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.