Pittsburgh Borough Institutes Background Checks Requirements for Board and Commission Members

By Michael Klazema on 9/29/2014

Baldwin Borough, which is located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, has instituted new background check requirements for volunteers or appointees serving on the area's public boards and commissions. A councilman for the Baldwin Borough said that the change was being put in place to prevent the chance of an "unsavory character" being allowed to publicly represent the borough. The checks will be required for the local city planning, civil service, and shade tree commissions. Members of the zoning board and the community standards board will also be required to complete the background screenings.

Given the support that the background check idea received from the Baldwin Council, it's surprising that checks weren't already in place for area commission members or board members. The council approved the measure in a 6-0 vote.

So far, the background check policies for local commission and board members have only been drawn out in skeletal form. Through which registries will the checks be run? What sort of criminal history will bar someone from representing the borough? The board also hasn't decided what to do about any volunteers who have active warrants out for their arrest. All of these items will undoubtedly be discussed in the coming weeks as the Baldwin Council designs a more concrete policy for how to handle any volunteers who end up having criminal histories.

One thing that has been decided is how to handle existing board and commission members versus new volunteers. In many cases, when an organization implements new background check policies, existing employees and volunteers are "grandfathered in" and not required to go through the new checks. Such policies please longtime employees, who view the decision as a show of respect and trust. However, a safer and more security-conscious policy is to have all employees or volunteers, both new and existing, complete the new checks.

Baldwin Council has opted for the latter option with new background check stipulations. All current commission and board members, some 40 volunteers, will be required to undergo background checks. However, for those existing volunteers, the borough will pay the $10 fee associated with the checks. New volunteers, meanwhile, will have to pay for their own background screenings.

The council has also said that it will not force any existing board members to undergo checks. If current volunteers feel that the criminal screening policies are an invasion of privacy, they can opt out. Of course, someone opting out would also mean resignation from public service for the borough. Since the council plans to request background checks around the end of the year, this policy should work nicely. At the end of each year, existing board and commission volunteers are already asked if they want to continue serving in the new year. This year, those who do want to continue serving will merely have to complete the background check.


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.