by Nick Fishman

Happy Holidays and Happy New Year to all of our loyal readers! Enjoy a healthy and peaceful holiday season. We look forward to hearing from you in the coming year.

by Nick Fishman

This is about a month old now, but an old friend from SHRM passed this study on Employment Screening in the retail sector which was published in Loss Preventation Magazine. See some key findings below:

The purpose of the survey was to benchmark large retailers’ current pre-employment screening programs. The survey was sent to the most senior-level loss prevention executive in ten leading U.S. retailers. The surveyed retailers ranged in store count from 250 to over 3,000 locations and included both hardline and softline retailers. The survey focused on five types of screening processes—drug testing, assessments, credit checks, criminal history, and motor vehicle checks. The scope of the survey included store, distribution centers, and corporate levels at each retail company. The survey was conducted in March, 2007.
The survey did not attempt to evaluate the ROI from a pre-employment background screening program. While this is outside the scope of this survey, many retail companies have an internal ROI process measuring programs such a pre-employment screening.
The chart below is a summary of the responses to the five primary questions. Conducting an assessment is clearly the most common pre-employment screening method employed, followed by conducting a criminal background check.

Screening Type: Store Distribution Center Corporate
Drug Screen 50% 60% 40%
Assessment 90% 40% 40%
Credit Check 0% 0% 33%
Criminal Background Check 70% 80% 70%
Motor Vehicle Record Check 0% 60% 40%

I am a little surprised that assessments beat out criminal background checks at the store level, but given the cost structure of screening tactics perhaps it makes sense. Also, I’m surprised that the Substance Abuse Screening levels and use of Criminal Background Checks vary from Store, to Distribution Center, to Corporate. I would think that if these things were important at one level, they would be important at all.

by Nick Fishman

Check out my recent Xtra Cheezhead post concerning the use of Social Networking Sites in Background Screening process.

I found a great interview in SmartMoney Magazine with employment attorney Jeanine DeBacker on the topic which highlights her thoughts on this practice and the potential for litigation.

Click here to view the full post.

by Nick Fishman

If you live in the state of Ohio and want to be a dentist, veterinarian, marriage therapist, dietitian or an embalmer state lawmakers just passed House Bill 104 mandating a criminal background check. Seems like a good idea. However, the same lawmakers didn’t think it was a good idea to subject themselves to the same requirement.

Check out “State lawmakers: No criminal checks on us” as published in yesterday’s Columbus Dispatch. This would be a funny story if it weren’t actually true.

by Nick Fishman

I’m taking a brief respite from posts related to background checks (trust me, it will be over after this one), to share an email that was passed on to me last week. Whether the story is true or made up doesn’t really matter. I still like the message.

