One of the more alarming news items of recent weeks is that the credit bureau Equifax, one of the three largest credit bureaus in the United States, has sustained a major data breach. It is estimated that around half of all U.S. adults with a credit rating – 143 million people – have likely been affected by the data breach.

It’s been reported that the hacking cybercriminals made themselves privy to names, birth dates, Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers and home addresses. The credit agency released this news on September 7; however, it’s likely that the data breach happened several months ago.

Are Job Applicants Who They Say They Are?

Identity theft is a very real risk in situations like this. The most likely ways the information will be used will be to get access to credit and cash fraudulently. However, it’s possible that a whole new identity could be created in order to start a new life and/or get a new job.

This major data breach underscores the importance of verifying identity in potentially sensitive situations. Companies looking to take on new hires should be especially careful. In addition to screening for criminal background and credit history, it’s crucial to ensure that each applicant is really who they say they are.

Adding to the controversy is the way the Equifax company is handling the situation. Anyone who wishes to check if their information was compromised during the hack by using the Equifax security website must agree to waive their right to sue the credit agency. The language of these terms is included in the fine print of the service, and many people have “agreed” to it without being fully aware of the exact terms.

Employment Screening and Verifying Identity More Important Than Ever

Employers tend to use background checks if the position calls for it. For example, a credit check is often conducted for persons who will be managing money in a job. However, this recent news has revealed that checking for criminal activity and honesty is an important safety measure for every type of employee in every type of job.

The recent Equifax security data breach underscores the potential risk of fraud in every hiring situation. Is the person who they say they are? What is their true past?

The Equifax data breach should give every employer pause regarding who they are hiring and what each individual will be bringing to the job. With resume fraud increasing as well, it’s never been more important for employers to screen applicants in order to verify identity and past history.

To Prevent a Data Breach Computer Security Should Always Be a Priority

This incident is also a cautionary tale for businesses that make a practice of storing sensitive data in their computer systems. Companies should take the time to reassess their computer security in order to ensure that firewalls and other security measures are the very best they can be. Not doing so could put the personal information of everyone associated with the company at risk.

Now more than ever, employment screening and background check security are crucial to smart hiring and optimal staffing. While there are always variables where human beings are concerned, professional employment screening increases the odds of making the right choice.

 Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

A recent survey has revealed disturbing news. Nearly half of 1,300 respondents surveyed revealed that they had told at least one lie or major exaggeration on a resume at some point as job applicants during their job search process.

A full 46 percent of those job applicants surveyed admitted to using fabrication to make their employment history, educational credentials or some other aspect of their past look better than it actually was. The respondents surveyed were comprised of 300 senior managers and 1,000 employees.

Job Applicants Lying On Resumes Has More Than Doubled Since 2011

A similar survey conducted in 2011 showed 21 percent of job applicants admitting to lying on their resumes. This means lying and misrepresentation on resumes has more than doubled in just six years. The recent research was conducted by OfficeTeam, which is a Robert Half company.

Rates of those who were aware of someone lying on their resume was higher for men, as 51 percent of the males surveyed knew of someone who had told a lie on their resume. However, a substantial 39 percent of women surveyed were also aware of an incident of lying on a resume by a colleague.

Majority of Lies on Resumes Related to Past Job Experience

Younger workers aged 18 to 34 reported knowing more liars, with 55 percent of these respondents saying they knew at least one person who was not truthful on a resume. The spike in dishonesty could be due to a more competitive job market.

The type of information most often fabricated on a resume was regarding job experience – a full 76 percent of the lying job applicants misrepresented this area of their resume. However, other areas were also ripe for fabrication: 26 percent lied about precise employment durations and dates, 33 percent made creative adjustments to their educational experience or degrees, and 59 percent augmented the job duties they supposedly undertook at past jobs.

There are four primary signs that job applicants have lied on their resume. These include:

1. Missing or Illogical Dates. When dates are omitted or don’t add up with the other information given on the resume, this information could be fabricated.
2. A Lack of Details. Any area that is vague or lacks specific details could be suspect.
3. Suspicious Body Language. If the subject has nervous facial expressions or body language during the interview regarding specific sections of their resume, they could be lying about these portions.
4. References Don’t Corroborate Details. Following up with each employment reference can help to verify if job applicants’ information included on a resume is true.

