Aurico Repeats #1 Rank in HRO Today’s Baker’s Dozen Customer Satisfaction Ratings

Aurico has claimed the top spot in the 2015 HRO Today's Baker's Dozen Customer Satisfaction Ratings for the second year in a row.  Ben Goldberg, President of Aurico, said, "This is a gratifying time for Aurico. To rise to the top of this list once, is a stunning achievement. To win this honor a second time is a clear endorsement of the level of excellence we provide on a day to day basis."

Aurico Webinar: E-Verify . . . Form I-9's Companion

Aurico will be hosting an upcoming Webinar on E-Verify on Wednesday, December 16th at 1:00pm CST.  This webinar is the accompaniment to the previous Form I-9 webinar on October 29th.  The I-9 webinar can be accessed HERE.  The Webinar will focus on the following topics

• Your responsibility in regards to E-Verify
• Directives from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
• Complying with the retention and disposal schedule of NARA
• The earliest you can run an E-Verify case and more . . .

REGISTER HERE to secure your seat for this informative presentation on E-Verify.

Aurico Webinar: "Ban the Box" - How to Comply with the New Regulations

Aurico will be hosting an upcoming Webinar on"Ban the Box" regulations Thursday, December 3rd at 1:00pm CST.  The Webinar will focus on the following topics:

• General overview of "Ban the Box"
• Recent state and municipal laws that restrict pre-employment inquiries into criminal and credit history
• How this new legislation impacts employers
• Best practices for creating a background check process compliant with local and city laws.

REGISTER HERE to secure your seat for this informative presentation on "Ban the Box" compliance.

President Obama Announces Ban the Box for Federal Government Employers

On November 3, 2015, President Obama announced an order to all Federal Government Employers to “Ban the Box” -remove the criminal question from the initial application process.  The criminal question may still be asked later in the process. As with most cities and states “Ban the Box” legislation and can be asked after a conditional job offer has been extended. 

This order impacts federal employers and not private employers; however, the President has encouraged all employers to “Ban the Box”.  Many cities, states and counties across the country have already passed legislation for private employers including:  Baltimore, Maryland; Buffalo, New York; Columbia City, Missouri; Hawaii; Illinois; Massachusetts; Minnesota; Montgomery County, Maryland; Nebraska; New Jersey; New York City, NY; Oregon ( 01-2016); Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;  Prince George’s County, Maryland; Rhode Island; Rochester, NY; San Francisco, California; Washington D.C.; and  Washington State

The White House says it is “encouraged” by such legislation in a new statement, but emphasizes the president’s order will take immediate action, mandating that the federal government’s HR department “delay inquiries into criminal history until later in the hiring process.”

Employer Considerations

Aurico recommends that employers review their job applications on a regular basis with their legal counsel along with a review of the updated criminal guidance regarding consideration of arrest and conviction records under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.


NOTE: Aurico Reports Inc. is not a law firm. Nothing presented in this communication is intended or should be construed as legal advice. You should always seek the advice of your own legal counsel.

EEOC vs. BMW - U.S. District Court enters a Consent Decree against BMW

On September 8, 2015, The U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina entered a consent decree ordering BMW Manufacturing Co., LLC (BMW) to pay $1.6 million and provide job opportunities to alleged victims of race discrimination as part of the resolution of a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The lawsuit alleged that BMW excluded African-American logistics workers from employment at a disproportionate rate when the company's new logistics contractor applied BMW's criminal conviction records guidelines to incumbent logistics employees. According to the lawsuit, BMW ordered the new logistics company to perform criminal background checks on all existing logistics employees who had to re-apply with the company in order to continue to work on the BMW contract. Allegedly, BMW’s criminal conviction records guidelines excluded from employment all persons with convictions in certain categories of crime, regardless of how long ago the employee had been convicted or whether the conviction was a felony or misdemeanor.

