Getting personal

Even if the small trespassing incident or the delinquent credit card bill gets pushed out of mind, such a past indiscretion is never out of sight.

And it’s at the fingertips of employers, who increasingly are going beyond verifying previous employment and talking to references to digging up more personal history about someone they may hire.

Criminal background, credit standing, driving record, marital status, citizenship, education level, licensure, involvement in lawsuits, previous residences, work ethic, personality traits — all are available with a little digging.

“All kinds of employers for all kinds of positions are doing background checks as a defensive measure. The thought is, if you don’t screen your applicants and others in the industry do, you may end up being an employer of choice for undesirable applicants,” said Lorrie Ray.

She heads a department at Mountain States Employers Council that does pre-employment screening. The Denver-based nonprofit, which has an office in Colorado Springs, helps employers with human resource issues and management development.

The percentage of U.S. employers doing some type of background checking jumped from 51 percent in 1995 to 96 percent in 2004, according to a study by the Society for Human Resource Management.

Employers are investing time and money to find out whether a job candidate is a convicted sex offender or has demonstrated aggressive behavior as a form of protection, said Richard Schur, president and chief executive officer of Magnum HR of Colorado Springs.

“There’s a fear that if employers don’t do this, there will be consequences — the potential exists to be named in a negligence lawsuit. In case I’m sued as an employer, I need to demonstrate I did everything I could to protect my employees and clients,” said Schur, a former police detective who now specializes in workplace investigations.

Employers can be held liable if an employee does something during work hours, either on purpose or by accident, to harm a customer or another employee, said Ray, the Mountain States expert.

“You can’t erase liability altogether, but you can hire people who are less likely to have some kind of incident,” Ray said. “The idea in background checking is, past behavior is predictive of future behavior.”

So a hospital probably would avoid an anesthesiologist with a history of drug use. A store would not want a cashier known to dip into the drawer, Schur said.

“We’ve saved some employers from some bad hires — not necessarily people with a criminal conviction or bad driving record, but things like sexual harassment or misuse of funds. And they came across in the interview as the most charming, credible person,” Ray said.

Employers want to end up with the right fit for the job, which isn’t always apparent from an application and an interview, said Rick Jones, who with his wife, Marianne, owns Express Personnel Services in Colorado Springs.

“Background checks can reveal information about applicants that may influence our decision,” he said.

More than half of applicants pad, fudge or outright lie on a resume or application form, according to the Society for Human Resource Management.

Lying on a job application is often worse than having a questionable item turn up in a background check, Schur said, because lying is considered a character flaw.

“People shouldn’t be afraid — having something in your background doesn’t necessarily disqualify you from a job,” he said.

In a CareerBuilder.com survey, 93 percent of U.S. employers said they did not hire a candidate after discovering a lie on their resume.

Red flags crop up 20 to 30 percent of the time in Ray’s background screenings, from the obvious criminal activity to the more subtle — a past problem with an applicant getting along with co-workers or questioning authority, for example.

Nationally, about one-third of background checks reveal something that might prevent the applicant from being hired, Jones said. At his local employment agency, it’s about 20 percent of job candidates.

At the family-owned Peoples National Bank, criminal and credit checks come back with a discrepancy once in a while, said Linda Grosso, human resource manager.

But an online personality and workhabit assessment that’s the first step in the financial company’s hiring process eliminates 25 to 30 percent of job applicants, she said.

“Answers to the questions give you a feel for the person’s honesty, integrity and reliability,” Grosso said.

Even though not all workers directly handle money, the bank checks backgrounds on candidates for all positions, from maintenance workers to the CEO.

“Our employees have access to customers’ personal financial information, so we do background checks so we don’t bring on someone with a criminal background or someone who has bad credit,” Grosso said. “We don’t want to give anyone a chance to embezzle or otherwise hurt the integrity of our company.”

Employers say most job seekers don’t balk at a background check — many have come to expect it, especially if they work in an industry where it’s commonplace, such as schools, day-care centers, hospitals, retirement homes and banks.

If an applicant has a problem with the employer doing a background check, that is a red flag, experts say.

After working five years in the insurance industry, Amber Averill of State Farm is used to the idea.

“I understand the need, and I don’t mind because I don’t have anything in my background,” she said. “I think there should be more done — I’d like the cable guy who comes to my house to have had one.”

Job seekers have the right to know that their background is being checked, Schur said. A waiver usually is found in the small print at the end of a job application, which the candidate signs. Some information is protected by federal privacy laws, including health care information and social security numbers, he said.

Schur thinks all employers should do background checks. Some employers, particularly small-business owners, assume job candidates are trustworthy, which can be a mistake, he said.

“Most employees don’t realize how far we can go. On the flip side, most employers don’t go far enough because they don’t understand the possible consequences,” he said. “Everything I do in checking backgrounds bodes to the end result of what will a jury think.”

DETAILS

For more information on background checks:

- Mountain States Employers Council, 667-0677

- Magnum HR, 210-6230

- Society for Human Resource Management’s Web site, www.shrm.org

SURVEY SAYS

More results of a 2004 Reference and Background Check Survey by the Society for Human Resource Management involving 345 human resource professionals around the nation:

- 85 percent always verify eligibility to work in the United States

- 68 percent always check criminal records

- 53 percent always verify former job titles

- 37 percent always check former job responsibilities

- 34 percent verify schools, colleges and universities

- 30 percent always check drug records

- 19 percent always do credit checks

- 19 percent always verify past salaries

SURVEY SAYS

Results of a 2004 Reference and Background Check Survey by the Society for Human Resource Management involving 345 human resource professionals around the nation:

- 96 percent conduct some form of background or reference check on job applicants

- 66 percent always verify former employers and dates of previous employment

- 55 percent believe reference checking is somewhat effective in identifying poor performers

- 41 percent always verify applicants’ credentials (licenses, certifications)

- 35 percent always verify candidates’ degrees

- 23 percent always check for malpractice or professional disciplinary action

- 2 percent always verify articles published, speaking engagements

HOW CHECKS WORK

-Big risk, big check:

Generally, the higher the liability risk associated with the job, such as upper management and high-security positions, the deeper the background investigation and the more costly to the employer.

-Basic checks:

The most basic check, of criminal history, costs about $50, said Richard Schur, president and chief executive officer of Magnum HR of Colorado Springs.

-Costly checks:

A full-scale investigation can cost $300-$400, said Lorrie Ray with the Mountain States Employers Council.

-Timing is key:

An upper-management candidate may be vying for several positions at once, and a background check may stall an offer. Some employers make an offer contingent on the results of the background check, Ray said.

-Quick results likely:

Investigators work quickly, Schur said, and typically are able to turn over results within 24 to 48 hours, perhaps longer if interstate records need to be obtained.

ESSENTIAL DIGGING

At a minimum, employers should check job candidates for:

-Criminal background:

There is no central source of information on criminal records, but employers can obtain records from county governments and state authorities. Look for convictions, not arrests.

-Eligibility to work:

Immigration form I-9 tells employers which documentation needs to be presented, such as a driver’s license or passport.

-Diplomas, licenses:

Check through the institutions that awarded them.

-References:

Call references listed on job application, ask those people questions about the person’s work habits, personality traits, performance. Then ask them for names of other people who know or worked with the job candidate. Go through this several times until you reach someone who will give a completely objective picture about the job candidate.

SOURCE: Richard Schur, Magnum HR