by Jason Morris

I read an interesting article yesterday about a British engineer who found a copy of a magazine printed in 1965 by Gordon Moore predicting the number of components on a processor would double every year and that costs would fall commensurately. I decided to do some research on Moore’s Law and picked up a book I had bought a month ago called No Place to Hide. Moore’s law specifically warns us that with computers getting more powerful, "big brother" is just around the corner.

The book itself is rather interesting and I will post a complete report when I am finished. The author focuses on company’s that aggregate data to sell to marketing firms and government.  For example, the "passenger watch list" is provided in part by some of these firms. We all know that the background screening industry is completely different but we are sometimes confused with these types of companies.  Pre-employment screening is heavily regulated by state laws and the FCRA, background checks can’t be conducted without a clear disclosure made by the applicant allowing the search to be conducted. 

by Jason Morris

I have seen a ton of articles in the past few days about laws requiring background checks for on-line dating services. This reminds me of a scene in Amazon Women on the Moon called "Two I.D.’s" with Steve Guttenberg and Rosanna Arquette. If you have not seen it I recommend it! In a nutshell, Guttenberg picks up Arquette for a blind date and she asks for two forms of I.D., she then swipes it into her phone and gets a hundred page print-out including the last time he went to the bathroom.

I am all for background checks, but I don’t think the government should focus on situations where a person "knowingly" puts themself into a situation where there could be a lot of  risk. I think it would be a GREAT idea if the ’services’ offered the user an "option" to run this check for an additional fee, but requiring it is putting laws where they don’t belong.  However, a person going into a work situation has the right to work in a safe environment, I think an employee should EXPECT that resonable efforts are made to ensure this safe, wholesome workplace. If the state and federal government want to require background checks, they should start in places where the expectation is low risk.

by Jason Morris

A great article showing the challenges some courts and states are having with an increased use of background checks:

The state of Maine received a record 37,000 requests for criminal background checks last month, a pace that the State Bureau of Identification says it can’t maintain without more staff.

Read the entire article

by Jason Morris

WRONG. Many argue in todays day of identity theft that removing identifiers from public records all together is a good thing. The US Senate is conducting hearings on identity theft and many are suggesting that if you don’t allow individuals to see this information we are all protected. This is a slippery slope, the problem is if you remove this information you have no way to identify that the record you are looking at is on the person you are searching.

Lets take an example of John Mohammed, John is looking for a job as a car salesman, after John’s background check is complete the company finds out that he has a 1999 Auto Theft after which he served one year in prison. John’s criminal record shows his full name and date of birth. When John is told he did not get the job because of this he is shocked, his biggest concern is that in 1999 he was serving oversees in Korea.

John Mohammed is a very common name. It just so happens that this record belonged to another person by the same name with the same date of birth. What we need is MORE IDENTIFIERS on court records, this will protect consumers from being accused of crimes they may not have committed.

Some may further argue that John would have been protected becuase of the FCRA and his right to dispute the record and in turn get the job he intended. This may be true, however it does not always happen that way.

Its very important that consumers write to their congressman and senator to let them know that their intentions are good but exceptions must be made.

Recently, Texas almost passed the type of legislation that would limit identifiers on public records. Members of NAPBS were there to stand up and show how this would effect the pre-employment screening industry. Texas considered the issues and it looks like certain information will not be removed!

by Jason Morris

This week I attended the NAPBS annual conference in San Antonio TX. NAPBS has grown by leaps and bounds this year, currently over 400 companies have made the decision to join forces to have one voice for our industry. With recent news about security breaches and identity theft,  Washington has been flooded with new legislative efforts to help consumers out with various issues. Before the formation of NAPBS the industry had no voice therefore bills were passed that severely hampered a company’s ability to perform quality and accurate background checks. Currently we are working with legislatures and elected officials showing them various ways to combat these issues without affecting our industry and our client’s ability to hire qualified, safe employees.

This week NAPBS held its second annual conference, it was a huge success. Members worked with privacy organizations to help consumers understand the differences between what happened with data brokers and how it is different from what our industry does. In addition we were further educated on various state laws and federal updates to the FCRA.  Jason B Morris, President of Background Information Services, Inc. took over as co-chairman of the 2005-06 board of directors of NAPBS. 

NAPBS will hold a mid-year government relations meeting in New Orleans and a “March on Washington” in July in order to meet with various elected officials to further our cause.  As the association grows we will be lobbying congress to and other state legislatures to further the cause of NAPBS and the employers we represent. For more information on NAPBS please visit their website at www.napbs.com

by Jason Morris

You can’t pick up a newspaper or watch television today without seeing a story about background checks. Take a look at this story, there are still some schools and government offices that don’t screen their employees… In Milwaukee, the mayor has urged for tougher checks on police applicants.

by Jason Morris

Today I wanted to give my two cents on diploma mills. A recent article in the LA Times gives a new angle on what is happening in today’s society.  Diploma mills are on the rise and anyone with an internet connection and a credit card can get one. Its very important to make sure your pre-employment screening company qualifies the schools they are verifying before attempting the verification.  Imagine hiring an individual who claims he/she is a teacher only to find out they simply bought their degree.