According to the complaint, after the criminal background checks were performed, BMW learned that approximately 100 incumbent logistics workers at the facility, including employees who had worked at there for several years, did not pass the screen. EEOC alleged that 80 percent of the incumbent workers disqualified from employment as a result of applying BMW's guidelines were black. 

Following an investigation, EEOC filed suit alleging that blacks were disproportionately disqualified from employment as a result of the criminal conviction records guidelines. EEOC sought relief for 56 African-Americans who were discharged. BMW has since voluntarily changed its guidelines.  

The Consent Decree includes:

Could There be a Federal Ban the Box in the Future?

On September 10, 2015, the Senate and House of Representatives introduced bills that would make it unlawful for federal contractors to request a job applicant, whether orally or in writing, to disclose criminal history record information before being offered employment.   The bills, S. 2021 and H.R. 3470 are pending and a first step towards the movement to ban the box on the federal level.  If these bills pass the impact in their current form will be for federal employers and NOT private employers.  Aurico will continue to monitor this movement and report any impactful updates.

Oregon State Passes Ban the Box for all Employers

On June 25, 2015, Oregon Governor Kate Brown signed into law House Bill 3025, which makes it an unlawful employment practice for an employer to exclude an applicant from an initial interview solely because of a past criminal conviction. House Bill 3025 expressly prohibits employers from asking about prior criminal convictions on an employment application. The new Oregon law takes effect January 1, 2016. Oregon makes it illegal for employers to ask the criminal question until after a conditional offer of employment is extended. Nothing in this legislation prevents an employer from considering an applicant's conviction history when making a hiring decision.

Exceptions

If a federal, state or local law, including corresponding rules and regulations, requires the consideration of an applicant's criminal history;

Law Enforcement Agencies;

An employer in the criminal justice system; or

An employer seeing a non-employee volunteer

Oregon join other cities/states across the country with similar bills for all employers including: Baltimore, MD, Buffalo, N.Y. Chicago, IL, Columbia City, MO, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montgomery County, Maryland, Nebraska, Newark, NJ , New Jersey, Prince George's County, Maryland, Philadelphia , PA, Rhode Island, Rochester, NY , San Francisco, CA, Seattle, WA, Washington State, Washington D.C.

New York City Passed Ban the Box for All Employers in NYC

Aurico wants to remind New York City Employers that on June 10, 2015, the New York City Council passed a "Ban the Box" bill  titled "Prohibiting Discrimination Based on one's Arrest Record or Criminal Conviction".  Mayor de Blasio signed the bill on June 29th, and this law will be effective on October 27, 2015. The bill impacts all employers with four or more employees in NYC (including the boroughs) and amends the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL).  This bill, like many other "Ban the Box" bills across the country, prohibits any employers from inquiring about a job applicant's criminal history before extending a conditional offer of employment. Employers are prohibited from not only asking an applicant criminal questions, but also prohibited from searching publicly available sources to obtain information about an applicant's criminal history (criminal background checks) until after a conditional offer of employment.

New York City joins many other cities, states and counties across the country with similar bills for employers including:  Baltimore, MD; Buffalo, NY; Chicago, IL; Columbia City, MO; Hawaii; Illinois; Massachusetts; Minnesota; Montgomery County, Maryland; Nebraska; New Jersey; Oregon (January 1, 2016); Prince George's County, MD; Philadelphia, PA; Rhode Island; Rochester, NY; San Francisco, CA; Washington State, and Washington D.C.  

Prohibited Inquiries

This bill prohibits any employer:

1. To declare, print or circulate; or cause to be declared, printed or circulated any solicitation, advertisement or publication, which directly or indirectly expresses any limitation or specification in employment based on a person's arrest or criminal conviction
    
2. Including an  employment agency to issue any solicitation, advertisement or publication that states, either directly or indirectly, any employment limitations or requirements based on a person's history of arrests or criminal convictions
    
3. To make any inquiry or statement related to the pending arrest or criminal conviction record of any person who is in the process of applying for employment with such employer or agent until after the employer or agent has extended a conditional offer of employment to the applicant.  The bill defines for temporary agency employers a conditional offer of employment to be extended when the individual is placed in the temporary help firm's general candidate pool. An inquiry under this bill includes any question communicated to an applicant in writing or otherwise, or any searches of publicly available records or consumer reports that are conducted for the purpose of obtaining an applicant's criminal background information.