The data revealed in the survey is in major contrast to what hiring managers think or assume about the people they are screening. A full 38 percent felt that lying did not occur very often, while 41 percent thought resume fraud occurred “somewhat often.” Just 12 percent thought it occurred very often, and 10 percent believe lying never happens on resumes.

The survey also found that over one third of hiring managers reported removing a candidate from consideration because it was discovered the job applicant had lied on their resume. It’s surprising that in the face of this evidence, 10 percent of hiring managers still feel that lying “never occurs” on resumes.

One of the best ways to determine if job applicants are being honest is with employment screening background checks. Companies that engage the services of a professional employment screener can determine a job applicants’ criminal history, education history, employment history, and much more.

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

In early June of 2017, Indiana became the first state to pass a law banning local ban-the-box laws. These laws had been enacted by various municipalities in the state to give persons with criminal records a better chance at transcending their past through gainful employment. However, some believe these laws put companies at risk.

The rest of the country is now watching to see how this change could impact other states that already have ban the box laws in place. Some states may be influenced to change their policies regarding background checks for pre-employment. Municipalities in Indiana are no longer allowed to create and enforce ban-the-box laws for Indiana Criminal Background Checks.

Employment Laws Always in Flux

These changes are a motive for hiring managers to work with pre-employment screening agencies to ensure they are assessing all applicants in compliance with the most current laws. These kinds of regulations are always in flux, and working with a professional agency allows companies to rest assured that they are handling employment screening in a way that is compliant with all state and local laws.

The new Indiana law, Senate Bill 312, outlaws the use of any current ban-the-box law that is on the books for any county or city in the state. The new legislation will effectively make it easier for businesses to conduct employment screening, especially when partnered with a professional agency experienced in these matters. Senate Bill 312 was recently signed into law by Indiana governor Eric Holcomb and will go into effect July 1.

New Ban-The-Box Law Makes Screening Easier For Indiana Employers

The city of Indianapolis banned ban-the-box laws in 2014. Ban-the-box laws in most areas of the U.S. require hiring managers to wait to ask about criminal history until a provisional job offer has been extended or at least until after an initial interview has been conducted. Employers in the state of Indiana can no longer inquire about job applicants’ criminal history as part of the hiring process.

The bill also states that criminal background check information regarding employees cannot be used as evidence in civil actions against employers based upon their conduct unless it has a direct relationship to the case, did not result in conviction, or if the conviction was sealed, reversed, vacated, expunged or pardoned.

The new legislation will no doubt assist employers that have statewide branches and offices throughout Indiana in having an easier time of standardizing their hiring practices across the state. The new law did not have any opposition in the state Senate.

Ban-The-Box Laws Finding a Balance

However, several watchdog groups oppose the passage of Indiana Senate Bill 312. Indiana branches of the ACLU and NAACP are calling for its veto. They say the bill is too friendly to employers and not in the interests of state citizens with criminal records who are trying to forge a new path through gainful employment.

This major change in the state underscores how employment laws are continually in flux. The best course of action for companies to stay current with all laws is by partnering with a professional employment screening agency. Employers can then rest assured that their screening policies are in compliance.

It remains to be seen how the rest of the nation will respond to Indiana banning ban-the-box laws. For now, local municipalities are still making this decision in most states.

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

Employers often perform various background checks on applicants prior to offering them employment. These checks can include a criminal background check to learn whether an applicant has criminal records. However, there are background check limitations and mixed reports on how far back the information on a criminal background check can go. While the federal government, through the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), allows reporting of criminal convictions without any time limits, some states follow the seven-year rule. Time restraints on criminal background information varies between states and many state’s regulations are more restrictive than federal laws. Employers and background screening consumer reporting agencies must abide by these state laws when performing criminal checks.

Understand Reporting Limitations Imposed by State Laws

Applicable state laws limit what a consumer reporting agency can report. Under the FCRA, there aren’t any background check limitations when reporting any convictions. However, agencies are generally limited to seven years when reporting other adverse information. These time restraints are sometimes null, however, when the applicant’s salary exceeds $75,000 annually. Some states prohibit arrest information or pending arrest information from being reported.

