Blog

 
     

University of Illinois Gives One-Year Report on Background Check Policy

By Michael Klazema on 1/23/2017
Last year, the University of Illinois expanded its background check policy. Before the expansion, the university was only screening applicants who would be working “sensitive” jobs, or positions that involved working with children, money, or hospital patients. After the expansion, reports explain, the university began running checks on virtually all its new hires.

One year into the expanded background check policy, the University of Illinois has released a “progress report” to assess the effectiveness of the policy throughout its first 365 days. Per a report from The News-Gazette—a newspaper based in Central Illinois—the report showed that U of I spent $465,500 to run 11,815 background checks during the first year of the policy. Those numbers reflect all the screenings that the university ran at its three campuses.

Of the 11,815 checks that the university conducted, 11 resulted in the rescindment of job offers (U of I only runs background checks on applicants who have been extended a conditional offer of employment). As the News-Gazette article noted, that number means that the University of Illinois found considerable red flags for 0.01% of its hires. Of the 11 individuals who had their employment offers rescinded, one was applying for a faculty position. The others, the News-Gazette says, were applying for “civil service or other positions.”

University trustees predicted that the low ratio of rescinded offers to total background checks would not sit well with taxpayers—especially given the nearly-half-a-million-dollar price tag. Per coverage, trustees stressed that not running these checks and missing one of those 11 red flags could have easily been more expensive.

Without giving names of applicants or identifying the jobs they were competing for, one trustee noted that there were people with “child endangerment or weapons charges” who were applying to jobs that involved contact with children. The trustee classified these red flags as “nontrivial issues,” and suggested that $465,000 was a small price to pay to protect students and safeguard the university from potential lawsuits.

Initially, the new U of I background check policy received a considerable amount of pushback from faculty members, coverage indicates. The chief argument was reportedly that the background checks were an invasion of privacy and would discourage applicants from seeking employment with the university. While the total number of applications received by the university was down 2% compared to last year, issues with the state budget also meant that fewer jobs were available, coverage explained.

Sources: http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2017-01-19/11-job-offers-pulled-first-year-ui-background-checks.html

Tag Cloud
Categories
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • April 10 — Oregon legislators have proposed a bill that would allow ridesharing companies to operate statewide. The bill’s critics argue that it doesn’t call for fingerprint background checks and would make it difficult for local municipalities to impose their own regulations.
  • April 06 — Idaho State University recently instituted a background check policy for faculty members and other full-time staff. Previously, the school only conducted reference checks.
  • April 03 — An Illinois man has been sentenced to three years in prison for failing to register as a sex offender and working as a youth sports referee. The state legislature is considering a bill that would require more in-depth background checks for licensed sporting officials.
  • March 13 — A Denver hospital was in the headlines last year for hiring a surgery technician who stole syringes of the painkiller fentanyl. New information suggests that a more thorough background check could have flagged the man’s addiction issues.
  • March 08 — On September 26, 2016, the state of California passed Assembly Bill 1843 that amended the Labor Code by prohibiting employers from asking an applicant for employment to disclose certain juvenile records. The amended Labor Code has been effective since January 1, 2017.
  • March 08 — For the past 5 years, backgroundchecks.com has reported rulings of district courts around the country that have ruled that an employer’s inclusion of a liability waiver or other extraneous information in a disclosure violates the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s (“FCRA”) disclosure requirements found in §604(b)(2)(a). Now, for the first time, a federal court of appeals has weighed in on the disclosure requirement.
  • March 07 — The Kentucky State Senate has approved a piece of legislation that would open the state’s child abuse and neglect registry to schools, camps, and parents. If passed, the law would allow anyone to request a search of the database.
  • March 06 — A federal judge in Florida has ruled that a plaintiff with a case against Amazon.com has the right to sue the company for an alleged violation of the FCRA. The suit accuses Amazon of failing to provide a standalone background check disclosure form free of extraneous information.
  • March 05 — A federal judge in Florida has ruled that a plaintiff with a case against Amazon.com has the right to sue the company for an alleged violation of the FCRA. The suit accuses Amazon of failing to provide a standalone background check disclosure form free of extraneous information.
  • February 21 — In January, a Washington, D.C. contractor was fired for being reckless with confidential patient files. The woman had a criminal record with two felony convictions, but a local background check did not list the offenses.