What is Permissible:

AURICO WEBINAR: THE REAL DEAL ON FORM I-9

Aurico will be hosting an upcoming Webinar on Form I-9 on Thursday, October 29th at 1:00pm CST.  The Webinar will focus on the following topics:

• Common mistakes made while completing the Form I-9 
• Completing an I-9 on a new hire before they start working for pay
• When and how to use the various Form I-9's
• Understanding the recent changes and updates in E-Verify
• Federal and state perspective on E-Verify

REGISTER HERE to secure your seat for this informative presentation on Form I-9.

Aurico Debuts on Workforce Magazine’s Annual Hot List of Leading Background Checking Providers

Aurico is proud to announce it has made the Workforce Magazine’s 2015 annual “Hot List” of the nation’s top background check providers. Workforce Magazine’s “HotList” features a list of the leading HR products and services providers. This renowned publication is also known for publishing the Optimas Awards, Game Changers Awards, and the Workforce 100 List.  This is the first year Aurico has made the list.

New York City Issues Guidelines on Credit Restriction Regulation

New York City issues interpretative guidelines on their credit restriction law “Stop Credit Discrimination Employment Act”. New York City employers should review these guidelines :

NOTE: Portions of this guide will be subject to future rulemaking pursuant to the City Administrative Procedure Act, N.Y. City Charter § 1041 et seq.

The New York City Human Rights Law (hereinafter the “NYCHRL”) prohibits discrimination in employment, public accommodations, and housing. It also prohibits discriminatory harassment and bias-based policing by law enforcement.

The NYCHRL, pursuant to the 2005 Civil Rights Restoration Act, must be construed “independently from similar or identical provisions of New York state or federal statutes,” such that “similarly worded provisions of federal and state civil rights laws [are] a floor below which the City’s Human Rights law cannot fall, rather than a ceiling above which the local law cannot rise.”1

National Labor Relations Board Decision on Browning-Ferris

Will the National Labor Relations Board Decision on Joint-Employer Status (Board Decision on Browning-Ferris Industries of California) change the test on joint employer relationships? 

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a much awaited decision on August 27, 2015 on the Browning-Ferris Industries of California case that greatly broadens the definition of who is a joint employer.  NLRB’s decision on the newly expanded test held that two or more, otherwise unrelated employers, may be found to be a joint employer of the same employees under the NLRA (Act), if they share or co-determine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment. In determining whether a putative joint employer meets the standard, the initial inquiry is whether there is a common-law employment relationship with the employees in question.  If this common-law employment relationship exists, the inquiry then turns to whether the putative joint employer possesses sufficient control over employee’s essential terms and conditions of employment to permit meaningful collective bargaining.  This decision affects both unionized and non-union companies and even entities that have no employees on their own.  The decision has broad implications for other employment laws and governmental agencies such as the DOL, EEOC and OSHA.  

Who May Be Impacted?

Aurico Makes the Inc. 5000 Honor Roll

Aurico has been named to the prestigious Inc. 5000 list of fastest growing private companies as a five-time honoree. Besting its previous four rankings, Aurico has placed number 2610 in this year’s elite list of top entrepreneurs.  The Inc. magazine’s annual Inc. 500|5000 list recognizes the nations’ fastest-growing, privately-held companies by revenue. Aurico's remarkable 141% growth over the past three years is reflective of the company’s strict compliance with industry reporting standards and its dedication to remain the front-runner in technology advancements through its innovative WebACE™ platform. Of the companies that made the list, Aurico Reports ranks 117th in the state of Illinois, and 114th in the Chicago area.

To read the full press release, click here.