State Background Check Limitations Based on Job Relation

Federal law doesn’t forbid employers from making hiring decisions based on an applicant’s criminal history in regards to how it relates to the job, however some state laws do impose restrictions. In these states, an employer can’t disqualify an applicant with a conviction record unless the crime is directly related to the job he/she will be performing. When disqualifying an applicant, employers may be required to provide proof his/her criminal record was relevant to the position he would have received.

State Background Check Limitations on Arrests Without Convictions

Federal law also doesn’t prohibit all employers from using arrest records in employment decisions, but state laws pose limitations. If an arrest didn’t lead to a conviction, many states don’t allow employers to use this data.

State Background Check Limitations on Pending Arrests

Arrest records are further broken down into pending and non-pending arrests. In some states, employers can consider pending arrests in the hiring process, but not non-pending arrests.

Conclusion

Comprehensive background checks are important business investments when compared to the potential losses the business could suffer, if it hired an unsuitable candidate. For each of the highlighted background check limitations, employers can typically go back seven years on criminal background checks for employment purposes. Besides various state and city laws, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) also protects applicants against discrimination.

Source: http://www.acc.com/legalresources/publications/topten/State-Background-Check.cfm

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

Without a good hiring process to attain top employees, a business cannot succeed and thrive. New hires who aren’t a fit can throw off the functioning of a business and reduce productivity. In worst-case scenarios, low quality hires can commit fraud or violence in the workplace.

Employment screening is a crucial part of an effective hiring process, as are focused interview techniques for finding the best new staff members.

Below are some of the most innovative hiring processes employed by some of today’s top companies:

Collaborative Hiring Process at Apple and Tesla Motors

Steve Jobs always favored a collaborative hiring process for Apple, and it’s still in use at the company today. Apple values allegiance, loyalty and secrecy in order to stay ahead of competitors, and getting the opinion of numerous staff members assists in this process.

The Tesla car company is known for introducing job candidates to the entire company. Candidates often spend an entire day at the facilities undergoing multiple interviews. This is an excellent way to determine if an applicant will be a fit for the current company culture. A rapid-fire questioning style is also used to test for mental agility.

Google’s Theoretical and Hypothetical Questions

The Google company is well known for its unconventional hiring processes. Among them is the use of theoretical and hypothetical questions that can throw candidates off guard and garner insights into their problem-solving abilities. From being asked to design an evacuation plan for the building to explaining how they might find a needle in a haystack, nothing is off limits. Applicants who are able to think on their feet and demonstrate creative critical thinking skills rise to the top of the list.

Thriving Under Pressure at Teach for America, Gallup and Pizza Hut

Teach for America and the Gallup polling company use interview techniques in their hiring process to look for the ability to excel under pressure. Teach for America presents candidates with real-life scenarios to test for fortitude, leadership abilities and character. Gallup uses a specialized series of lengthy interviews including initial online assessment followed by key questions to assist in matching the candidate’s strengths with the ideal job. At the other end of the spectrum, the Pizza Hut company has conducted 140 second interviews at the South By Southwest festival in their search for new digital talent.

In today’s rapidly evolving marketplace, companies are seeking top talent who will fit well. Outsourcing national criminal background checks to a professional employment screening company frees up time and resources for creating the most innovative interview process possible.

Source: http://www.enthusiadams.com/2011/11/17-interview-questions-developed-by-gallup/

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

Background checks are a valuable asset when it comes to hiring a new employee to work for your company. This is especially true when it comes to individuals with no established relationship beforehand and you’re judging their character by what’s written on their resume. With this being said, here’s a look at why criminal background checks help protect employers and employees alike.

Criminal Background Checks Protect Employers And Provide Truth

Many are guilty when it comes to embellishing the truth (and hiding the facts) when it comes to their work history. Although many recruiters can spot these actions on paper, embellishments may go uncovered without running a background check beforehand. Such things that a background check can uncover, to help protect employers, are:

• A work history and education verification background check before the hiring takes place.
• Proof of a third-party drug test before any job offer is made.
• Prior felony and/or misdemeanor criminal convictions (state and federal levels).

When Criminal Background Checks Protect Employers And Employees

As an employer (or employee), you have the right to know about the candidates that are entering your workforce. Given the legal relationship that the business and the possible employee are about to embark on, your company needs to protect its employees and and be aware of any criminal convictions that the potential new hire may have.

