Hiring

Elizabetharess

By law we have to run background checks on potential hires. During the interview and before the background check the Manager tells every applicant that if they have anything on their background check they must be sure to note that on the Application for Employment. The Manager also lets every applicant know that if they lie on the application, they will not be hired.
We had a situation where an applicant stated she did not have criminal charges and the check came back with some charges. We did not care that there were charges, we did not hire her because she did not answer the application truthfully.
She attended some training and was let go immediately. We paid her for her training.
What standard do any of you follow for this?

Paul in Cannon Beach

3rd party criminal background checks are covered by the FCRA which means you need to notify the applicant that you are running a check and review their right to review any report that causes an adverse action for accuracy.

Did this applicant have the opportunity to review the criminal check results?

Elizabetharess

Yes, she did. Her reply was that it wasn't her but in the same breath she said "They told me it wouldn't show up"

SMace

Can I ask what law requires you to run background checks?

Elizabetharess

We are a care facility.

joannie

The Manager
>also lets every applicant know that if they lie
>on the application, they will not be hired.


Does your application state that also?

Our policy is to run criminal background checks on all considered applicants. We use a national third-party service. They provide the necessary disclosures which all applicants sign as part of the application package. If anything turns up that the applicant fails to list, we terminate for falsifying application and provide the necessary FCRA notice.

Elizabetharess

Yes, the application states that we will terminate.

Paul in Cannon Beach

So what is your question?

davids

We follow a similar practice - If an applicant lies on the application, even if the conviction itself wouldn't eliminate the person from consideration, we would probably not hire.

Elizabetharess

Wasn't really a question, I was curious to see how everyon else works with this.
Thanks

NeedCoffee

In the case you mentioned above, you terminated the EE because something showed up on the background check and they didn't disclose it.

While I understand your intent, I don't necessarily agree with it. I have had several background checks that came back with "hits," when in reality the EE really did believe nothing would show up - this is for various reasons - fraud, identity theft, plea bargain promises, etc.

I think a better solution would be to allow applicants the opportunity to explain anything before hand, but also to allow for discussion after the fact. It's certainly plausible that an applicant's identity was stolen and fraud was committed that still shows up on a background check. In this case, they would have no duty to notify you prior to running the background check.

It's just a thought.

Elizabetharess

Wow, I see what you are talking about and thank you for bringing that up.

Paul in Cannon Beach

I agree that its best to discuss the results but I also think its a major red flag when something comes up on a crim background check that was not disclosed.

Plus, I am a little concerned about the applicant's reaction. At first she says "no thats not me" but then she says she didnt think it would show up.

Huh? Something's fishy here. I think you made the right call not to hire.

Just curious, had the applicant disclosed the conviction, would you have hired her?

System

Well the original poster said there were "charges", not necessarily a conviction. The original poster also said that they didn't care that there were charges, just that the applicant had lied.

I also don't think the applicant's response is entirely suspicious. As someone else said, say the police mistakenly charged you with something someone else did (say some other Paul in Cannon Beach). So you get charged with the offense, then you explain to the police that you are not the Paul in Cannon Beach they thought you were, and the charges are resolved. Concerned about your criminal record, you ask the police, "Well, is this going to show up on my report now?" and they say, "No, we'll take care of it. These charges will not show up on a background check."

Fast forward a couple years. Prospective employer says, "We're going to do a background check - is there anything that's going to show up on it for you? Keep in mind that if you answer dishonestly, you're disqualified for the position."

You think back and recall the mistaken charges, and your conversation with the police who assured you they would not appear on a background check. You give what you believe to be the honest answer, "No, nothing will show up."

Then you find out that the mistaken charges [i]did[/i] show up on the report after all! Remembering that you were falsely charged because of mistaken identity, you say, "That wasn't me!" (i.e., they were supposed to have charged someone else). Also recalling your conversation with the police, you say, "They told me that [the mistaken charges] wouldn't come up on the report!"

I don't think that's that far-fetched. Especially in the age of identity theft.

ray a

When we have discovered an ee lied on their app about something critical, such as criminal record, we have terminated. I agree though with NeedCoffee, give them a chance to tell their side of the story first to be certain the results you received are correct.

HRQ

Elizabetharess, we are a child care company. Our staff qualification regulations are probably similar to yours, with respect to criminal history checks.

Applicants are advised on the job app and in the interviews that all new hires will be required to obtain a Fingerprint Clearance Card through the Department of Public Safety.

We provide them with a list of convictions that would cause them to be denied a FP Clearance Card and ask them if they have any convictions that may prevent them from obtaining their Card.

When there is a conviction, sometimes they claim they didn't know about it, or thought it was removed from their record. Regardless of the reason behind the denial of the card, or whether or not they knew about the conviction, they cannot work without a current card.

Because of our state regs, they can't work until it's resolved. The bottom line for us is, "no Clearance Card, no job."

I'd assume it would be similar under your regs. Doesn't matter why the employee thinks their record is wrong, the fact is, there IS a conviction on their record and they can't work until it's resolved.

There is an appeal process for this, and the process usually takes a few months. We advise the employee in writing that we may need to replace them while they are appealing the card denial.