FTC Issues a Guide to Security for Businesses

Posted In the FTC¹

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently issued a guide, Start with Security: A Guide for Business, which is designed to provide businesses with guidance and steps to implement to protect Personal Identifying Information.  There are ten lessons listed below from the guide that organizations could easily implement.

1. Start with security

From personal data on employment applications to network files with customers’ credit card numbers, sensitive information pervades every part of many companies. Business executives often ask how to manage confidential information. Experts agree on the key first step: Start with security. Factor it into the decision making in every department of your business – personnel, sales, accounting, information technology, etc. Collecting and maintaining information “just because” is no longer a sound business strategy. Savvy companies think through the implication of their data decisions. By making conscious choices about the kind of information you collect, how long you keep it, and who can access it, you can reduce the risk of a data compromise down the road. Of course, all of those decisions will depend on the nature of your business. Lessons from FTC cases illustrate the benefits of building security in from the start by going lean and mean in your data collection, retention, and use policies.

Aurico is Exhibiting at the National SHRM Conference in Las Vegas. Stop by booth #2146 for chance to win $25,000!

Aurico will be exhibiting at the 2014 Annual SHRM Conference & Exposition at the Las Vegas Convention Center in Las Vegas, Nevada on June 28^th – 30^th.  We will be at booth #2146.  Aurico will be giving away hundreds of prizes again, including another chance to win $25,000 in cash.  Stop by booth #2146 and win something.  If you’re not registered for the conference and you would like to visit the exhibit hall, click here to request your free exhibit pass, courtesy of Aurico.

Aurico Webinar: Important Industry Updates on DOT Drug Testing

Aurico will be hosting an upcoming Webinar on DOT drug testing on Thursday, May 21st at 1:00pm CST.  The Webinar will focus on the following topics:

• Emphasis on FMCSA Modality
• General Overview
• Collection Process
• Testing Methodology
• MRO Review Process
• Random Testing Best Practices
• DOT eCCF

REGISTER HERE to secure your seat for this informative presentation on DOT drug testing.

Dynamic Reporting Tool Analytics Drive Results

“As we work with customers to maintain regulatory compliance, the message always seems to revolve around reporting tools,” says Laura Randazzo, Vice President of Compliance with Aurico Reports, Inc. “HR professionals want evidence of EEOC individualized assessments, proof of adherence consistency with compliance policies, and global adverse action history. They want to be able to effectively report background screening metrics during the ultimate challenge from a regulatory agency’s audit.”

The capture of talent acquisition data is fundamental to talent acquisition performance and productivity. It is key to making hiring decisions that mitigate corporate risk and drive operational success. The five reporting tool essentials include:

From the Blooper Book

We continue to review applications and wonder if these candidates are being completely serious or just being funny.

Have you been convicted of a crime in the past seven years, other than minor traffic violations?

(Checked yes) I was caught stealing in my last job but it was just a big misunderstanding.

While scheduling an occupational health exam: 

Is it ok if I abstain from taking the medical for the job?

While scheduling a drug test:

What Employers Could Learn from the Freeman Case

Aurico attended the NAPBS Mid-Year Regulatory Conference, held recently in Washington, D.C. The presenters included Federal Trade Commission (FTC) representative and industry attorneys who provided the audience with a wealth of information and best practices. Representing Freeman in the case filed by the EEOC, Don Livingston from Akin, Gump listed ‘what the EEOC did wrong’ and what employers can learn from the case. He noted the discrepancies against the EEOC included poor and inaccurate data management, calculation errors, EEOC manipulation, and inaccurate testimony that conflicted with the EEOC’s position on a different case.

Livingston said there are two key takeaways from this decision:

• The EEOC could not prove “disparate impact” from using general census data. Freeman maintained very detailed records of every applicant offer, acceptance, and refusal, and was able to defend its practices using that dataset.
• The EEOC must provide a certain level of specificity in its charges. The EEOC needed to point out a specific employment practice having a disparate impact, such as excluding applicants based on particular offenses such as theft, sex offenses, and/or drug trafficking.