For example, there were almost 572,000 non-fatal crimes that occurred in the workplace each year from 1993 to 2009, according to the Justice Department Bureau of Justice Statistic Workplace Violence. However, many of these cases potentially could have been avoided if criminal background checks had been performed to protect employers.

So in consideration of the information above, a criminal background check is the sure-fire way to help protect employers and help keep your workplace environment safe for employers and employees alike. By eliminating possible issues with potential employees, a criminal background check allows businesses to focus on the tasks at hand.

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

Marijuana legalization passed in several states, but remains illegal at the federal level. Drug convictions are some of the most common charges to show up on a criminal background check. Many of these convictions involve marijuana, a substance once strictly prohibited in all states and now available for recreational use in a few regions and medical use in many more.

Recent changes in marijuana legalization have added to the confusion of the criminal background check process.

Federal Law Versus State Marijuana Legalization Law

While recreational use of marijuana is deemed legal in many states, it remains illegal at the federal level. As such, employers can still terminate employment if they discover that employees have used marijuana recently, especially in the workplace. Federal law protects employers’ right to create a zero-tolerance drug policy, enforced, in part, through background checks. Thus, regardless of whether businesses are based in recreational marijuana legalization states, medical marijuana legalization states, or states in which all use of cannabis is prohibited, it is perfectly acceptable to bar current drug users from employment if their drug use could potentially harm customers or other employees. Background checks remain a thorny issue, so it is important to use discretion and get legal counsel. Regardless of federal legality, it may be deemed discriminatory to bar somebody with an old marijuana conviction from, for example, a retail job.

The Role of Drug Testing

Many employers continue to use drug testing to determine whether new and current employees have abided by company drug policies. These tests are often inaccurate, as cannabis may linger in the system for up to six months after it has been used. However, for some employers, any evidence of past cannabis use is grounds for termination or non-hiring. For employers who utilize drug testing, it is imperative that employees are informed of the role of drug testing in the workplace, who is subject to drug tests, and how often they will occur. Policies regarding drug testing and the termination of those with drug-related convictions should be clearly outlined in the employee handbook.

For businesses located in states that permit recreational marijuana legalization, the decision of whether to enforce a zero-tolerance policy ultimately comes down to personal preferences. There are no legal consequences for those who opt for the zero-tolerance approach. In fact, in many industries, this approach is necessary for workplace safety, particularly in childcare, health care, and transportation. Accusations of discrimination may arise for those who bar employees with previous drug convictions, so drug testing may be a more reliable means of weeding out drug users.

Source: http://www.drugfreebusiness.org/Media/documents/IBH_workplacetesting.pdf

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

One could be forgiven for thinking that an FBI fingerprint database check is the creme de la creme of background checks, the figurative gold standard of all that is out there. Though popular due to being well-known, such background checks are intended for law enforcement, not as an employment screening tool. Consequently, there are numerous oversights that employers should be aware of prior to relying on the FBI as the sole pre-employment background check.

As a pre-employment and tenant background screening service, Screening Intelligence is dedicated to protecting the safety of employees and landlords. While state legislators are to be applauded for their efforts at mandating background checks for many industries, the FBI screening tool should be supplemented with other, more comprehensive measures in order to lessen risk.

Here are three of the primary reasons why FBI fingerprint database isn’t sufficient on its own.

1. Incomplete

Although television shows such as “Criminal Minds” and “CSI” perpetuate this notion that the FBI fingerprint database is all-encompassing, it simply isn’t true. One of the most egregious mistakes is that the FBI doesn’t always offer information about the outcome of a case. For instance, there aren’t details stating if a case was dismissed, or a record expunged. In 2013, the National Employment Law Project released a report indicating that such inaccuracies are potentially preventing 600,000 Americans from being hired at jobs they otherwise would be perfectly suited for on an annual basis.

2. Inaccurate

Roughly half of all final outcomes from criminal cases are missing from the FBI fingerprint database simply because some states aren’t required to report them. A 2015 Government Accountability Office Report underscored this point by stating that 10 states reported that their databases were 50 percent or less complete; 13 states reported a completion of only 50 to 75 percent; while a mere 20 states reported 76 to 100 percent completion. Seven states didn’t offer any information.

