Often we hear clients ask about national databases, search quality and options to access criminal reports. Our answer? Searching for criminal records isn’t the one-step process you may think it is.
It’s easy to assume that the process is simple. After all, film and television detectives pull up a person’s criminal history with a few keystrokes. But real life isn’t that convenient. While the United States government does have a database called the National Criminal Information Center (NCIC), it’s for law enforcement use only—companies that perform pre-employment screening for non-governmental jobs do not have access. And even those who have access use additional methods, since this is not a complete database of all U.S. criminal records.
To adequately search a person’s criminal history, it’s best to go to the source of data: the court where the case was judged. However, there are thousands of courthouses across the 3,141 counties, boroughs and census areas in the United States, each with their own access limitations and requirements. Since court records are “public” by law, every county court has a method for accessing records. Although it can be complex, this is the best practice because it provides the most accurate and up-to-date information possible. If a lawsuit was filed yesterday, it’s on the public record terminal tomorrow. If a record was expunged or sealed, it’s immediately removed from the public record terminal.
Therefore, Aurico recommends searching all counties a person has had known activity in: anywhere the individual has lived, worked or attended school. Performing county searches, along with checking other sources to locate possible offenses outside the “known” area, will provide the best possible public records check.
While most of our clients are satisfied with county reports, many also choose to run federal court record checks. And there’s a good reason why: federal cases will not be found in any county court. While it’s statistically much less likely that you’d have a federal case than a county case (1.5% of all criminal cases are handled at the federal level), these cases can be serious–Aurico has encountered applicants with federal cases for bank robbery, racketeering, kidnapping and embezzlement, to name a few. Now you know why no one wants to “make a federal case out of it”–federal cases are serious business.
To learn more about search options, screening strategies or to review your program please contact us at 866.255.2852 or submit a request online http://www.aurico.com/About_Aurico/Aurico_Challenge.asp.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
From the Blooper Book
Thanks to their honesty and entertaining spelling, these individuals pre-screened themselves out of the candidate pool. Here’s the latest installment of real, eyebrow-raising responses we’ve seen on job applications.
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “I found a credit card and tried to use it for gas”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “Weapons passion”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “druge case (I have a waiver)”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “Drug traffing.”
List any special training or skills (languages, machine operations, etc.): “BilinguAl”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “Possion of a controled substance – I will talk to you about it. Please?”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “I found a credit card and tried to use it for gas”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “Weapons passion”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “druge case (I have a waiver)”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “Drug traffing.”
List any special training or skills (languages, machine operations, etc.): “BilinguAl”
Have you been convicted of a crime in the past ten years, other than minor traffic violations? (checked yes)
If yes, describe in full: “Possion of a controled substance – I will talk to you about it. Please?”
Industry News: Important news for employers
The FTC has issued an update to the use of Employer Guidelines. This is a document the FTC has posted on their website and was recently updated as follows:
Using Consumer Reports: What Employers Need to Know
Your company has job vacancies to fill. You're also thinking about promoting some employees from within the company. You've winnowed down the stack of applications and resumes and want to run background checks through a third party company who is in the business of compiling background information.
Employment background checks also are known as consumer reports. They can include information from a variety of sources, including credit reports and criminal records.
When you use consumer reports to make employment decisions, including hiring, retention, promotion or reassignment, you must comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces the FCRA.
Complying with the FCRA
You must take certain steps before you can get a consumer report, and before and after you take an adverse action based on that report.
Before You Get a Consumer Report You must:
Before You Take an Adverse Action
Before you reject a job application, or applicant, reassign or terminate an employee, deny a promotion or take any other adverse employment action based on information in a consumer report, you must give the applicant or employee:
After You Take an Adverse Action
If you take an adverse action based on information in a consumer report, you must give the applicant or employee a notice of that fact—orally, in writing or electronically.
An adverse action notice tells people that adverse action was taken against them because of information in their consumer report and alerts them about their rights to see information being reported about them and to correct inaccurate information. The notice must include:
Employers who use "investigative reports"—reports based on personal interviews concerning a person's character, general reputation, personal characteristics, and lifestyle—have additional obligations under the FCRA. These obligations include giving written notice that you may request or have requested an investigative consumer report, and giving a statement that the person has a right to request additional disclosures and a summary of the scope and substance of the report. (See 15 U.S.C. section 1681d(a), (b)).
Using Consumer Reports: What Employers Need to Know
Your company has job vacancies to fill. You're also thinking about promoting some employees from within the company. You've winnowed down the stack of applications and resumes and want to run background checks through a third party company who is in the business of compiling background information.
Employment background checks also are known as consumer reports. They can include information from a variety of sources, including credit reports and criminal records.
When you use consumer reports to make employment decisions, including hiring, retention, promotion or reassignment, you must comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces the FCRA.
Complying with the FCRA
You must take certain steps before you can get a consumer report, and before and after you take an adverse action based on that report.
Before You Get a Consumer Report You must:
- Tell the applicant or employee that you might use information in their consumer report for decisions related to their employment. This notice must be in writing and in a stand-alone format. The notice cannot be in an employment application. You can include some minor additional information in the notice, like a brief description of the nature of consumer reports, but only if it does not confuse or detract from the notice.
- Get written permission from the applicant or employee. This can be part of the document you use to notify the person that you will get a consumer report. If you want the authorization to allow you to get consumer reports throughout the person's employment, make sure you say so clearly and conspicuously.