Livingston recommended that employers maintain records and data on their decision making process and decisions. The Freeman case demonstrated that documentation is a primary reason why Freeman had a good case against the EEOC. Without data or records, the courts would have allowed the EEOC to use Census data, based on a geographic area, making the defense of employer policies and procedures problematic. 

Federal Trade Commission Industry Focus

During the NAPBS Mid-Year Regulatory Conference, Maneesha Mithal, from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) spoke about its focus on data protection, and compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The FTC will expect Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs) like Aurico, to maintain strict procedures for accuracy and adverse action re-investigation, and vetting end-user clients for the appropriate permissible purpose and data protection. 

New York City Council Passes a Bill Restricting Credit Checks For Employment Purposes

The New York City Council passed a bill on April 16, 2015 restricting employers from using credit reports for employment purposes. This bill amends the New York City Human Rights Law, making it unlawful for an employer to use an individual's consumer credit history in making employment decisions. The bill's protections extend beyond the hiring process to current employees by prohibiting employers from considering consumer credit history broadly with regard to "compensation, or the terms, conditions or privileges of employment."

New York City becomes the 12th State to pass a credit restriction bill, joining California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and the City of Chicago.

Marijuana in the Workplace Update

Marijuana in the work place is still a debatable topic in which employers face.  Now with about 25 states with medical or legal marijuana laws, Aurico agrees with the experts and recommend that clients have a crystal clear policy on marijuana in the workplace tolerance.  The regulated industries still maintain that marijuana is an illegal substance and follow federal law; however, the Department of Justice has deferred the enforcement of marijuana laws to the states.   Case law still shows most of the Employer related Marijuana cases are held in favor of the employer, however, recently in New Mexico  in Vialpando v. Ben’s Automotive Services, the state supreme court agreed with the state Workers Compensation Judge  requiring the employer to pay for the employees medical marijuana .  The workers’ comp judge ruled that New Mexico’s medical marijuana program constituted “reasonable and necessary medical care”.  Aurico will continue to monitor these cases. 

To Our Valued DOT Clients:

DOT Electronic Chain of Custody and Control Forms

Aurico is excited to announce that the Department of Transportation (DOT) issued a final ruling and notice for Electronic Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form (eCCF). While federal approval has arrived, Aurico has work to do with our lab partners to ensure that they have the data required to complete the inspections necessary to begin use of the eCCF for DOT regulated testing. Rest assured, as our laboratories receive their approval, we will enable the eCCF for the customers that use them.

Many more details will follow related to implementation steps. Aurico  is committed to bringing this long awaited solution to our DOT customers, as quickly as possible.   

Aurico Webinar: Comply with Form I-9 Requirements for Remote Hiring

Aurico will be hosting an upcoming Webinar on Form I-9 compliance on Wednesday, April 8th at 1:00pm CST.  The Webinar will focus on Form I-9 requirements when hiring remotely and how to properly satisfy the legal requirements for section 2 of the Form I-9.  Register today to secure your seat for this informative presentation on remote hiring.

REGISTER HERE!

Negligent Hiring Risk and Motor Vehicle Records

We frequently get calls to re-verify current employee motor vehicle records or driver’s history reports. We continue to see a growing trend for HR departments to add annual re-verification to their risk management strategy.

Since 23% of applicants have had serious motor vehicle violations due to drugs, alcohol or revoked licenses, we suggest that our clients complete motor vehicle records searches on prospective employees and annually with current employees. Without this search and annual re-verification program, companies can be left open to negligent hiring litigation risk.

Negligent hiring is a claim made by an injured party against an employer, based on the theory that the employer knew or should have known about the employee’s background, which would have indicated a dangerous or untrustworthy character. 

From the Blooper Book

This year, we’re taking a closer look at job applications and the things we find will make you laugh and cry; but mostly laugh.

Experience listed on an application:

Worked at a daycare center for community service hours.