3. Applicant protections

FBI fingerprint database reports do not provide applicants with the sorts of protections that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and similar state laws mandate. Ordinarily, applicants have the right to know what is on their record and then dispute it. Without exercising that right, a person may be excluded from a job due to an error or oversight.

Consumer reporting agencies (CRAs), including Screening Intelligence, go far beyond fingerprint databases to ensure accuracy. Many CRA services will include using personal identification information to examine hundreds of primary sources, such as education, employment, driving records, and criminal history backgrounds with outcome data. When you’re trying to decide what background checks service to use, consider one that provides you with the whole picture.

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

 

It’s every company’s worst nightmare: handing the proverbial keys to the computer system to a cyber criminal. And yet, that’s what thousands of companies do if they don’t properly screen their new network administrators and systems administrators for criminal history or other shady dealings. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the job outlook for network security administrators is expected to grow 18 percent, which is faster than the current job growth. With this growth comes a crop of new cyber criminals ready to step in and take advantage of unsuspecting companies.

Not a Cyber Criminal…Yet

According to Computer Weekly, cyber criminals are already looking to compromise a company’s staff by looking through their social media accounts and coercing their compliance. About 61 percent of companies have been compromised in their security, whether intentionally or inadvertently through their employees’ actions. If these people had been screened and properly vetted, there would be a lower probability of this happening as the company could be made aware of the potential threat of hiring a cyber criminal.

Types of Security Concerns

Hacking is no longer the realm of the kid in his parent’s basement causing a bit of trouble because of a virus or malware. Hacking is big business — cyber criminal business, but still big business. Hackers aren’t the kids who bring down the grandparent’s home computer; they are part of organized crime, government intelligence agencies, terrorists, or even eastern European firms that are for hire to destroy any system for a fee. Symantec’s 2015 report shows that malware continues to attack systems. In 2014, some 317 million pieces of malware were identified. The hackers that network administrators and systems administrators are up against are well educated and sometimes better funded than they are. It’s little wonder that the very people companies hire to protect their systems are the same ones who may destroy them.

Sources: http://www.ecpi.edu/blog/2015-cyber-security-trends-hacking-internet-of-things

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.

You may hear about the horror stories that can result from a failure to implement complete workplace background checks on employees in the news or through the grapevine fairly regularly. But it’s unusual that when stories are told of gross employee theft, violence, criminal incompetence or a dozen other things that improperly vetted staff may do to hurt their employers, that anything other than the disturbing act itself and the resulting damage is shared. What you rarely hear about is that the offending employee’s background was not thoroughly researched, that there was no criminal background check or that the workplace background check was not done well.

Here are a few examples of the kinds of things that can happen, and have on a massive scale in recent years, as a direct result of a failure to perform proper and complete workplace background checks.

Workplace Violence – From the sad, tragic, and outrageous circumstances that can result from violence in the workplace, nothing can make incidences like these more bitter to the employer and HR department than knowing that violence committed by an employee could have been avoided with thorough workplace background checks.

Professional Theft – Oftentimes, professional criminals live out their careers in crime knowing that they are guaranteed to spend part of their lives in prison. For such a person, committing fraud in the job application and interview process is simply a matter of trying employer after employer until someone forgoes criminal workplace background checks and hires them. When this happens, the new employee can quickly gain access to valuable capital, cash registers and commit massive theft. Such a person may not be afraid of being fired or incarcerated. To them, the risk may be worth the reward.

Frivolous Lawsuits – In today’s employment market, there is very little loyalty between employer and employee, and there are a small but dangerous number of people out there who make their livings by filing frivolous lawsuits against employers. For those who are talented at this – just about any kind of employer – no matter how honest or well-meaning, is at risk.

Gross Incompetence – An incompetent employee can cost an employer massive amounts of money, or cause incalculable damage in a matter of hours, sometimes even moments. Heavy equipment operators, those who handle client’s financial information, and many other seemingly simple positions place the integrity of an entire organization in the hands of a single employee.

By performing simple and relatively inexpensive workplace background checks, you may avoid many of these dangers as well as the one that loom behind all of them: negligent hiring lawsuits. Don’t let your firm become another statistic by forgoing employee workplace background checks on all new and recent hires.

Disclaimer: The information on InstantCriminalChecks.com is governed by our Terms of Use and is never intended as legal advice.