Internal thefts: OK to redo background checks? — Business Management Daily: Free Reports on Human Resources, Employment Law, Office Management, Office Communication, Office Technology and Small Business Tax Business Management Daily

Internal thefts: OK to redo background checks?

Get PDF file

by on
in Centerpiece,Employment Background Check,Human Resources

background checkHas your workplace experienced an increase in theft? If so, you’re probably exploring different loss-prevention measures—including taking a closer look at your current employees.

As this case shows, running new background checks on your current staff is not, by itself, a discriminatory act. Just make sure that before the checks begin, you set clear standards on how you will react to the results.

The safest bet is to adopt a multipronged approach that doesn’t just single out current employees with criminal records.

Recent case: A Texas-based trucking company began to experience a string of large-scale thefts, including the disappearance of truckloads of packages from the facility and tool theft from lockers.

In response, the company installed surveillance cameras, retooled locks and expanded its prehire criminal records screening. It then re­­fused to hire anyone with a criminal record it believed might make the applicant more likely to steal. This didn’t slow down the theft.

Then the company announced it would be reviewing the criminal records of all current employees. It established standards to ­deter­­­­mi­­ne whether current staff with records could keep their jobs. Factors included violent felony convictions, unlawful sexual behavior, theft, fraud, embezzlement, possession of stolen goods and workplace violence in the past 15 years.

Also on the list: any felony related to the sale, possession or distribution of illegal drugs or controlled substances in the past seven years.

Thomas, who is black, worked as a body technician. When he applied, he checked a box on his application that indicated he had been convicted of a crime in the past seven years. He wrote that his crime was marijuana possession.

At the time, convictions like his didn’t bar hiring.

When supervisors reviewed Thomas’ conviction as part of the new crackdown, they took into consideration that he had done jail time and believed he might have possessed more marijuana than usual for personal use. So Thomas was terminated under the new rules.

He sued, alleging race discrimination, and arguing that the company’s use of criminal records had a disparate impact on his race.

The court tossed out his case, saying the company took other steps to stem the theft losses before coming up with a new criminal-history policy, and it set consistent standards in its follow-through with the rules. (Dade v. ­GRA-GAR, No. 3:13-CV-0318, ND TX)

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Morgan P. Yarbrough April 9, 2015 at 6:06 pm

I’m curious as to whether the thievery ceased with Thomas’s discharge?

Reply

Adam Townsend April 8, 2015 at 3:24 pm

Re-screening your current employees at regular intervals can help your company avoid this kind of situation altogether. If your employees know that they may be subject to post-employment background screening, they may be encouraged to avoid conducting any activities that could result in their dismissal.

Additionally, this story raises an extremely important point in the employer’s responsibility to their employees when implementing post-hire screening programs. Employers can better protect their business interests by laying out policies and procedures for re-screening that are both detailed and consistent.

If you intend to conduct post-employment screenings on your employees, be sure to thoroughly research your options. Many third-party companies are available to provide guidance, so make sure you consider years of experience and professional accreditation when selecting a screening provider.

Reply

Leave a Comment

 

Previous post:

Next post: