Student leaders are beginning to take on the question of Ban-the-Box for College and University applications. Banning the box essentially eliminates the question of criminal history and potentially levels the playing field for those with a criminal background record when it comes to being accepted into an institution of higher learning.

From UPressOnline.com on April 7, 2021:

Anyone who has filled out a university application may recall having to answer a question about their criminal history. Failure to answer these types of questions can delay application processing and a prospective student’s answer can result in a disciplinary hold or rejection.

Ban the Box at FAU is an organization working to remove questions regarding criminal history from FAU’s and other university and college admission applications. ^{upressonline.com/2021/04/ban-the-box-town-hall-discusses-removing-criminal-history-application-questions/}

At Yale University in Connecticut, efforts are underway to ban-the-box on Yale’s admission applications but no longer on the Common Application widely used in higher education.

From Yale Daily News on April 1, 2021:

During the 2019-2020 admissions cycle, the Common Application permanently removed its criminal history question. However, Yale still includes a criminal history question in the Yale-specific section of the Common Application. The question asks applicants, “Have you ever been convicted of, or pled guilty or no contest to, a misdemeanor or felony, or are there any criminal charges pending against you?” ^{yaledailynews.com/blog/2021/04/01/justice-impact-movement-ycc-call-on-yale-to-ban-the-box-in-admissions/}

Ban-the-Box laws across the country affecting employment applications have been occurring for many years now but removing the box on higher education institutes like Colleges and Universities is a much newer phenomenon. The mentality that criminal background records can become a huge obstacle for people to get jobs also exists for the same kind of people to get accepted to a College or University. As public perception in the USA has been changing more and more people understand that getting these kind of people employed or enrolled at a place of higher learning is better for the community at large and also helps with avoiding recidivism.

To read more about this subject read recent press release: Ban the Box Goes to College: The Next Evolution in Eliminating the Question of Criminal History

Recently Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Rep. David Trone (D-MD) presented the Workforce Justice Act, an act that would mandate the removal of the criminal history question on employment applications. The time may be now for a successful passage of the Workforce Justice Act, and hiring managers should take immediate note, ensure their hiring policies are current, and work with a well-qualified third-party pre-employment background screening agency to remain compliant with laws governing hiring.

Ban-the-Box legislation has grown since the first bill emerged from Hawaii over 20 years ago. During the corresponding years many states and local municipalities have enacted similar laws requiring an elimination of the criminal past question on employment applications.

From HRDive.com on March 3, 2021:

There’s a growing push in the U.S. to remove the barriers standing in the way of job seekers with criminal histories.

States and cities have adopted ban-the-box legislation, which prohibits employers from requiring applicants to indicate whether they have a criminal history record. ^{hrdive.com/news/2nd-cir-wont-reconsider-whether-criminal-history-hiring-ban-disparately-i/596058/}

In early March of this year Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) and David Trone (D-MD) introduced the Work Justice Act into Congress.

From a press release from the Office of David Trone, on March 3, 2021:

Ahead of the House of Representatives’ historic vote on the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, Congressman David Trone (MD-06) and Congresswoman Maxine Waters (CA-43) introduced the Workforce Justice Act, which would encourage states to ‘ban the box’ on employment applications nationwide and give justice-impacted individuals a greater chance of gaining employment. ^{trone.house.gov/media/press-releases/reps-trone-waters-introduce-historic-legislation-ban-box-employment}

Changing how the question of criminal history and related criminal history reports will be a significant move. For companies large and small this may cause considerable concern. However, at some point after the initial employment application is filled out employers can pull criminal history reports on potential hires depending on how the ban-the-box legislation works in their jurisdiction, sometimes only after an initial offer is made can a criminal report be pulled.

To read more about this subject read recent press release: Growing Push for National Ban-the-Box Law Should Alert Hiring Managers

As the Covid pandemic continues all over the world in the USA it remains very important that employers still employ a thorough vetting process to help weed out malfeasant individuals during the hiring process. Across the country companies continue to hire new employees during the Covid pandemic and pre-employment background screening should be a part of the hiring process. Now, more than ever, hiring managers and HR departments must remain diligent in hiring practices and pre-employment background screening agencies should be utilized to provide legally compliant, accurate, and up-to-date information.

During the current economic upheaval related to the Covid pandemic, it is important to note that the laws governing pre-employment background screening have not been put on moratorium or relaxed. All laws that govern the use of public records (such as criminal background records) as related to background screening, remain fully intact. The laws, policies and regulations governing pre-employment background screening have not changed during the pandemic.

From Lexology.com (Aug. 20, 20):

Don’t ignore federal and state background check laws while waiting for the dust to settle on this pandemic! Here is what employers need to know about these requirements.

Generally speaking, before an employer may obtain a background check (also called a “consumer report”) from a third-party background check provider (also called a “consumer reporting agency”), the employer must make a clear and conspicuous written disclosure to the individual that a background check may be done. In fact, the document must consist “solely” of the disclosure… The candidate or employee must also provide written consent for the employer to obtain a background check report. Different requirements exist for “investigative consumer reports” (those based on interviews of the individual’s friends, neighbors and associates), and for employers regulated by the Department of Transportation (depending on their hiring practices). ^{lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=159821ee-3fa1-4344-89c1-ebd125262953}

It is important to note that employers still need written consent from a potential hire before conducting background checks on the individual. This letter is called an employee release form and if investigative consumer reports are to be had as well there also needs to be a clear explanation of these kinds of reports being conducted as well. In addition an employer also has to be cognizant of other laws regarding hiring practices like ban-the-box laws that may apply to them and may limit when in the hiring process certain background checks like criminal background checks can be conducted. All in all it is still a best practice for employers to utilize a professional background screening company to provide background check reports in a compliant and legal manner.

To read more about this subject read recent press release: During Covid-19 Background Screening Should Continue Without Change; States CriminalBackgroundRecords.com

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently released guidance for employers in the USA concerning existing employees and new hires relating to the Coronavirus Pandemic (COVID-19)… And any time a significant document regarding pre-employment background screening or managing employees in general, such as the recent guidance from the EEOC, companies should take immediate notice and work with a well-qualified third-party pre-employment background screening agency in order to remain compliant with law.

With the new Guidance companies now have procedures as how to manage a business in the midst of a pandemic. The EEOC is clear in how to manage potential illness and information related to such under the law and ADA.

From AkinGump.com (Apr. 01, 2020):

The EEOC’s guidance clarifies how, consistent with federal disability discrimination laws, employers may (i) screen new hires and employees for COVID-19, including by using temperature checks; (ii) protect the workforce by delaying start dates for new hires and removing employees from the workplace who present a risk of transmitting the virus to others; (iii) notify coworkers who may have been exposed to the virus due to an employee testing positive; and (iv) ensure that employees returning to work are fit to do so through certification by a health care provider. ^{akingump.com/en/news-insights/eeoc-issues-updated-guidance-on-covid-19-and-federal-disability-discrimination-laws.html}

Additionally COVID 19 is considered a “direct threat” as considered under the ADA.

From HKLaw.com (Mar. 25, 2020):

The ADA generally prohibits employers from discriminating against applicants or employees on the basis of disability. However, the ADA allows employers to exclude individuals from the workplace if they pose a “direct threat” to the health or safety of themselves or other employees. A direct threat is defined as someone who poses a “substantial risk” to the health or safety of other employees in the workplace that cannot be mitigated or eliminated by reasonable accommodation.

On March 21, 2020, the EEOC declared that the COVID-19 pandemic meets the definition of a direct threat. ^{https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2020/03/eeoc-updates-published-guidance-for-covid-19-pandemic-preparedness}

It is important that companies and organizations pay close attention to new rules and guidance on how to handle their employees during this crisis. They must remain vigilant in ensuring the people within their organizations and the people they come in contact through won’t be further spreading COVID-19.

Additionally when it comes to new hires the rules have not really changed as new hires must be treated fairly and equally throughout the vetting and hiring process, and must follow all guidance provided by the EEOC. With the COVID 19 outbreak those rules have been slightly altered but the overarching principle of equality and non-discrimination remain firm.

To read more about this subject read the recent press release: COVID19 and the EEOC Guidance

The Government of West Virginia kills a ban-the-box bill mostly by Republicans. Even though such laws have been enacted by many jurisdictions across the country that doesn’t mean it is a guarantee to pass. However, this process should still remind employers and hiring managers why they should ensure pre-employment background screening policies are current and compliant with law.

Hiring managers need to take note whenever a law governing the use of criminal background records are attempted, such as the recent action in West Virginia, and a best practice remains to work with a well-qualified third-party pre-employment background screening agency in order to remain compliant with existing law and aware of potential law.

The legislature in West Virginia recently went through an unsuccessful effort to implement Ban-the-Box legislation for all public agencies. Even when a legislative effort fails to implement a Ban-the-Box law, employers and hiring managers should take note and ensure existing policies are compliant with law.

Legislators in West Virginia recently attempted to enact a Ban-the-Box law that would force all public employers and agencies to ban the question of criminal history on applications. It explicitly dictates when the offer of employment can be made as well as when a background check that includes criminal history information can be conducted.

The movement behind eliminating criminal history from the employment application is to allow for greater access for employment from individuals with criminal histories.

From West Virginia’s Register-Herald on February 22, 2020 discussing the reasons behind Ban-the-Box in West Virginia:

Del. Sammi Brown, D-Jefferson, the bill sponsor, noted that criminal convictions are one symptom of the ongoing drug epidemic.

“It’s a public safety matter,” she said. “It’s a decreasing crime matter. It’s also getting folks back into the job force and making them fully capable and autonomous over their own lives, and you’re less likely to commit another crime if you’re gainfully employed. You’re less likely to go back into incarceration if you’re providing for yourself and your family, and we just want to give folks quality of life and dignity.” ^{register-herald.com/news/state_region/w-va-committee-passes-ban-the-box-legislation-for-public/article_45660d6f-942b-52a4-87e3-21c3652a0659.html}

But the push for Ban-the-Box legislation brings political challenges.

After introduction Republican’s killed the Ban-the-Box legislation.

From Register-Herald webpage on February 27, 2010:

Republicans in the West Virginia House of Delegates Rules Committee voted on Wednesday to kill a bill that would have prevented public employers from asking about a job applicant’s criminal history unless the applicant signed a waiver. ^{register-herald.com/news/state_region/republicans-remove-ban-the-box-legislation-from-agenda/article_1e6a611b-c861-5b08-b986-ee5c7c4e6313.html}

Even with the failed effort in West Virginia Ban-the-Box legislation will continue to find its way into different jurisdictions throughout the country, however there will continue to be challenges to all legislative actions. At this point it is still a best practice for all hiring managers and employers to check their current policies and procedures on pre-employment screening to ensure compliance with law.

To read more about this subject read the recent press release: Ban-the-Box Not Always Instant Legislative Passage, Employers Should Still Take Notice; Opines CriminalBackgroundRecords.com

The Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) says that communities become safer when people are able to earn a decent living.  They think that formerly incarcerated individuals (those with criminal background records) don’t recidivate because of their character, they do it because they can’t find employment and decent living conditions and therefore can’t provide for themselves or their families.

There have been several initiatives in the USA in the last decade or so to help aid ex-cons find gainful employment.  The most famous of which is the ban-the-box movement which eliminates the question of criminal history on certain employer’s job applications.  At this point it is clear that the majority of people in this country are willing to help individuals with certain criminal pasts get back on their feet and reintegrate into mainstream society in a positive way and getting these people good jobs becomes a top priority to complete a successful transition into a healthy and crime free societal way of life.

Housing and employment are critical in keeping formerly incarcerated individuals from going back to jail.

From a recent article in USA Today (Mar 19, 19):

“I think it’s the perfect storm,” Taylor {Johnny Taylor, CEO of SHRM, Society of Human Resource Management} says, noting that communities also become safer when people are able to legally earn a living. “People aren’t recidivating (or returning to criminal activity) simply because they’re bad actors. They’re recidivating because they can’t provide for their families.”  ^{usatoday.com/story/money/2019/03/19/business-commitment-hiring-those-with-criminal-record/3091463002/}

In recent years efforts have been made to legislate the question of criminal history from the front end of pre-employment background screening by removing the question for the initial application.  However, States like California and organizations like the SHRM are going even beyond that.

Recent surveys sponsored by SHRM have suggested that the general public is open to working with companies that hire formerly incarcerated individuals.

From FastCompany.com (Apr. 04, 19):

The Koch Institute and SHRM collaborated on yet another poll. It turns out that 78% of Americans are comfortable buying goods {sic} or services from a company who hires ex-cons to directly interact with them. Logically, that’s not surprising. Why wouldn’t people who are okay hiring ex-offenders or working alongside them also be fine patronizing places that acted similarly?  ^{fastcompany.com/90329075/whats-holding-companies-back-from-hiring-people-with-criminal-records}

Recently SHRM launched a new initiative and guidance for hiring organizations.

From FastCompany.com (Apr. 04, 19):

SHRM countered that in late January 2019 by launching Getting Talent Back to Work, an initiative that offers an online tool kit and additional guidance for all types of organizations.  ^ibid

The action taken by SHRM will certainly push the industry toward hiring and rehiring formerly incarcerated individuals.  And with this action a renewed focus on fair and equal pre-employment background screening will take place.  Criminal background checks will remain an important tool in the hiring process, but where and when criminal background records are reviewed will change, as will the pre-conceived stigma attached to criminal history.

To read more about this subject read recent press release found at:SHRM Pushes for Greater Inclusion of Formerly Incarcerated, a Step that Could Greatly Impact Hiring; Opines CriminalBackgroundRecords.com

As ride sharing services like those provided by companies like Uber experience tremendous growth across the country it is time to perform thorough background screening on the part-time drivers.  Just as employment screening of full-time employees helps mitigate risk and determine if a potential employee is qualified for a position the same kind of background screening should be performed on part-time ride sharing drivers as well.

Just because a person isn’t designated as a full-time employee doesn’t mean they don’t pose the same risks as a full-time employee.  These ride sharing drivers are entrusted with the lives of those they drive around and the safety of these passengers should be paramount.  Screening out potential ride sharing drivers that could pose a significant risk due to past behaviors is the best course of action for the overall safety of ride sharing customers.  These part time workers should be vetted the same as full-time employees prior to letting them drive around customers.

Whether at the airport or around town ride sharing (or ride-hail) has had explosive growth over the past decade.  Uber, Lyft and other related companies dominate the short drive hire industry, an industry once dominated by taxi cabs.  The millions of people that use these services have grown to trust them for their safety.

And yet controversy lingers over the hiring of ride-hail/ride-share drivers.  Seemingly on a daily basis the news on the internet is filled with stories about attacks from drivers for ride-share companies.

A recent report by CNN suggests that incidents with Uber drivers have forced the company to create a Special Investigations Unit.

From CNN.com (Jan 22, 19):

According to CNN, the memo stated that the SIU team “manages nearly 1,200 cases per week,” and noted, “Although some reports shared with the SIU are frivolous and later found to have no merit or constitute fraud, we were told that most of the cases reported have some basis of substantiation.”

In the case of violence toward women, the number of instances that have already come to light—even compared to the total number of rides, which Uber estimates at 2 billion over the past two years—is cause enough for alarm.  ^{forbes.com/sites/janetwburns/2019/01/22/report-uber-investigators-faced-trauma-and-huge-caseloads-according-to-memo/#66b70cb427bd}

Thorough background screening of many drivers would be a considerable challenge and yet remains an essential task.  The very essence of background screening is risk mitigation.  Public safety should be a primary concern for ride-sharing companies, subsequently risk mitigation would be a critical outcome, and background screening would be an integral element within that risk mitigation program.  With so many ride sharing drivers out there and continued growth in this sector now is the time to mandate professional background screening on all drivers before they are allowed to cart around passengers.  The safety of the customers must be paramount for these ride sharing companies in order to prevent casualties and abuse.

To read more about this subject read recent press release: Thorough Background Screening of Ride Sharing Drivers Could Better Serve the Public; opines CriminalBackgroundRecords.com

Now that school is in full swing that means time for after school activities.  These activities include sports, clubs and the arts like music and theatre.  These extracurricular activities usually involve volunteer parent assistance.  And anytime you have adults spending time with an at-risk population like children there should be a thorough background check.  Every school utilizing volunteers should take all the necessary steps to ensure the safety of their children.  Having a thorough vetting process that includes criminal history checks, reference checks and the proper verifications is essential to securing the safety of the students.

A best practice for schools requiring volunteers to assist in afterschool activities is a thorough vetting process, one that includes a criminal background check.

At-risk populations, such as children or the elderly, are vulnerable to victimization. Schools using volunteers that interact with children must take steps to ensure their safety.

And the reasons are clear.

In Yadkinville, NC a school volunteer was arrested for alleged malicious behavior.

From JournalNow.com (Oct 02, 18):

A Starmount High School volunteer coach was arrested after being charged with sex offenses involving a student… journalnow.com/news/crime/volunteer-coach-at-yadkin-county-high-school-charged-with-sex/article_9f219f44-9ca9-59f3-8615-4743311e0cc6.html

Things are no different on the west coast.

From theCalifornian.com (Sep 20, 18):

In Salinas California a youth football coach faces “charges of gunning down a man in Chinatown two years ago.”  thecalifornian.com/story/news/2018/09/20/salinas-coach-murder-arrest-what-we-know-now/1362358002/

A potential conviction of murder would certainly preclude an individual from serving as a volunteer but in some areas of the country certain convictions would not lead to a failed background check or rejection from a volunteer role.

In New Hampshire…”A former Winnacunnet High School assistant football coach facing burglary charges was a convicted felon when hired by the school in 2017, but officials say the conviction would not necessarily have prevented him from working in education.”  seacoastonline.com/news/20181005/ex-whs-football-coach-had-prior-felony-convictions

The requirements and legalities of a volunteer background check can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.  A best practice is to work with a well-qualified third party background screening agency.

A solid and thorough background check can work as a barrier to potential predators from working around children as a volunteer.  Despite potential pushback, a best practice remains that all volunteers should be background checked by a well-qualified third-party background screening agency.

To read more about this subject read recent press release: Back to School; Back to Background Screening Volunteers

The background screening process may seem simple to those outside of human resource departments.  The process seems to be placing an Ad for a job position, then sorting through resumes, then having interviews for the candidates that look the most promising and then picking the best person for the job and hiring them.  This process as highlighted appears to be straight forward and rudimentary.   However, every employer needs to understand the laws that govern the employment screening industry and must remain compliant with such laws and guidelines to avoid legal action from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and other agencies.  These type of agencies work to ensure that the hiring process is non-discriminatory and that all applicants have a fair chance at gainful employment.

The truth is that hiring is a complicated process these days as employers and hiring agents need to make sure their hiring process is legal and ethical and does not conflict with US Federal, State and Local laws and guidance’s.  The core of the hiring process is employment screening both pre-employment screening and post-employment screening.  This process is essential to any sound hiring practices and helps verify information on a resume and looks into the life experience and background data of a prospective employee.  Employers should utilize a third party background screening company to help them gain access to these necessary background reports and also to assist employers in creating or maintaining background screening policies that are compliant with all pertinent laws and regulations.

The use of public records, specifically consumer credit reports, is regulated by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and is enforced predominantly by the US Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The FCRA also has clear rules in its section covering employment background checks.  It states that all employers using consumer reports including criminal history reports must get written permission from the job applicant to run the background checks and must tell the applicant if the criminal record report was in-part or wholly responsible for the applicant not getting hired.  This adverse action letter must be given to the applicant along with a summary of their rights under the FCRA and the applicant has a right to dispute these records along with other rights.

Other than credit information consumer reports like criminal history reports are protected and enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under the authority of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its various updates and expansions.  There are clear rules that employers have to abide by when selecting new employees.  The FCRA and EEOC make it clear how criminal records are to be utilized during the employment screening process through its documents and guidance’s.  In the end it is a best practice for employers to work with employment screening companies both for gaining access to pertinent background reports like criminal reports, SSN reports, driving records, sex offender reports and various other reports or verifications/reference checks as well as to help them create or maintain a legally compliant background screening and hiring policy.

To read more about this subject read recent press release found here.