According to an informal study, only 20% of job applicants had no criminal or driving history. 52% of applicants with one offense had multiple issues in their history. Additionally, 30% of resumes contain inaccurate information about work experience, education, or job titles. Thorough background checks including criminal, driving, and education/employment histories can help identify concerning inaccuracies or issues in an applicant's background. However, employers must ensure background check policies do not have an unlawful discriminatory impact and consider the nature and severity of any offenses. Two ongoing lawsuits are challenging hiring policies based on past arrests.

1. www.BusinessControls.com
Do You Trust A Resume?
According to the United States Department of Commerce, 30% of small
businesses fail due to employee theft.[1] Theft, negligence, and improper hiring
practices are often the thorn in the side of every business executive. Lawsuits
resulting from negligent hiring practices are handed out with higher price tags,
and they are becoming more common as employees and the economy struggle.
As such it is even more important to know your employees. In an informal study
conducted by Business Controls, Inc., it was found that of the individuals who
were reviewed for a pre-employment screening, only 20% had no felony,
misdemeanor, or infraction history. It was found that 36% had a driving history
infraction, 22% had a DUI, 36% had a misdemeanor and 4% had a felony. 52%
of individuals who had one type of record had multiple instances of other criminal
or negative driving history. While 36% of applicants denied ever having pled
guilty, bonded out, or pled no contest at any point prior, 66% falsely indicated
that they had never done so, or did not accurately reflect their history regarding
prior convictions.
When reviewing the resumes of potential hires, you often see the best an
individual has to offer. Unfortunately, it is not uncommon for employees to over-
exaggerate their resume. Bankrate.com offered statistics to suggest that
approximately 30% of resumes had some sort of distortion in the information
presented.[2] The most common areas of exaggeration include employment
duration, experience, degrees and education received, and job titles. When
screening your applicants, be sure the application is completely and accurately
filled out. Also, be sure to call educational institutions and employers to confirm
titles, experience, and employment duration. Employers should be conscious of
concerning information, such as information that does not accurately reflect the
details provided on the application, or employees who are not eligible for re-hire.
While it has become more common for organizations to release less information
when providing employment verification, it does not hurt to ask for information
beyond what is offered or to offer to provide a copy of a signed release, which
should accompany every application.
Another important search to conduct is of applicants’ criminal history as it can
provide the most information regarding misdemeanors, felonies, potential
substance abuse history, as well as weapons charges or violent crime. A driving
history is also important for those employees who will use a company vehicle, as
well as to reflect substance abuse or weapons charges. For applicants working
with at-risk populations such as children or the elderly, or for those who will enter
customers’ homes, it is important to complete a search of registered sex
offenders.
5995 Greenwood Plaza Boulevard, Suite 110 ● Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111 ● Office 303.526.7600 ● 800.650.7005 ● Fax 303.526.7757

2. www.BusinessControls.com
When reviewing an applicant’s pre-employment background, employers should
look for a number of specific “red flags.” Felonies, misdemeanors, and driving
infractions are easily recognizable concerns. Inflation of employment or
education history are concerning in that they may “cover up” unsavory or
problematic gaps in the applicant’s history. This may be reflected by employers
or educational institutions that are unable to find a record for a former employee
or student. Hesitation regarding eligibility for re-hire is a concern, as it may reflect
a history of misconduct, performance issues, or other issues that warrant further
questioning. It should be noted that resume and background inflation are not
limited only to lower-level employees. A 2007 article by Bloomberg
Businessweek indicated that approximately 16% of executive resumes and
approximately 30% of management-level resumes contain inaccurate
information.[3]
While there are many types of pre-employment background services available to
organizations, it is worth noting that the industry is a “buyer beware” market in
that you “get what you pay for.” There are many quick internet background
services available; however, they do not guarantee a name or information match,
which may lead to a lot of data sifting on the part of the organization. Similarly,
many of the almost 3,200 counties do not report to a central location, such as a
state or national database. As such, many “statewide” and “nationwide” searches
are approximately 60% accurate to a name-match only. The allure of these
database searches is that they are quick and inexpensive; however, it has led to
a false sense of security in the information returned.[4] Hand-record searches,
while more expensive, guarantee accuracy and information matches relevant to
the applicant. If you are going to invest the time and money into conducting pre-
employment backgrounds, you should be sure to do your homework and invest in
a quality product. Spending money at the forefront may save your organization
millions of dollars in a negligence lawsuit later.
Of note, two current court cases are testing the extent to which criminal records
can be used in a pre-employment background check. Specifically, in Hudson v.
First Transit Inc., Adrienne Hudson, an African American woman, was terminated
after a background check revealed she had served 4 days in jail for a charge that
was subsequently dismissed. Ms. Hudson claims First Transit’s criminal records
policy has an adverse affect on African American and Latino applicants and
employees. Notably, First Transit does not consider the nature or age of the
offense, or the relevance of the offense to the job.
In Johnson v. Locke, Eugene Johnson and Evelyn Houser, who are both African
American, were denied temporary employment opportunities with the United
States Census Bureau based on arrest records retrieved from the FBI database.
5995 Greenwood Plaza Boulevard, Suite 110 ● Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111 ● Office 303.526.7600 ● 800.650.7005 ● Fax 303.526.7757

3. www.BusinessControls.com
The FBI database does not provide information about the nature of the charges
or if the charges were subsequently dropped; thus the Census Bureau relies on
the applicants to provide information about these records. Both Mr. Johnson, who
was provided with inaccurate information from the county court, and Ms. Houser,
who was never formally convicted of any charge, were denied employment with
the Census Bureau in spite of being otherwise qualified applicants. As such, they
claim that the Census Bureau’s hiring practices are inherently discriminatory.
In 1982, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a
statement affirming that
“an employer's policy or practice of excluding individuals from employment on the
basis of their conviction records has an adverse impact on Blacks and
Hispanics in light of statistics showing that they are convicted at a rate
disproportionately greater than their representation in the population.
Consequently, the Commission has held and continues to hold that such a policy
or practice is unlawful under Title VII in the absence of a justifying business
necessity.”[5]
A poll by the Society for Human Resource Management (January 2010) noted
that at least nine out of ten HR professionals consider the nature and severity of
the criminal activity, the number of convictions, the relevance to the position they
are applying for, and the time since the criminal activity, which are the necessary
considerations to ensure hiring decisions are in compliance with EEOC
guidelines. Further, over half of employers offer the applicant an opportunity to
explain any adverse information found before making a hiring decision.
Pre-employment verification has quickly become an industry best practice. It is
important to know who you are hiring and what their backgrounds look like.
Protect yourself, your employees, and your organization by developing and
complying with a pre-employment verification process. Reduce the risk of legal
action due to improper hiring and negligence. Finally, be sure that the employees
you hire are who they say they are.
[1] http://www.employerschoiceonline.com/resources/screening-stats.html
[2] http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/biz/Biz_ops/20000515.asp
[3] http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/oct2007/ca2007104_799274.htm
[4] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7467732/
[5] http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/convict1.html
5995 Greenwood Plaza Boulevard, Suite 110 ● Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111 ● Office 303.526.7600 ● 800.650.7005 ● Fax 303.526.7757