An Employment Screening OutlinePolicy Development
A policy of Factual Employment Screening; Personality Evaluation/testing; and/or Drug Testing should be developed and embedded into
core policy manual rather than exist as a supplement or bulletin policy. This avoids any “after fact” ramifications, should policy be challenged under discriminatory theories.
The policy should have an effective date, and if corporate philosophy is for “purification” of existing staff, then a policy implementation should be evident, along with reasoning for retroactive purification of staff. This is common practice following a recently resolved internal problem, where specific numbers of staff have been terminated for one problem or another. No justification is needed when implementing new programs if purification is in line with philosophy of company.
Policy Guidelines
Consistency is key when establishing new policies, especially when said policies enter into gray and ever-changing areas of human rights and right to privacy. For example, when establishing any screening parameter there must be absolute consistency within each specific employment class in order to avoid obvious Title 7 ramifications. Additionally, inconsistent programs will invalidate any baseline, as companies providing employment, drug, and psychological screening have no industry-based uniformity, and new variables can enter picture which will skew standard.
Date of effective program
Set forth date of management’s decision to implement screening programs and actual date of implementation.
Referral to Employee Classification, and overview of class requirements
These details can be included here, but are best left in general terms to allow for modification at a later date. Each class would have specific screening requirements, which would be determined by management as to job, applicability, exposure, and other employee interface. Sample general class terms include Fiduciary Capacity Employees – Non- Exempt (cash handlers and janitors with key access): Management/Policymaker (those who would set policy and those who have signing authority); Management/Mid-level (those who supervise others); and Sales Force – Outside (those who would be field personnel and those who would use company vehicles).
Formology
Forms and/or procedures applicable to each specific employment class should be developed to ensure processing consistency and provide a competent audit trail for future reference.
Referral of candidate (by name) to firms conducting various levels of screening.
This is very important as baseline for screening rests with vendor since no industry guideline exists. It is also critical in combating allegations of age/policy/screening discrimination. If you are curious about changing a vendor, this should be done with a memorandum of policy modification, rather than a core change, which will survive litigation if effective change is implemented across board for hires subsequent to date of vendor change. Good, Solid Factual Employment Screening is not Ultimate Decision-Maker you are.
Policy decision
This should rest with top corporate management, or at highest divisional levels. It should be included in minutes of board meetings, and disclosed in publicly held (10K/10Q) firms as a negligent hiring mitigator. The policy can be used as a positive offsetter for ongoing litigation disclosure requirement in 10K/10Q.
Vendor Selection
A thorough background check on firm supplying service should include:
.How long in business?
.Type of criminal conviction research (hand vs. database), as well as if and how discoveries are verified against subject identifiers.
.How deep are research and data capabilities?
.National research capability
.Licensure designation (PI, reporting agency, credit bureau, and so forth).
.For older firms like guard service companies, how long since they “got into fad” of employment screening?
.Press noteworthiness .Depth of human resources vs. security experience (both is optimal).
Litigation history (errors/omissions).
Depth of professional liability insurance.
Who runs division?
.Cost/turnaround/reporting method – raw data is instant death; a “compiled report” is best.
.Jurisdictional coverage and researcher consistency – avoid database vendors.
.Analysis of ancillary services (i.e. How can a new private patrol operator or recently retired police officer afford to have thoroughly researched nuances of employment screening laws in all 50 states?)
.How often is program reviewed by counsel?
Screening Program Review
The program should be reviewed quarterly for compliance as issues change regularly, and an antiquated policy can make whole process suspect, if not litigable. Make sure that an updating memorandum is included in procedure file for audit purposes.
