This article ran recently in the Stamford Advocate
Connecticut News
FedEx sued after employee alleges molests boy
STAMFORD, Conn. — FedEx Corp., famous for fast deliveries to millions of homes, failed to properly conduct a criminal background check before hiring a sexual predator who allegedly molested another boy, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday.
Paul Sykes, who worked in a FedEx Kinko’s print shop in Fairfield, solicited customers there for a computer repair business he ran called “Facts and Fantasy,” according to the lawsuit. He allegedly molested an 8-year-old boy during a visit to repair a computer.
Neal Rogan, the boy’s attorney, said the incident raises troubling questions about a company with widespread contact with the public….Rogan said. “… you absolutely have a duty to do proper criminal background checks.”
Sandra Munoz, a FedEx spokeswoman, said the company conducts criminal background checks on all job candidates. A check of Sykes, who has been fired, did not reveal a criminal history, she said….”
FedEx, formerly called Federal Express, reported revenue of $24.7 billion last year, while a criminal background check costs $25 and takes about an hour, the lawsuit states. Rogan noted that a company spokeswoman was quoted in a local newspaper in October saying the company did a criminal background check on Sykes before he was hired but no record was found.
“That person is either lying or Federal Express is wildly incompetent in how they do the background checks,” Rogan said.
Munoz noted that the company has more than 250,000 employees. “Obviously the background checks we do have been very thorough,” she said.
What happened here? While we have no doubt that FedEx dutifully conducts background checks on all its job candidates, someone inside appears to have dropped the ball. Had it been a lesser company than a FedEx, we would question the veracity of their claim to have peformed a pre-employment background check on Sykes. Increasingly we hear about a fair amount of companies who seek to cut corners by neglecting to conduct pre-employment screening. Naturally, when confronted, they swear they did run a background check on the candidate in question, but the background check revealed nothing. In some cases, when pressed further the spokesperson for these lesser firms will admit the alleged pre-employment background check was conducted on a free research site. We can’t admonish employers enough that not only do you get what you pay for, but all background checks are not created equal.
Wading through the “he said she said” on this issue is a matter we will leave to the courts. The fact that FedEx couldn’t produce a record of its background check on Sykes opens up a range of possibilities, the more possible being individual employee incompetence as opposed to negligent hiring. Lord knows, good help is hard to find, even with a background check. Ask anyone in business, and between the spelling errors and alphabetical misfiles you have to wonder if Americans and their native language have reached a critical discord.
Meanwhile a young boy may suffer permanent psychological and emotional damage from the alleged advances of Mr. Sykes.
Perhaps it is best for some companies to not be so dependent on the automated background checking systems. Perhaps the weakest link is their admin who in this day an age may have a variety of language difficulties, may give half an effort for his minimum wage and mess up on the spelling or some other aspects of a candidate’s application.
We at Corra suggest it is often better to call, fax or email the order and allow the pros to conduct the actual background check. Not only does this create a better interchange between client and service provider, but this practice might cause more clients to review their present standards for background checks and work with the service provider to customize a new standardized background check that would better fits the client’s needs. The client may even have to pay a little more for the service but he makes it up in labor allocation, expediency and the kind of accuracy that helps prevent lawsuits and other liability claims. And bad press, like this.