- Certify compliance to the company from which you are getting the applicant or employee's information. You must certify that you:
- notified the applicant or employee and got their permission to get a consumer report;
- complied with all of the FCRA requirements; and
- will not discriminate against the applicant or employee or otherwise misuse the information, as provided by any applicable federal or state equal opportunity laws or regulations.
Before You Take an Adverse Action
Before you reject a job application, or applicant, reassign or terminate an employee, deny a promotion or take any other adverse employment action based on information in a consumer report, you must give the applicant or employee:
- a notice that includes a copy of the consumer report you relied on to make your decision; and
- a copy of A Summary of Your Rights Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which the company that gave you the report should have given to you.
After You Take an Adverse Action
If you take an adverse action based on information in a consumer report, you must give the applicant or employee a notice of that fact—orally, in writing or electronically.
An adverse action notice tells people that adverse action was taken against them because of information in their consumer report and alerts them about their rights to see information being reported about them and to correct inaccurate information. The notice must include:
- the name, address, and phone number of the consumer reporting company that supplied the report;
- a statement that the company that supplied the report did not make the decision to take the unfavorable action and can't give specific reasons for it; and
- a notice of the person's right to dispute the accuracy or completeness of any information the consumer reporting company furnished, and to get an additional free report from the company if the person asks for it within 60 days.
Employers who use "investigative reports"—reports based on personal interviews concerning a person's character, general reputation, personal characteristics, and lifestyle—have additional obligations under the FCRA. These obligations include giving written notice that you may request or have requested an investigative consumer report, and giving a statement that the person has a right to request additional disclosures and a summary of the scope and substance of the report. (See 15 U.S.C. section 1681d(a), (b)).
Industry News: Pepsi Settles EEOC Charges of Racial Bias in Screenings for $3M
Pepsi Beverages, formerly known as Pepsi Bottling Group, has agreed to pay $3.1 million, develop a new background check policy and provide job offers and training to resolve a race discrimination charge filed against them for violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
An investigation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) revealed that more than 300 applicants were adversely affected when Pepsi applied a criminal background check that disproportionately excluded minority applicants from permanent employment. Under Pepsi's former policy, job applicants who had been arrested pending prosecution were not hired for a permanent job even if they had never been convicted of any offense. The EEOC also said Pepsi's former policy had denied employment to job applicants who had been arrested or convicted of certain minor offenses.
One recommendation is for employers to take more factors into consideration before completely excluding applicants, such as the nature and gravity of the offense and the time that has passed since conviction, etc. We recommend that employers review their policies with their legal counsel on criminal records to assure compliance with EEOC, State and Federal regulations periodically.
To read more, click here
An investigation by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) revealed that more than 300 applicants were adversely affected when Pepsi applied a criminal background check that disproportionately excluded minority applicants from permanent employment. Under Pepsi's former policy, job applicants who had been arrested pending prosecution were not hired for a permanent job even if they had never been convicted of any offense. The EEOC also said Pepsi's former policy had denied employment to job applicants who had been arrested or convicted of certain minor offenses.
One recommendation is for employers to take more factors into consideration before completely excluding applicants, such as the nature and gravity of the offense and the time that has passed since conviction, etc. We recommend that employers review their policies with their legal counsel on criminal records to assure compliance with EEOC, State and Federal regulations periodically.
To read more, click here
Industry News: Good News on Driver Privacy for Background Screening with Permissible Purpose
On January 23rd, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a case decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that held that companies making bulk purchases of personally identifying information from state driver's license databases for future permissible uses did not violate the Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA). The lower court had ruled that as long as the ultimate use of the records by the company or another end user is for a statutorily permitted purpose, the DPPA does not dictate when those records may be obtained.
(Howard v. Criminal Info. Servs. Inc., U.S., No. 11-621, cert. denied 1/23/2012)
(Howard v. Criminal Info. Servs. Inc., U.S., No. 11-621, cert. denied 1/23/2012)
Industry News: Court Record Identifiers and Employee Privacy
On December 29th, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruled that the Pennsylvania Governor’s Office of Administration (GOA) properly redacted the partial birth dates of state employees from salary records produced in response to a media request. The court overturned the state's Office of Open Records’ (OR) determination that the full birth dates should have been released.
(Governor’s Administration Office v. Dylan Purcell, Pa. Cmmw., No. 2452, opinion 12/29/2011)
This signifies good news for Aurico and our clients. As of recent years, courts and state repositories have been reviewing their policy on supplying identifiable information such as date of birth on court records and more and more courts/repositories are redacting the date of birth or a portion of the date of birth and social security number. These identifiers are critical to the processing of criminal records checks and other records such as Motor Vehicle Records and without these identifiers the processing of these records is impeded. We urge our clients to support a policy of Open Records for criminal records across the country. Aurico will continue to monitor these courts and lobby on behalf of our industry and clients to assure the continued access to identifiers in court records and repositories.
(Governor’s Administration Office v. Dylan Purcell, Pa. Cmmw., No. 2452, opinion 12/29/2011)
This signifies good news for Aurico and our clients. As of recent years, courts and state repositories have been reviewing their policy on supplying identifiable information such as date of birth on court records and more and more courts/repositories are redacting the date of birth or a portion of the date of birth and social security number. These identifiers are critical to the processing of criminal records checks and other records such as Motor Vehicle Records and without these identifiers the processing of these records is impeded. We urge our clients to support a policy of Open Records for criminal records across the country. Aurico will continue to monitor these courts and lobby on behalf of our industry and clients to assure the continued access to identifiers in court records and repositories.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)