EmployeeScreenIQ Blog

I just came across this release from Carnegie Mellon University entitled “When Is It Safe to Hire Someone With A Criminal Record”.  The study suggests that a person has been fully rehabilitated after a period of 5 years without any additional criminal records.  By no means do I endorse this study.  They might be right and they might be wrong.  One thought though: just because a person hasn’t been charged or convicted of a crime in five years doesn’t mean that that they have not engaged in criminal activity.  It simply means that if they did, they haven’t yet been caught.  What do you think?

The new study, which appears in the current issue of Criminology, estimates that after five years of staying clean an individual with a criminal record is of no greater risk of committing another crime than other individuals of the same age. The research comes at a time when President Barack Obama’s crime agenda includes breaking down employment barriers for people who have a prior criminal record, but who have stayed clean since their earlier offense.

More

Continue Reading

We just posted a great new research paper on employeescreen University about a disturbing trend we’ve noticed when conducting verification of past employers.  Our Vice President of Quality Service, Kevin Bachman explains how  job applicants and prospective employers are being hurt by organizations who have downsized and cannot or do not respond to verification requests in a timely manner.

See excerpt below:

How Another Company’s Downsizing Negatively Affects Your Hiring Initiatives

by Kevin Bachman

In today’s economic climate, companies that can hire have a distinct advantage. As unemployment soars, talented employees are available simply as a result of corporate downsizing. Individuals that were nowhere to be found at 4% unemployment are abundant at 8%. Trusted with conducting the employment verifications, a screening partner plays a vital role supporting these talent acquisition initiatives. As healthy companies position themselves for an economic upturn, it is necessary to validate whether the qualifications of the star performer who fell in their laps are true.

Here’s where things are beginning to get dicey. With the increase in organizations that are downsizing, we are finding an alarming trend. Often, these organizations are no longer adequately staffed to be able to provide verifications in a timely manner, if at all for former employees. It makes sense this function would be lost on the cutting room floor. It doesn’t add any value to the company and can be a time drain. Employees are encouraged to focus on tasks that help make money or cut costs. And providing dates of employment, job titles or the salary does neither.

So as companies refocus their efforts, employeescreenIQ anticipates a further shift in personnel, human resources, and accounting departments. In honor of the typical experiences of the door to door encyclopedia salesman, here’s how the employment verifier could soon be as rare as a shelf full of Britannica’s.

Download the full white paper

Continue Reading

I guess none of us should be surprised by the results of a recent study conducted by US Information Security Company Cyber-Ark which suggests that one out of every three IT professionals admitted to snooping.  47% admitted to accessing company information that wasn’t relevant to them.

Here are some other hair-raising findings from the study:

Cyber-Ark said privileged passwords get changed far less frequently than user passwords, with 30 percent being changed every quarter and 9 percent never changed at all, meaning that IT staff who have left an organization could still gain access.

It added that seven out of 10 companies rely on outdated and insecure methods to exchange sensitive data, with 35 percent choosing email and 35 percent using couriers, while 4 percent still relied on the postal system.

employeescreenIQ has long recognized that IT professionals have nearly unfettered access to an organizations infrastructure and that those that wish to abuse such access could do significant harm.

Here’s my best background screening tip for IT people:  SCREEN THEM!

Okay, I’ve got some better recommendations for background screening services to be considered:  Social Security Number Trace, County Criminal Record Search in each County the Applicant has lived, worked or attended school and in each name revealed in the SSN Trace, National Criminal Database Search (only in conjunction with a county search), Federal District Criminal Record Search, Employment Verifications, Education Verifications, Credit Check and a Substance Abuse Test.

Seem like a pretty extensive search?  It is, but if performing these searches help you protect yourself, your employees and your business, it’s well worth it.

Continue Reading

We just published a new White Paper about Violence in the Workplace written by employeescreenIQ president and C.O.O., Jason B. Morris.  This free content provides some research and statistics on workplace violence, recent public incidents and some advice for prevention.

This free information can be downloaded by clicking the link below (hope the basic information we request is a minor inconvenience in exchange for the insightful content):

Violence in the Workplace

Continue Reading

A new study on Substance Abuse conducted in Perth, Australia shows that 1 in 3 meth users admit to getting high on the job. 4% of the Australian workers surveyed admitted to recent use of ice, speed or other forms of methamphetamine. This results of this survey shouldn’t really shock anyone. You might recall a U.S. study released in July, 2007 showed that 1 in 12 U.S. workers had used drugs within a month of the time of the study. These two studies scream out to employers the need to conduct Substance Abuse Screening on all new hires.

Continue Reading

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.

Continue Reading

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

Continue Reading

Continue Reading

Continue Reading

Well, it certainly took them long enough to catch up to the rest of the country, but we are finally seeing some positive trends when it come to higher education institutions and background checks. I found this great article, Checking Up on Your Past on insidehighered.com (I’m sure today’s college students get a kick out of the name of this on-line publication).

The article focuses on last week’s annual meeting of the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (who knew there was such a thing? but I bet you background screeners will be flocking to it from now on). Evidently, the topic of background checks was all the rage. Noteworthy in this article is a study conducted by Stephanie Hughes, an assistant professor of management at Northern Kentucky University on the use of background checks among universities. See a snapshot of results below.

- 13% of university’s polled never engage in criminal background checks
- 87% perform checks for some staff positions
- 40% screen for some faculty positions
- 26% conduct checks on some student workers

These are good stats, but a little misleading since “The way the survey was phrased, a “Yes” answer meant only that in some cases, a person in that category would be subject to a background check. That means that a college that would investigate a potential professor being hired in a field where security clearances are necessary or for work with young children would have answered Yes even if the vast majority of professorial hires are never subjected to a criminal background check.”

Good article and even better trend nonetheless.

Continue Reading