Two Choices

What would you do? ….you make the choice.
Don’t look for a punch line, there isn’t one. Read it anyway.
My question is: Would you have made the same choice?
At a fundraising dinner for a school that serves children with learning disabilities, the father of one of the students delivered a speech that would never be forgotten by all who attended. After extolling the school and its dedicated staff, he offered a question:“When not interfered with by outside influences, everything nature does, is done with perfection. Yet my son, Shay, cannot learn things as other children do. He cannot understand things as other children do. Where is the natural order of things in my son?” The audience was stilled by the query.The father continued. “I believe that when a child like Shay, who was mentally and physically disabled comes into the world, an opportunity to realize true human nature presents itself, and it comes in the way other people treat that child.”Then he told the following story:Shay and I had walked past a park where some boys Shay knew were playing baseball.Shay asked, “Do you think they’ll let me play?”I knew that most of the boys would not want someone like Shay on their team, but as a father, I also understood that if my son were allowed to play, it would give him a much-needed sense of belonging and some confidence to be accepted by others in spite of his handicaps.I approached one of the boys on the field and asked (not expecting much) if Shay could play. The boy looked around for guidance and said, “Well, we’re losing by six runs and the game is in the eighth inning. I guess he can be on our team and we’ll try to put him in to bat in the ninth inning.”Shay struggled over to the team’s bench and, with a broad smile, put on a team shirt. I watched with a small tear in my eye and warmth in my heart; and, the boys saw my joy at my son being accepted.In the bottom of the eighth inning, Shay’s team scored a few runs but was still behind by three.In the top of the ninth inning, Shay put on a glove and played in the right field. Even though no hits came his way, he was obviously ecstatic just to be in the game and on the field, grinning from ear to ear as I waved to him from the stands.In the bottom of the ninth inning, Shay’s team scored again. Now, with two outs and the bases loaded, the potential winning run was on base and Shay was scheduled to be next at bat.At this juncture, do they let Shay bat and give away their chance to win the game?Surprisingly, Shay was given the bat. Everyone knew that a hit was all but impossible because Shay didn’t even know how to hold the bat properly, much less connect with the ball.However, as Shay stepped up to the plate, the pitcher, recognizing that the other team was putting winning aside for this moment in Shay’s life, moved in a few steps to lob the ball in softly so Shay could at least make contact. The first pitch came and Shay swung clumsily and missed.The pitcher again took a few steps forward to toss the ball softly towards Shay. As the pitch came in, Shay swung at the ball and hit a slow ground ball right back to the pitcher.The game would now be over. The pitcher picked up the soft grounder and could have easily thrown the ball to the first baseman. Shay would have been out and that would have been the end of the game. Instead, the pitcher threw the ball right over the first baseman’s head, out of reach of all team mates. Everyone from the stands and both teams started yelling, ‘Shay, run to first! Run to first!’ Never in his life had Shay ever run that far, but he made it to first base. He scampered down the baseline, wide-eyed and startled.Everyone yelled, “Run to second, run to second!” Catching his breath, Shay awkwardly ran towards second, gleaming and struggling to make it to the base. By the time Shay rounded towards second base, the right fielder had the ball. The smallest guy on their team now had his first chance to be the hero for his team. He could have thrown the ball to the second-baseman for the tag, but he understood the pitcher’s intentions so he, too, intentionally threw the ball high and far over the third-baseman’s head.Shay ran toward third base deliriously as the runners ahead of him circled the bases toward home.All were screaming, “Shay, Shay, Shay, all the Way Shay.”Shay reached third base because the opposing shortstop ran to help him by turning him in the direction of third base, and shouted, “Run to third! Shay, run to third!” As Shay rounded third, the boys from both teams, and the spectators, were on their feet screaming, “Shay, run home! Run home!”Shay ran to home, stepped on the plate, and was cheered as the hero who hit the grand slam and won the game for his team “That day”, said the father softly with tears now rolling down his face, “the boys from both teams helped bring a piece of true love and humanity into this world”.Shay didn’t make it to another summer. He died that winter, having never forgotten being the hero and making me so happy, and coming home and seeing his Mother tearfully embrace her little hero of the day! AND NOW A LITTLE FOOT NOTE TO THIS STORY:We all send thousands of jokes through the e-mail without a second thought, but when it comes to sending messages about life choices, people hesitate.The crude, vulgar, and often obscene pass freely through cyberspace, but public discussion about decency is too often suppressed in our schools and workplaces.If you’re thinking about forwarding t his message, chances are that you’re probably sorting out the people in your address book who aren’t the ‘appropriate’ ones to receive this type of message. Well, the person who sent you this believes that we all can make a difference.We all have thousands of opportunities every single day to help realize the ‘natural order of things.’So many seemingly trivial interactions between two people present us with a choice:Do we pass along a little spark of love and humanity or do we pass up those opportunities and leave the world a little bit colder in the process?A wise man once said every society is judged by how it treats it’s least fortunate amongst them.You now have two choices:

1. Delete 2. Forward

by Nick Fishman

A couple weeks ago we committed ourselves to identifying some methods for performing background checks in a more environmentally friendly way. Tip number one is for those that order background checks by fax to switch to electronic requests.

Think of all the paper that is generated for faxed requests. A piece of paper is used to request the search and a new one is used at the receiving end of the fax. Plus, if you attach a cover sheet you’ve used even more paper: twice. All that paper piles up over time.

The nice thing about this tip is that it goes hand-in-hand with speeding up the process. If the order is faxed, your screening provider must enter the order into their system. This takes time. If an order is placed on-line, most likely (depending on provider), the work is assigned in an automated fashion. This also saves the hassle of “Didn’t you get that fax? I sent it three days ago.”

Saving trees and saving time. Sounds good to me.

by Nick Fishman

We’ve just released the latest edition of our Quarterly Newsletter, The Verifier. Please feel free to check it out.

http://theverifier.net/index.php

by Nick Fishman

I am proud to announce that employeescreenIQ has been recognized as a Weatherhead 100 organization for the 3rd consecutive year. This year’s ranking of 14th is extremely gratifying. I have included a brief description of the award below and invite you to view the attached press release.

Since 1987, the Weatherhead 100 has showcased the fastest growing companies in Northeast Ohio. Recognized organizations must demonstrate consistent growth over the previous five years. The Weatherhead 100 list is objectively determined annually and highly regarded throughout the region. It is branded as a testament to hard work, commitment, innovation, and the dream to succeed.

2007%20Weatherhead%20Release.pdf

by Nick Fishman

We see so many articles these days slamming employers and grossly overstating the misuse of employment credit reports, so I was pleased to see a well-balanced, informative view about from a 30,000 ft. level of the process. See article below published in the Detroit Free Press.

by Nick Fishman

As if Drew Peterson wasn’t in enough hot water, now he’s being investigating for conducting illegal background checks through his police department’s computer system. Talk about a guy who thought he was above the law. Peterson is a Chicago-area cop who is being investigated for his 4th wife’s disappearance and his 3rd wife’s death.

This story on ABC News details the allegations.