Blog

 
     

Compliance and Legislation Update - The EEOC and Me

By Michael Klazema on 9/14/2010

The situation

A few years ago, had you asked the average businessman his personal philosophy on background screening, his response would’ve likely been something to the effect of “better safe than sorry.”  Better to screen every applicant, to eliminate any applicant with a blemish on their record, than to face a due diligence lawsuit.

Now that opinion is changing.  By taking “better safe than sorry” truly to heart, businesses have started to run afoul of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  According to the EEOC, making employment decisions (specifically hiring or retention decisions) based on arrest and convictions or on credit reports has a disparate impact on minorities.

The EEOC has also determined that they would generally analyze the following items to determine if a hiring/retention decision was a business necessity or if it was discriminatory:

  1. The nature and gravity of the offense(s);
  2. How much time has passed since the conviction and/or completion of the sentence, and
  3. The nature of the job held or sought.

The forecast

These two differing opinions have put many businesses between a rock and a hard place. Businesses can’t stop doing background checks completely without opening themselves to due diligence lawsuits but to continue in the vein of running all checks on everyone opens the business to discrimination lawsuits.

Ideally, in order to avoid the potential lawsuits, each company would do the following:

  • Look at the risks that a hypothetical criminal in a given job poses to the organization, its customers and its other employees. This can include access to people who are easily victimized (e.g. children), access to easily stolen information or things, and even access to other employees.
  • Consider mitigation of those risks from the job itself. There are two major types of on-the-job risk mitigation: supervision and availability to the public. By these standards, a night watchman who would typically work alone should be subjected to a different set of checks than a cashier who would typically work with a manager nearby. Similarly, a school guidance counselor is much more private than even a teacher and should be subjected to different searches.
  • Look for evidence in your applicants of the kind of criminal behavior that leads to those risks. This is where you should determine what types of checks are necessary for each applicant. Is there a financial risk with a CFO? Absolutely and that may warrant a credit check. Is there a financial risk with the mail room clerk? Unlikely and running a credit check would probably just be a waste of resources.
  • Consider attenuation of that evidence due to the passage of time and any evidence of rehabilitation. The key here would be to consider your grading criteria. Can a single misdemeanor be ignored for a job class? How old is the record? Is there any evidence of rehabilitation?

What it comes down to is that each job class has a different risk profile and because of that, not each job class can be treated the same. The possible risks need to be carefully weighed for each class and policies need to be updated to reflect these risks.


Tag Cloud
Categories
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • July 11 Under an innovative program that went into effect July 1, Pennsylvania will automatically seal many old criminal records. 
  • July 09 In October, the Georgia Long-Term Care Background Check Program will officially go into effect. Here’s what employers in the state need to know about the law.
  • July 04 Despite the failure of a full-scale legalization effort, New York state has reduced cannabis-related penalties and introduced automatic expungement.
  • July 02 Charlotte-Mecklenburg School District in North Carolina stopped fingerprinting new hires last July even though board policy requires fingerprinting during pre-hire background checks. The fingerprinting “pause” caused alarm in the Charlotte community.
  • June 27 In 2012, the EEOC published new guidelines instructing employers not to use blanket bans against applicants with criminal records. The state of Texas sued. Today, arguments continue in federal circuit court.
  • June 25 Learn the differences between infractions, misdemeanors, and felonies and what each run-in with the law means for a background check report.
  • June 25 A recent federal court ruling has called into question how employers should observe the FCRA when filling independent contractor positions rather than full- or part-time jobs. Many sections of the FCRA are only relevant if background checks are intended for “employment purposes.”
  • June 20 The ACLU has filed suit against the owner of an apartment complex in Virginia alleging discriminatory practices. The owner contends otherwise.
  • June 19 If you need to conduct a quick background check, you may be wondering: are background checks instant? At backgroundchecks.com, we maintain several databases capable of generating instant background checks.
  • June 18 A recent audit in the Catholic Church conducted by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops found issues with background checks for priests in multiple dioceses.