EmployeeScreenIQ Blog

You know Toucan Sam of Fruit Loops fame  might have been on to something years ago when he coined the famous phrase, “Follow the nose, it always knows!”  Scientists from the University of Bath in the UK are using the most prominent feature on an individual’s face, their nose,  as a way to confirm their identity through facial recognition software.

Of course the author of the article,  Software Sniffs Out Criminals by the Shape of Their Nose, didn’t do his work justice by conjuring up images of some Aryan Brotherhood experiment with his title.  However, if you look further, it’s an interesting concept.  Is this setting the stage for background checks and employment screening being conducted by looking at a person’s schnozola?

Software Sniffs Out Criminals by the Shape of Their Nose

With worries about illegal immigration and identity theft, authorities are increasingly looking to using an individual’s physical characteristics, known as biometrics, to confirm their identity.

Unlike other facial features used for biometrics, such as eyes or ears, noses are difficult to conceal and also aren’t changed much by facial expression.

Dr Adrian Evans and Adrian Moorhouse, from the University’s Department of Electronic & Electrical Engineering, decided to investigate whether images of people’s noses could be used to recognise individuals.

They used a photographic system called PhotoFace (http://www.uwe.ac.uk/cems/research/groups/mvl/index.shtml), developed by researchers at the University of the West of England in Bristol, to scan the 3D shape of volunteers’ noses and used computer software to analyse them according to six main nose shapes: Roman, Greek, Nubian, Hawk, Snub and Turn-up.

Instead of using the whole shape of the nose, the researchers used three characteristics in their analysis: the ridge profile, the nose tip, and the nasion or section between the eyes at the top of the nose.

They combined the curvature of the ridge with the ratios of the tip and nasion widths and ridge length. This combined ratio was then used to distinguish between a database of 36 people.

More

Continue Reading

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the U.S. Department of Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is stepping up their efforts to audit U.S. employers who hire illegal workers.  According to John Morton, the new chief of of ICE, 654 companies are currently being audited with many more notices to follow.

These efforts are in stark contrast to the lax auditing practices of the previous administration.  And the fines are significant.  So employers, beware.  Make sure you have I-9’s in place with a process to ensure you are receiving valid identification.  Many employers now have started to use E-Verify and other electronic employment eligibility systems to help with compliance in this regard.

U.S. Intensifies Audits of Employers- Wall Street Journal

LOS ANGELES — A senior U.S. immigration official said Monday that his agency will intensify a crackdown on employers of workers in the country illegally as part of the Obama administration’s new immigration strategy.

John Morton, the new chief of U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, a unit of the Department of Homeland Security, said that the agency is set to increase the number of companies it will audit and systematically impose fines on violators. Violations could also lead to criminal charges, he said.

On July 1, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced an audit of employers to verify whether their employees were eligible to work. Mr. Morton said that 654 companies are currently being audited and that many more employers will be notified soon that they also will be under scrutiny by the government.

“You are going to see audits regularly and on a larger scale,” Mr. Morton said during a two-day visit to southern California, his first since being appointed four months ago. “You will see the resuscitation of…civil fines.”

More

Continue Reading

I had the honor of representing the National Association of Professional Background Screeners (NAPBS) along with 20 other colleagues from the screening industry on their annual Washington DC lobbying event.  We had a busy schedule of meetings over a two day time period highlighted by sessions with the EEOC, FTC and officers of our nation’s senators and congressmen.

We met with staffers from the following legislators: Senator Chuck Grassley (Republican-Iowa), Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (Republican-Texas), Senator Mark Warren (Democrat- Virginia), Congressman Sam Johnson (Republican-Texas), Congressman Rodney Frelinghuysen (Republican- New Jersey), Senator Charles Schumer (Democrat- New York), Sentor Orrin Hatch (Republican- Utah), Senator Kay Hagan, Democrat, North Carolina, Senator Arlen Specter (Republican- Pennsylvania), Congressman Lamar Smith (Republican- Texas), Senator Byron Dorgan (Democrat- North Dakota), Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat- Vermont), Congressman James Moran (Democrat- Virginia), Senator John Kerry (Democrat- Massachusetts), Senator Dianne Feinstein (Democrat- California), Senator Benjamin Cardin (Democrat- Maryland), Senator John Ensign (Republican- Nevada) and Senator Johnny Isakson (Republican- Georgia).  Our meetings primarily focused on three core issues which are being addressed in upcoming legislation:

Senate  Bill 163 (Child Protection Improvements Act of 2009)- Calls for the development of a mandatory background screening process for child care givers (day care, teachers, camps, etc.).  As an industry, we fully support this legislation.  However, we have concerns about the type of background check that the bill calls for, particularly its reliance on the FBI Criminal Database and state criminal record repositories.  It is a commonly held misconception that these two resources are the most accurate and reliable resources for conducting background checks.  In reality, there are far more effective methods for determining whether someone has been convicted of criminal activity.  The most thorough, accurate and reliable method being a county criminal record search in all counties where the subject has resided under all names used complemented by a National Criminal Record Search which includes a multi-jurisdictional Sex Offender Registry Search.

