Background Investigation Blogs

HR.BLR.com advises that it's not always safe to do your background screening from sites like Google, Facebook, and more because "the practice could expose...companies to additional liabilities because the sites contain so much personal information about the individuals who use them."

But there's more to fear when relying on Myspace and the like for pre-employment background screening.

Respecting personal information is important, to be sure, but doing cursory background screening online is just as likely to leave an employer or manager open to negligent hiring suits than accusations of crossing privacy laws.

Quickly skimming a Myspace page isn't going to verify a resume for an employer, nor will it ensure that the potential hire in question doesn't have a dangerous criminal history.  Googling someone's name won't necessarily tell you if that person is secretly a drug addict who might engage in risky behavior on the job, and it isn't likely to reveal false letters of recommendation or a spotty record behind-the-wheel.

The article is right when it advises extreme caution for those who do their background screening by glancing at personal online pages, but for many more reasons than they list.  It's simply not a good idea because it does very little to ensure that the person that gets hired is the right person for the job.

The citizens of Beaufort County in North Carolina were shocked and outraged to discover that a former Coosa Elementary School teacher was charged and convicted of the sexual molestation of 8 children.  In the wake of the trial and in the face of the millions of dollars awarded the victims and their families, the school district hired a consultant to create stronger security and safety policies, including nationwide criminal background checks.

As it's reported at The Beaufort Gazette, the school district is quick to point out that for years it has been relying on criminal background checks of its applicants; however, "those background checks were limited to crimes that occurred in South Carolina - not the 49 other states in this nation from which many staff are hired."

It's simply too easy for a registered sex offender, or any other criminal, to move to another state and slip through the cracks of a simple, superficial background check.  This is why quality background screening agencies will always offer criminal background checks on a national level, as well as a social security number search and verification, to make sure that the person that gets hired for the job isn't hiding anything that would make them unfit for the workplace.

Beginning next month, more than 200 San Diego Unified Port District employees who work at its two marine cargo terminals and its cruise ship terminal must submit to background screening in order to qualify for a federal Transportation Worker Identity Credential.

As it's reported by Sign on San Diego, "the new identity card, which must be obtained by long shore workers, truck drivers, rail employees and representatives of private companies who work at the terminals, is another in a series of federal efforts to make the nation's ports more resistant to terrorism."

Through background screening procedures the security spotlight will be focused on the people who work at port facilities, minimizing the likelihood that a dangerous employee could gain access to the state and country through the ports.

The best and most effective background screening companies are also diligent in their compliance with OFAC (the Office of Foreign Assets Control).  OFAC blocks interaction with terrorists, international narcotics traffickers and proscribed weapons violators, among others, as well as denying dealings with certain foreign entities.

Every once in awhile it's important to look into current statistics on workplace violence in order to better understand how it is that background screening can minimize this problem.

And according to the statistics reported by the CDC, even in today's more modern workplace environment we need to focus on minimizing dangerous elements.

An average of 20 workers are murdered each week in the United States.  In addition, an estimated 1 million workers are assaulted annually in U.S. workplaces.  Most of these assaults occur in service settings such as hospitals, nursing homes, and social service agencies.

While the majority of such incidences are the result of robberies and attacks from outside people, there are still many incidences of violence and injury in the workplace that can be preventing by thorough background screening.

The best background screening companies will implement thorough criminal records searches, a resume check, previous employer interviews, and pre-employment drug testing to make sure that unstable employees don't make it into the workplace at all.  And from there, further screening protocols on a regular basis, like random drug testing, maintain workplace safety in the long term.

A recent Florida scandal in the firefighter's department of Daytona Beach reveals, in the midst of debates over employee drug testing for public servants, how very useful such testing could be.

The firefighter in question was arrested this week for stealing thousands of dollars from several fire stations.  According to wftv.com, he even made false 911 calls in order to evacuate the fire station, so he could steal the money he needed to feed his drug habit.

Employee drug testing for public servants like firefighters and police officers has been a hot topic lately, with more and more counties nationwide adopting stricter policies on the testing of the men and women whose job it is to protect and serve the public.  

Other employees of the fire department expressed surprise and sadness over their comrade's addiction, stating that "they didn't know he was using drugs" when he was supposed to be protecting and supporting them in a dangerous field of work.

Which is exactly why employee drug testing, especially random testing, is so important in situations like these.  Too often drug abuse on the job goes unnoticed, as was the case in Boston last August, when two firefighters who perished in a blaze were later found to have been under the influence of drugs and alcohol at the time.

While there's been a great deal of controversy lately over the application of employee drug testing procedures to police departments and fire departments, recent incidents in Illinois stand as proof that these types of background screening are definitely necessary.

According to the report at officer.com, a Cicero police commander who is under investigation for possible drug use asked to resign from his post and be demoted to patrolman the day before he underwent a town-ordered employee drug testing.  He is suspected of marijuana use.

And this happened in the same week as a Cicero firefighter was charged with felony possession of a controlled substance, thought to be cocaine, after he was seen emerging from the bathroom of a restaurant with powder around his nose.

In both cases drug abuse could have easily impeded the ability of the men in question to do their jobs.  And when your job could feasibly include dangerous work and protecting the lives of others, employee drug testing becomes an issue that's less about following company policies, and more about safeguarding the health and well being of innocent people.

Though it is barely February, this year has already seen a rising popularity in employee drug testing for professions that had historically been exempt from this type of background screening procedure.

In the wake of last year's firefighter tragedy, where two Boston firefighters who lost their lives in a blaze were later found to be under the influences of drugs and alcohol, a public debate erupted over the need to apply employee drug testing to public servants, including police and firefighters.

Now, in Utah the Deseret Morning News reports that a former deputy, and member of the Central Utah Narcotics Task Force, is facing charges of drug possession and theft.  Employee drug testing discovered illegal drugs in his system.

And in Oklahoma, the much publicized firing of County Treasurer Stan Stevens, who was charged with distribution of hydrocodone, has led to further discussions of the need to apply employee drug testing to all public servants.  

Such a move isn't intended to be invasive or aggressive or disrespectful, it's intended to prevent tragedies like that which happened in Boston, and to keep public servants of all types from inadvertently doing harm to the very public they promise to serve.