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.