Corra Daily Planet

An editorial in the New York Times notes that the FBI criminal database has flaws in the system and that makes it even more difficult for some employment candidates to be hired.   The editorial notes correctly that getting a job in this economic downturn is tough enough, but to be  listed in your background search as having records you don’t have, or if the records have certain discrepancies,  it is that much tougher to find work.

A new bill was introduced by Virginia Democratic Congressman, Bobby Scott, requiring the FBI to verify the criminal information before issuing the background check for purposes of employment.    The bill submits that the FBI should bring all records current as some do not list the final disposition of the charges.   This is where either the charges were ultimately dismissed or where the felony conviction was reduced to, say a misdemeanor or possibly deferred.

The bill is also requesting that the less serious offenses be eliminated from the background report.  I am not sure if this is such a good idea.   Such seemingly innocuous offenses may later point to behavior characteristics, where for example loitering may be later discovered as “stalking.”  If it is in fact a lesser offense, most employers will probably disregard it anyway when they consider the candidate for hiring.   I wouldn’t be so quick to eliminate any charges.

The bill does require that the FBI correct any erroneous information.   This should be obligatory.  No argument there.   As for the employment candidate, having the right to review their background check, they have this right already through the Fair Credit Reporting Act.  Upon request, the employer is by law obligated to provide the job applicant with the background check that was run on him.

The editorial ends with the quote, “No one should be denied a job because the government’s information is wrong.”   I couldn’t agree more.  In fact, sometimes to verify whether the information is accurate is pays to conduct a county criminal background search.  When done properly, the county criminal search is hand pulled from the county courthouse and provides the most current information.   The county criminal background check will also show any pending cases, so the employer doesn’t hire a candidate who three weeks later is about to be carted off to jail.   Always something well worth knowing up front.

Check them out before you hire.

While the controversy about the new Arizona Immigration Law, SB 1070, rages around the country, employers should not lose track of the fact the federal government is cracking down on companies who hire illegal immigrants or undocumented workers.   Argue the issue any way you like, but at the end of the day those caught hiring undocumented workers are facing heavy fines and possible business closure.

If you are a business that contracts with the federal and different state governments or companies who in turn contract with federal and state governments, than it has been mandated since the first of the year that you must conduct the E-Verify or I-9 search on any new hire.   The E-Verify Background Check or I-9, of course, will reveal whether your potential employee is eligible to work legally in the United States.  This employers who do not conduct the I-9 can find themselves losing valuable government contracts.  No joke, for sure.

Additionally, be aware that the Internal Revenue Service, is also getting into the act.  Not only can you as an employer be fined and your business closed down, the IRS may look to see if you withheld paying your fair share of employee taxes.   If the IRS deems there was criminal deception than the company principles face prison and extensive fines for past due taxes.   There was one recent case where the courts upheld a ten year prison sentence and millions of dollars in fines.

Employers who conduct background checks as part of their preemployment screening will typically run the Social Security Trace to verify their candidate’s eligibility and to be sure that candidate is working under their actual social security number.  If you believe that everyone works under their own social security number, best to think again.

According to an article in the Los Angeles Times,  the French Gourmet, in San Diego, California, was recently cited for hiring undocumented workers.  He is accused of ignoring the fact that the social security numbers his  employees provided where either bogus or had initially belonged to someone else.    We shall see the outcome.  But bear in mind, this is an upscale restaurant, and not some little greasy spoon.  Still,  its owner, Michel Malecot,  has been indicted and if convicted, faces  fines of $250,000 per count and five years in prison, per count.    If he is convicted, this may be a long time between pastries.

There are other restaurants and restaurant chains that have been turned into examples as to why it is best not to hire undocumented workers.   American Apparel, the clothing manufacturer, was recently forced to layoff some 1,500 workers because of alleged discrepancies in their documentation.  I blogged about this in one article, entitled, Immigration Woes Strike American Apparel Workforce.

Essentially, the government is making it more costly to hire undocumented workers than those eligible for employment.   If your employees lack the proper documentation, then they can cost you.   Big time.  In this particular climate, the public exposure and subsequent embarrassment, the probable fines, and possible prison sentences may longer be worth the few bucks the employer saves.  Keep it in mind.

And check them out before you hire.

The Guardian Angels have been a controversial civil watch group since their inception.    The Guardian Angels organize street patrols and attempt to prevent crime in neighborhoods where crime prevention could definitely use a helping hand.  Some people think the Guardian Angels may overextend themselves.   I think any volunteer group that is attempt to lower crime rates is doing good work.

But recently, a Davenport, Iowa Alderman invited the Guardian Angeles to patrol the city streets.  According to the Quad-City Times four of the Guardian Angels that were scheduled for street patrol had previous assault records.    The Guardian Angels typically conducts background checks on its volunteers and they must be cleared and vetted before being allow to join the organization.   However, I suppose in an effort to expedite matters the four men were allowed to graduate training, before their background checks had been returned and reviewed.

There is some concern that the background checks or the applications and consent forms for the background checks may have disappeared from the Guardian Angels’ office.   In any case, certain documents are missing and have yet to be found.    As for the background checks that have been returned, the Guardian Angels may accept members who were convicted only of misdemeanors.

In fairness to the Guardian Angels, there are more than a few public service agencies where the background checks fall between the cracks.   There are municipal law enforcement agencies that have hired police and support personnel with criminal records.   Sometimes the criminal records slip through the cracks, and sometimes the background checks are not reviewed carefully upon their return.    So for such an organization to miss searches, this is nothing new.

However,  the Guardian Angels are involved in sensitive operations.   The reputation of the organization is always at stake when one of its members acts inappropriately.   There can be unwarranted damages to persons and property.   There are liability issues.   So, as with the errant law enforcement agencies that were embarrassed when it was discovered they were hiring cops with criminal records, conduct a comprehensive background search.  And, above all, read the background check and vet the candidate, before putting him into the street.

That way the headlines you make are favorable to the organization.