Senate Bill 141 and House Resolution 122 (Protecting the Privacy of Social Security Numbers Act of 2009)- This bill is aimed at curbing identity theft and calls for a limitation on how Social Security Numbers can be used in commercial situations.  Such measures include restricting access to public records which contain this information.  There is a provision to protect the continued permissible use of personal identifiers for legitimate purposes such as background screening and our efforts focused around reinforcing the need for this language and educating staffers on the importance for these identifiers.

Extension of E-Verify Program- This internet-based system is operated by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration and allows employers to electronically verify the employment eligibility of their employees.  House Resolution 1105 reauthorized the program through 9/30/09 and we support further extension of this important government program.

Meeting with the EEOC

This was a truly enlightening experience.  We met with Carol R. Miaskoff who is an Assistant Legal Counsel for the agency.  Carol shared with us the role of the EEOC and its stance on background checks.  She was very clear that the EEOC did not have a problem with background checks as anexercise proper due diligence.  Where they do take exception is with bright line policies such as “do not hire anyone with a criminal record”.  They believe that such policies would have a disparate impact on minorities.  We spent a great deal of time discussing El v. Septa as it will continue to be an important force in future guidelines on background screening.  At the end of the day, the EEOC wants employers to demonstrate job relatedness, the nature of the offense, whether the candidate was a repeat offender and how long ago the crime was committed.

Meeting with the FTC

I was not there for this meeting but I understand that much of the meeting focused on the privacy issues previously mentioned on SB 141 and HR 122.

I was a truly an enlightening experience which provided much insight into our legislative process.  I am confident that the work we accomplished in just two days will have a positive impact on our industry and on employers that rely on the use of employment background checks.

Continue Reading

John McCain and Barack Obama squared off again last night in round two of the Presidential Debate Series.  Like round one, there were some great questions about the future of our great country.  This particular debate was more of a “Town Hall” format than debate.  In fact, the candidates didn’t even debate each other, they just answered questions.  Yesterday’s questions were heavily focused on the downturn in the economy, the war in Iraq and healthcare.  The candidates did a better job on answering the questions and not attacking each other directly.  It was pretty tame (nice way of saying lame). 

I was surprised that there were no questions regarding domestic security and immigration reform.  There are several bills pending today that address both issues.  First is the E-Verify program allowing organizations to instantly verify an employee’s right to work.  This program is set to expire in November and has overwhelmingly passed the House of Representatives by a huge margin.  Under this extension the program would be extended for five years. This program also allows employers to centralize their I-9 process and allow for electronic I-9 forms. Currently this renewal bill is sitting in the Senate.

Secondly, questions on domestic security were passed over.  September 11th, 2001 was not all that long ago.  There have not been too many significant bills regarding domestic terrorism since the Patriot Act was renewed.  One bill that has caught my eye is HR 7033.  This bill would provide safeguards with respect to the FBI criminal background checks prepared for employment purposes.  The act is officially titled “Fairness and Accuracy in Employment Background checks Act of 2008.”  Several reports prior to this act has the FBI admitting how inaccurate their databases are in regard to criminal records.  This bill does NOT expand the industries that are allowed access to the system but strives to make the process better.  Would FBI background checks stop terrorism? No, but checking your employees and people is a pillar of a strong security program. According to the Attorney General’s Report on Criminal History Background Checks:

Contrary to common perception, the FBI’s III system is not a complete national database of all criminal history records in the United States. Many state records, whether from law enforcement agencies or courts, are not included or have not been updated. For example, not all the state criminal history records or associated fingerprints meet the standards for inclusion in the III. Because of inconsistent state reporting requirements, some criminal history records involve offenses that are not submitted to the FBI. Other records that were submitted to the FBI do not have fingerprints of sufficient quality to be entered into the system. Moreover, many criminal history records may contain information regarding an arrest, but are missing the disposition of that arrest. Currently, only 50 percent of III arrest records have final dispositions. The records of more recent arrests, however, have a higher rate of completeness. Nevertheless, the III, while far from complete, is the most comprehensive single source of criminal history information in the United States, and provides users, at a minimum, with a pointer system that assists in discovering more complete information on a person’s involvement with the criminal justice system.

What does this have to do with the Presidential Debate?  In today’s age security and terrorism remain fresh in everyone’s minds.  Immigration Reform and Security go hand-in-hand and need to be addressed.

Continue Reading

Most of us knew this was coming!  This allows for employers to continue using automated I-9 Services and E-Verify as it currently stands.

Democratic leaders and Republicans agree that there is not enough time left in this year’s congressional session for the wider verification debate.

In a year when political gridlock has halted most immigration legislation, the House overwhelmingly approved a bill Thursday, July 31, that would extend for five years a controversial government-run electronic employee verification system.

