Auditors Investigate Background Check Policies for City Employees in Hartford, Connecticut after ban the box excuse is used by feloon

By Michael Klazema on 12/23/2013

Auditors are taking a closer look at how the city government of Hartford, Connecticut screens its employees. The investigation, which is being conducted by the Hartford Internal Audit Commission, was launched after it was discovered that the city’s mayor, Pedro Segarra, had attempted to appoint a convicted felon to a high-profile position. The auditing commission is now perusing the city government’s hiring processes for temporary or interim employees, as well as non-union workers and mayoral appointments. They will investigate the full hiring and screening process, but will pay extra attention to how the city does its background checks.

At first blush, auditors have not been able to determine precisely what screening benchmarks – if any – the city government’s human resources department requires employees appointed by the mayor to meet. Specifically, the human resources department has not been able to produce job applications or proof of background checks for two employees appointed by Mayor Segarra. The first is currently serving as Segarra’s interim chief of staff. The other one held the title of deputy chief of staff for a short time, but withdrew his name and his claim to the job after it was discovered that he had a felonious past. Between the two employees, HR only had a single resume for one of them.

Mayor Segarra appointed the temporary chief of staff last month. However, he chose to withdraw from the position when the media got a hold of his criminal record, which includes felony convictions for the possession and sale of narcotics and for the illegal possession of a firearm. In the aftermath of the media uproar, the mayor’s office admitted that it had neglected to subject the chief to any kind of background check before announcing his appointment on November 26. While the appointment didn’t last long – the media revealed his troubled criminal past on November 27, causing him to resign from the position – it still made the city government look careless and inspired an audit into their employment screening procedures.

In an effort to save face, Mayor Segarra claimed to the public that the chief had not disclosed his criminal record prior to his appointment, implying that he had somehow deceived the city government in his bid for the deputy chief of staff position. However, the chief of staff told The Courant, a Hartford-based newspaper, that he had never been given an opportunity to be honest about his criminal past due to the city’s “ban the box” ordinance. As a result, the media ultimately aired his criminal past before he could reveal them to his new employers. The city’s “ban the box” legislation however states that the mayor’s office should have run a background check immediately after offering the position.

Furthermore, the Hartford city government only does criminal background checks through the local police department, meaning that the screening process only has the power to uncover local offenses. In order to provide better security, the city of Hartford might consider adopting state or national criminal background checks. Both services are available through vendors like and can uncover a much more comprehensive criminal picture of a potential employee’s past.


Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • March 20 Employers who use E-Verify must follow the proper steps and procedures when they receive a “tentative non-confirmation notice” from either the Social Security Administration or Department of Homeland Security. Failure to follow the proper procedures can cost employers both time and money. 
  • March 20

    Four Department of Commerce employees are out after their background checks resulted in security clearance denials. All four had worked high-ranking positions for months despite incomplete background checks.

  • March 15 As more states legalize the recreational use of cannabis, they contend with the emergence of new industries surrounding marijuana cultivation and production. 
  • March 14 In most cases, it is easy to determine where an issue might show up on a pre-employment background check. Citations for traffic violations or reckless driving charges will appear on a motor vehicle record check. Verdicts in a civil court case will show on a civil court background check. And criminal convictions—from petty theft to violent felonies—show up on criminal background checks.
  • March 13 How many years back do employment background checks go? This question can have multiple different answers depending on the situation.
  • March 13 A new bill in Florida would require landlords of apartment complexes to present tenants with verifications of employee background checks to give them peace of mind the people working in and around their homes are trustworthy.
  • March 08 Police officers working with the University of Texas at Arlington recently arrested a man who had avoided police capture on a warrant out of Oregon for nearly two decades. The man, whose real name is Daniel Charles Ray Hanson, spent those 17 years using a variety of fake names and identification documents to move around the country, often engaging with educational institutions under false pretenses. Police say Hanson regularly went by at least three different aliases. He sports a rap sheet that stretches back to an arson conviction in 1995. 
  • March 07

    The Future of EEOC Guidance in Texas Is Up in the Air

    The EEOC issued guidance in 2012 warning employers about the dangers of enforcing categorical policies to bar candidates with criminal histories. That guidance is not enforceable in Texas thanks to a recent court ruling.

  • March 05 Vermont is the latest state to restrict employers’ access to and use of social media accounts of employees and applicants. 
  • March 01 In an age of "industry disruptors" turning established business models on their heads, companies such as Uber and Lyft rely on a unique workforce of individuals outside the traditional employer-employee context. Uber calls them "partners" while other businesses refer to them as "independent contractors," the official classification these individuals use for tax purposes. Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) revealed they had warned a business, Postmates, for misclassifying their staff as independent contractors. In the NLRB's determination, these individuals were employees.