search criminal records
A background check is essentially a verification procedure. It
is a method of investigating the past of an individual and his
achievements and failures for the purpose of recruitment. This
helps the employer to judge the validity of information
furnished by the prospective employee.
Any company must go through a proper and systematic background
checking before making a hiring decision. Background checks have
proved to be more beneficial and effective in comparison to
personal interviews and information provided by resumes and
Reference Letters.
Background checks are organized methods of investigation, where
the company follows a particular course of action by conducting
a research work as par requirement disregarding additional
unnecessary details.
Click here to read more from this article
...
Employers Requesting Background Checks
This week's job searching tip addresses a question from one of our readers about about background checks. While many employers will hire people without them, some companies require background checks on some or all of their potential hires.
QUESTION FROM A SUBSCRIBER:
Q: If a person receives a job offer, and is told that there is going to be a drug test and background check, what are the items relevant in the background check? At what point can a prospective employer reject a person?
- M.B.
Dear M.B.,
When it comes to background checks, the general rule is the background check needs to be relevant to the position you're being hired for. If the background check being conducted is checking for information that is not very relevant to how well/competent the applicant is likely to be in the job, it could be challenged - especially if the negative results of such a check would tend to disproportionately affect a protected class of job candidates (e.g. women, minorities, etc.).
Generally, even if you have been convicted of a crime, that fact alone should not disqualify you from a position unless the crime you committed would tend to make you a less qualified applicant for the job in question. For example, if someone was convicted for child molestation, they would probably not be a good candidate for a child care position, and an employer would in most cases be fine with using that as a reason not to hire the person. On the other hand, if someone was convicted of failing to taxes, it would be more difficult for an employer to use that as a reason not to hire them for that same type of position.
Another area where employers can run into trouble is with credit checks. If an employer requests a credit check of an employee who will not have any fiduciary responsibilities, it could be difficult for them to show that it was truly warranted. As an example, if ABC Company institues a policy to require credit checks on all their job candidates before hiring and a year later it turns out that a disproprotionate number of the people they rejected were minorities, one of the minority candidates would probably be successful in suing the company for damages if they could show that credit worthiness is not a good predictor of job performance for the type of position they applied for.
To address the question about your specific situation: the company you applied for would probably be on solid ground to reject you on the basis of a positive drug test provided that the drug test is administered to all job applicants (and not just job applicants that would likely be in a protected class).
For information about reference checks on your prior employers, check out this article:
http://www.jobsearchinfo.com/refs.htm
About the Author
Scott Brown is the author of the Job Search Handbook (http://www.JobSearchHandbook.com). As editor of the HireSites.com weekly newsletter on job searching, Scott has written many articles on the subject. He wrote the Job Search Handbook to provide job seekers with a complete yet easy to use guide to finding a job effectively.
Everyday the news tells of violence in the workplace and sex offenders on the prowl. The scary thing is that you usually never know who these people might be until it's too late. How many times have you seen an interview of someone describing an accused criminal as the nicest person you could ever know? They would have never suspected this person of committing any crime until the crime had already been commited. A criminal background check could have easily put up a red flag about this person and it might have
Click here to read more from this article
...
Scott Brown
public records in
The purpose of personal background checks is to get a feel for the applicant's character. Personal and professional references are a good starting point, however, experts in the investigative field caution employers on using this method solely. Prospective employees are obviously going to give references of people whom they trust will provide a good character reference for them. Those references may not necessarily be fabricating information regarding the applicant; they simply may not know pertinent information about him or her.
Another method employer's use is obtaining a credit report on the prospective employee. While privacy advocates argue the necessity in
Click here to read more from this article
...
With the recent corporate scandals of Enron and WorldCom, the
popularity and necessity of executive background checks has
greatly increased. In order to protect themselves from potential
disasters later on, many companies are now requiring extensive
investigation on prospective executives to verify their
employment and educational history as well as information
regarding any past wrongdoings.
As with any other type of pre-employment background
investigations, employers need to have the appropriate
disclosures available. According to Federal law and the Fair
Credit Reporting Act, applicants must sign and date specific
disclosures regarding the various types of background checks
employers desire. It is important to respect the privacy of
potential employees while maintaining the company's
Click here to read more from this article
...
| 
