as it appears on the application. Of course the name could be different if the applicant married or legally changed the name.

A Permanent Resident Card (also known as a Green Card) is another form of identification that can be used in verifying your applicant’s identity. If the applicant has no proven address history and is coming from a foreign country to seek employment in the US, they must show this card as it establishes an immigrant’s legal presence and right to work. More to come on this topic in a future blog.

Legible copies of pay-stubs, bills/mortgage statements, and any legitimate piece of information bearing the applicant’s name and address can be used in conjunction with above-mentioned documents. They are not to be substituted for the driver’s license and social security card as these forms of identification are the most important since they can legally verify your applicant’s identity.

To legally comply with the federal government’s standards on employment eligibility, you can download a copy of the I-9 form that is provided to employers by the Department of Homeland Security, US Citizenship and Immigration Services. You can download the most recent copy from our Resources section.

Hawaii became part of the trend back in July to limit the use of credit reports in the acceptance or rejection of an applicant for a position unless the information relates to a legitimate occupational qualification.

House Bill HB31 CD1 took effect July 1, 2009. It is an extremely important piece of legislation as it directly pertains to credit reports and how they are part of the background screening process most employers use in screening the applicant. This legislation essentially prevents consumer credit reports from being used to determine if an applicant is qualified for a position. Those with credit issues can now be considered for a job they were once not qualified for since the employer had specific guidelines in what to accept in regards to specific credit criteria.

What’s important to understand is that credit reports can still be used in situations that pertain to federal or state law, managerial and supervisor positions, and certain financial institutions. Hundreds of job applicants continue to seek employment and without the use of credit reports, it forces employers to use other means to inquire about the applicant’s history. Hawaii does not make any mention to eliminate the other searches that can be used in determining the eligibility of an applicant for a position. Other searches include an employment verification, motor vehicle history, drug screening, criminal background, reference check, and an education verification.

With federal legislation pending approval pertaining to credit reports and how they may be removed for consideration for certain positions, many job applicants with poor credit histories will be re-considered for the job they once were not qualified. It is still highly recommended that employers continue to use other reports to determine if a job applicant can be hired and not become discouraged since credit reports may not be used in the process.

A critical piece of legislation recently unveiled by Congressman Steve Cohen (D-TN) would essentially prevent employers from using credit reports in the background screening process, with some restrictions on the type of organization, position, and level. HR 3149, titled The Equal Employment for All Act, would basically provide a level playing field for all individuals regardless of their credit history. To summarize it even further, it prohibits the use of consumer credit checks against prospective employees for the purpose of making an adverse employment decision.

There are several different exclusions to the bill:

When a person applies for, or currently holds, employment that requires national security or FDIC clearance.

When a person applies for, or currently holds, employment with a State or local government agency which requires such a report.

When a person applies for, or currently holds, a supervisory, managerial, professional, or executive position at a financial institution.

When otherwise required by law.

The bill is designed to help those with financial hardships that have poor credit histories be eligible for jobs they would otherwise be denied due to their credit history. Although credit checks are one part of the background screening process, they have become increasingly popular over the years as people are losing their homes to foreclosure, not paying financial obligations, in addition to other financial dilemmas that affect your credit history drastically. Your credit history is your lifeline when you are trying to purchase your first home or buy a new car. Companies are looking at credit in greater detail and knowing the person has a poor credit history, may prevent them from landing a new position.

I guess the most important thing to consider if this bill gets through Congress and onto final passage is that credit reports are only part of the background screening process. The employment verification, drug screening, motor vehicle search, reference check, and more importantly, the criminal background, will remain intact. If the background investigation investigation is truly complete, meaning all the above mentioned pieces are done correctly and thoroughly, you should have really no issue in denying or accepting the applicant for the position.

In a recent settlement between TALX and the FTC, it was determined that TALX violated the terms of the FCRA by failing to provide certain disclosures to users of their consumer reports. The full article can be found here. This brings up a really interesting point when it comes to an employment verification.

What I believe to be an argument to the charge by the FTC is how does verifying employment history be classified under a consumer report? Consumer reports are usually credit-based however the scope is broadened to criminal, eviction, or any type of pre-employment background investigation. Asking someone to verify if an applicant worked at their company could be misconstrued as just a verification of employment and not a consumer report however in the eyes of the FCRA, it is a consumer report and you have to follow the rules set forth.

An excellent place for information regarding consumer reports can be found on the FTC website. Click here and you’ll have the most current information direct from the FTC.

It would be wise for any background screening company to make sure all the i’s are dotted and t’s are crossed, especially when it comes to complying with federal and state laws regarding consumer reports. And if you’re not sure, by all means, check with your legal counsel as it’s better to be compliant so you’re not investigated by the FTC.

The process of verifying employment history can be extremely simple, or it can be extremely daunting. First, the applicant must provide consent on the job application. After filling in all the questions, a statement at the bottom should read to the effect of:

“I, the undersigned applicant, hereby authorize the company to obtain and verify verbally, in writing, or electronically such information about my background and qualifications for employment as the company, in its sole discretion, deems relevant to its decision whether to hire me for the position I am applying for, including without limitation professional and personal references, employment verifications, educational verifications, license and credentials, criminal records, motor vehicle records, credit reports, and Social Security number verifications.”

If you want a full consent document, you can find it here or Contact Us and we’ll send it to you directly.

Why did we say employment verifications are simple? Well, if you call the previous employer and they don’t answer your call and no follow-up attempt is made, they’re simple. One attempt and you’re done. The only problem here is the full background investigation is not complete. Although the applicant may be the most qualified for the position, often you won’t be able to proceed with hiring until you get the information verified. If, for example, a salary for a previous job looks suspicious, it is absolutely imperative that every attempt to contact the previous employer is made. Once you know that the information is confirmed, you may proceed with either hiring or denying the applicant for the position.

Then, why are employment verifications daunting? Many HR professionals agree; the labor involved outweighs the value. After hearing time after time, “we only verify dates of employment,” you start to feel like you are getting the corporate run-around. Many also feel that inquiring on an applicant’s credit and criminal background is sufficient. We all know that information costs money, however, some HR departments seem to think that a $4.95 criminal background from the #1 result in Google for background checks is good enough. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but that is not the case. In a future blog, we will discuss criminal data but in general terms, criminal information that is distributed from state-sanctioned sources is the same for each and every background check company. If you see an advertisement for a 50-state criminal search, you should be concerned as there are states that do not allow their data to be stored in a database.

In all honesty, tasking an HR analyst with background investigations for all job applicants is pretty exhausting. Think of the process that begins with the job application, then the criminal investigation, followed by the drug screening and finally, the employment verification for all the companies the applicant worked at over the past five years.

The employment verification process may vary based on your protocols, but follow the general steps for a given applicant:

1. You have to call previous employer number one, leave a message.

2. Call previous employer number two, leave a message.

3. Call previous employer number three, speak to someone and get transferred to someone else in HR because the first individual is not authorized to provide any information related to previous employees.

Between all of the voicemails, transfers to someone else, and the line, “we only verify dates of employment,” it’s no wonder you are exhausted.

Let’s face it; information is crucial and quality information costs money. No one would disagree with that statement. Searching for the most cost effective vendor may save you money but the old saying goes “penny wise, pound foolish” has a very broad meaning and companies who tend to follow that statement tend to be burnt in the long run. Not saying that’s the case 100% of the time but you get what you pay for and when you see a report for $4.95, it’s probably worth that and not a penny more.