Experience listed on an application:

Former marijuana smuggler.

Award listed on an application:

Won Puletsur Prize and donated it to charity.

Education listed on an application:

Recent EEOC Judgment: Compliance Update

On Friday, February 20, a panel of judges from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, challenged the EEOC in a case involving an employer’s use of both a credit check and criminal background check during its hiring process. The lower court dismissed the case, and the appeals court agreed, noting that the EEOC’s statistics expert was “utterly unreliable” and “made a mind-boggling number of errors.” Remarkably, the court rebuked the EEOC’s continued use of this expert (who has been found to be biased in earlier cases) as not serving the public interest well.” ¹

This case is important because the EEOC’s enforcement position on the use of background checks rests almost exclusively on statistics. If the EEOC is willing to rely upon a biased manipulation of statistics, it is hard to imagine how an employer will get a fair shake during the charge process. This case may be a call for changes to the EEOC’s aggressive position on background checks. Thus far, one might say the EEOC has had little success on these types of claims and might need to reconsider its strategy.

¹http://www.hr-headaches.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2015/02/freeman.pdf

NEW MEXICO EXPANDING BAN THE BOX

The New Mexico Senate has proposed Bill 583 to expand the Ban the Box prohibition to private employer initial applications. After initial applications, there would be no constraints on asking questions about criminal history and doing criminal background checks.

New Mexico joins other states/cities that have initiated ban the box for all employers. Aurico recommends, as a best practice, to eliminate the criminal question from your job applications and ask about criminal history later in the hiring process.  

I-9 NEWS: DACA AND DAPA EXPANSIONS IMPACT EMPLOYERS

In November 2014, President Obama announced the expansion of two similar immigration acts: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA). Each act has been modified to allow more people to benefit from their protections. DAPA has implications for all employers while DACA continues to impact hiring managers who seek younger employees. The DACA expansion went into effect 90 days after the President's announcement, while DAPA will be expanded 180 days following his executive action decision.

Candidates may qualify for DACA if:

• They entered the US prior to their 16th birthday
• Have lived in the country continuously since June 15, 2007
• Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012
• Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor or three or more other misdemeanors
• Do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

Candidates may qualify for DAPA if:

• They have lived in the United States continuously since Jan. 1, 2010
• Have no lawful status on Nov. 20, 2014
• Were physically present in the United States on Nov. 20, 2014
• At the time of making a request for consideration of DAPA, had on Nov. 20, 2014, a child of any age or marital status, who is a US citizen or lawful permanent resident
• Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more other misdemeanors
• Do not otherwise pose a threat to national security
• Are not an enforcement priority for removal

Background Screening a Minor: Should It Be Done?

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, almost 28.8% of young adults, 16-19 years of age, were employed in December 2014.1 In addition, The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that there were approximately 1.3 million juvenile arrests in 2012 (39% involving youth younger than age 15).2 For these reasons, employers may have justification for developing and implementing a background screening program for minors.

There are a number of factors to consider when conducting background checks on minors seeking employment. As with all background screens for applicants or employees, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires consent in conjunction with pre-employment screening for minors as well. Careful understanding of the nature of a minor’s consent is necessary for employers to be protected.

From the Blooper Book

This year, we’re taking a closer look at job applications and the things we find will make you laugh and cry; but mostly laugh.

Personal reference listed on an application:

Do you accept accomplices?

Personal reference listed on an application:

EBay feedback, Wikipedia.com, The Farmer’s Almanac.

Personal reference listed on an application:

Compliance Update - Special Ban the Box Adverse Action Requirements Reminder

We want to remind our clients of special Adverse Action requirements for some of the recent cities/states that have passed "Ban the Box" ordinances. Please refer to the information below:

Chicago, IL - Requires the adverse action notice to include a reference to the specific items which form the basis of the criminal record decision. No pre-adverse action letter requirements.