Although the measure passed 407-2 under special House rules that required at least a two-thirds majority, the final outcome doesn’t signal widespread agreement on the issue.

Many Democrats and some Republicans want to overhaul or junk E-Verify. Most Republicans and some conservative Democrats praise it for helping reduce the “jobs magnet” that fosters illegal immigration—and want to make it permanent and mandatory for all employers.

More

Continue Reading

A few weeks ago I spent time in Washington DC lobbying on behalf of our industry. Included in this NAPBS “Day on the Hill” was a very productive meeting with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). DHS along with many of our members came up with some great ideas on how to expedite Tentative Non Confirmations (TNC’s) and other issues facing employers using E-Verify. I came across the following article this morning while reading BLR’s HR section, a great resource for HR Professionals and Employment Lawyers. E-Verify and other automated I9 Services are being used by approximately 5% of U.S. employers, this number will go up significantly in the coming years.

March 24, 2008

Gov’t Adjusts No-Match Rule, Aiming to Address Court Ruling

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has released a Supplemental Proposed Rulemaking for the No-Match Rule previously issued on August 15, 2007, aiming to address three issues cited in a decision of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California blocking the original rule. The August 2007 rule outlined steps an employer should take if it receives a letter indicating that the information submitted for an employee fails to match the government’s records.

Specifically, the court questioned whether DHS had: (1) supplied a reasoned analysis to justify what the court viewed as a change in the department’s position–that a no-match letter may be sufficient, by itself, to put an employer on notice, and thus impart constructive knowledge, that employees referenced in the letter may not be authorized to work in the United States; (2) exceeded its authority by interpreting the anti-discrimination provisions of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA); and (3) violated the Regulatory Flexibility Act by not conducting a regulatory flexibility analysis.

More

Continue Reading

As many of our readers know I am very involved with our industry international association, NAPBS. Every year for the past four years we have had a “Washington Fly In” to promote our initiatives and make our congressmen aware of our industry and laws that may be affecting it. This year I had the privilege of doing it again. Last week I spent three days in Washington meeting with various Congressional and Senate Offices in addition to a very productive meeting with the Department of Homeland Security.

Not much is happening during this session of congress due to the upcoming elections but it gave us an opportunity to focus on a few issues that are still pending; Immigration Reform, Privacy Bills, FCRA and the Fair use of Criminal Records.

The current E-Verify program run by the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration is due to sunset (expire) this calendar year. All signs point to it being renewed. Currently there is a bill supported by SHRM introduced by Congressman Sam Johnson (3rd Dist. – TX) called H.R. 5515 the New Employee Verification Act. The current program, E-Verify is not perfect but it is a good system and is getting better every day. Based on the feedback I received the Johnson Bill is unlikely to go anywhere and will likely die in committee. NAPBS fully supports the re-issue of the E-Verify program and is working with the Department of Homeland Security on ways to improve the program through designated agents.

Other noteworthy bills include:

H.R. 3316 – Identity Theft Protection Act of 2007 (Representative Carolyn Malony)

I had the pleasure of meeting with a few actual members of congress and several senior staffers and chiefs of staff. It was a very productive trip, many of the individuals we met with remembered us from past years. Its important to keep up our lobbying efforts. Many times bills are introduced with unintended consequences for our industry. NAPBS has done an exceptional job at keeping our initiatives on the forefront of their legislation.

Continue Reading

On Wednesday November 7th, US Citizen and Immigration Services released a revised Employment Eligibility I-9 form to be used by employers. All U.S. employers are mandated by Federal law to have all employees complete an I-9 form within the first three days of work. The use of the newly released form is not yet mandated, but soon will be. Feel free to download a copy of the new form below:

New I-9 Form

Continue Reading

This is pretty drastic. Evidently Illinois governor Rob Blagojevich distrusts the Social Security Administration’s and Department of Homeland Security’s databases so much that he and other Illinois law-makers have banned the use of the basic pilot program. The basic pilot program allows employers to query these databases to determine if their employees are legal U.S. workers. I understand their concern about the fallibility of these databases. There are definitely some false-positives that come across (tentative non-confirmations that occur due to poor record keeping or data entry by these governmental agencies), but this seems a bit drastic. See the article below.

New State Law Bans Use of Residency Tool

There is a vague provision that allows use of the system after “training” of an organization has occurred. I have been told by those in the know that this legislation is most likely in response to a power play from Illinois’ labor unions and that this law will ultimately be deemed unconstitutional.

Continue Reading

Last month Seyfarth Shaw updated us with The Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) efforts to crack down on employers who received mismatch letters from the Social Security Administration and didn’t act upon them. Enforcement was to begin on September 14th, but a federal judge in California issued a temporary ruling which prohibits the Social Security Administration from sending the letters and DHS from acting on them.

Again, Seyfarth has provided us with a full breakdown of these events. See link below. Do you think the government will ever figure this thing out?

Lawsuit Halts DHS Crackdown on Unauthorized Workers

Continue Reading