Massachusetts - Requires (i) a copy of the Company’s Massachusetts Criminal Record Information Policy; (ii) the sources of any criminal history records provided to the Company (as reflected in the background report); and (iii) information from the Massachusetts Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (“DCJIS”) concerning the process for correcting a criminal record.

Montgomery County, MD - The pre-adverse action notice must include a reference to specific criminal items which form the basis of the decision; and then there is a minimum seven day waiting period before taking adverse action. Montgomery County, MD does not require that the final adverse action letter specifically enumerate the items forming the basis for the action.

New Minnesota Expungment Law Helps Protect Employers from Liability

Minnesota has joined a list of states that have either introduced or have passed laws that protect employers from negligent hiring and retention suits when hiring ex-offenders with expunged criminal records.  In addition to the protection from expunged records Minnesota included in their “Ban the Box” regulation a similar protection that an employee’s criminal record “may not be introduced as evidence in a civil action against a private employer” where “the action is based solely upon the employer’s compliance with the law (not asking about the criminal record on the application). These laws may not protect employers, however, if there is negligence for not performing a proper background check in order to ensure a safe work environment.    

The states of Georgia, Tennessee, and Alabama have similar laws.   

The Value of On-Going Screening Throughout the Employment Lifecycle

A new consideration in the background screening industry is whether employers should conduct ongoing or periodic background checks on their current workforce. Although a comprehensive background screen may have validated and confirmed a clear record on the way into an organization, something you may need to know may have occurred since that time.

While pre-employment screening refers to the process of investigating the background of a potential employee, post-employment screening refers to the investigation of an existing employee’s activity. Ongoing post-hire searches may be one way to demonstrate due diligence, support workplace safety, and even minimize exposure to risk.

From the Blooper Book

As we continue to look at some of these job applications, we can’t help but wonder how some of these job applicants got a job in the first place.

Reason for Termination:

Sharing proprietary information with competitor; young blondes; “Good behavior. They cut two months off the sentence.”; Maturity leave.

Job Titles listed on application:

Assistant chef for 15-20 years in a state facility; uninformed security guard; blue-color worker; plumbing and hating specialist; Prisoner.

Experience listed on applications:

In December, 2014 the D.C. Council unanimously passed legislation that will prohibit an employer from drug-testing potential employees for marijuana before a conditional job offer has been made.

The bill, "Prohibition of Pre-Employment Marijuana Testing Emergency Act of 2014," was introduced by council member Vincent Orange (D-At Large) in March of 2014, and explicitly states that an employer cannot test a potential employee for marijuana use until after an offer for employment has been made. After an employee has been hired, however, they "must still adhere to the workplace policies set forth by their employer."

FTC Action Halts Online High School Diploma Mill That Made $11 Million Selling Worthless Diplomas to Students

At the Federal Trade Commission's request, a U.S. district court in Florida has temporarily halted a diploma mill that allegedly grossed more than $11 million from marketing and selling fake high school diplomas online to consumers nationwide. The FTC's lawsuit seeks a permanent injunction to stop the deceptive practices and to return ill-gotten gains to consumers.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated the FTC Act by misrepresenting that the diplomas were valid high school equivalency credentials and that the online schools were accredited. The FTC says the defendants actually fabricated an accrediting body to give legitimacy to the diploma mill operation.

Annual Reminder: Fair Credit Reporting Act – Employer Responsibilities

As the New Year commences, Aurico wants to reinforce your duty as an end user of consumer reports, attached is a Notice to Users of Consumer Reports. There are certain obligations imposed upon you under the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and we are providing you with a summary to help you continue to stay in compliance. In addition, we want to remind you it is essential that you provide the consumer (candidate, applicant, employee) with a copy of the FCRA Summary of Rights document during the process.

1. Before an employer orders a consumer report from Aurico, your consumer reporting agency (CRA), you must make a "clear and conspicuous" written disclosure to the consumer that a consumer report may be obtained. This document is often referred to the "Disclosure" and may be a part of a Disclosure and Authorization form. It must consist "solely" of the disclosure.