The increase of ban-the-box legislation as well as the potential of costly legal action should alert hiring managers and HR departments to work with a well-qualified third-party background screening agency.
WALTHAM, Mass. (PRWEB) April 25, 2018
Recently Target Corporation came to a proposed settlement in a civil case regarding alleged use of discriminatory pre-employment background screening policies and could potentially cost the company $3.7 million dollars. Adam Almeida, President and CEO of CriminalBackgroundRecords.com opines: “The potential cost of this proposed settlement alone should alert hiring managers and HR Departments to immediately review all hiring policies, especially pre-employment background checks, in order to remain fully compliant with law.”
Across the country “Ban-the-Box” legislation concerning criminal history information continues to expand and the discrimination case against Target Corporation highlights the trepidations of ban-the-box proponents.
From the Wall Street Journal (Apr. 05, 18):
Target Corp. has agreed to pay more than $3.7 million and overhaul job-screening guidelines for hourly workers to resolve a civil-rights class-action complaint that alleged the company’s policies regarding criminal background checks were too broad and discriminated against African-Americans and Latinos. (1)
“Ban-the-Box” legislation compels the removal of criminal history questions on applications and pushes the actual criminal history search to after a conditional offer of employment is made. In many instances “Ban-the-Box” legislation dictates whether or not a criminal records history search can be conducted. While certain positions require criminal history search, many may not.
Almeida states: “The increase of ban-the-box legislation as well as the potential of costly legal action should alert hiring managers and HR departments to work with a well-qualified third-party background screening agency in order to maintain compliance with all current law and legislation governing employment background screening.”
Background screening remains an important tool in the hiring process but companies must remain compliant with law.
From a New York Times article restating a comment from Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel and the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund: ““Target’s background check policy was out of step with best practices and harmful to many qualified applicants who deserved a fair shot at a good job…” (2)
Almeida adds: “Background screening can prove to be invaluable in validating and verifying applicant information.”
From the Wall Street Journal and a related comment from Miss Ifill (Apr. 05, 18):
“Criminal background information can be a legitimate tool for screening job applicants, but only when appropriately linked to relevant questions such as how long ago the offense occurred and whether it was a nonviolent or misdemeanor offense,” (3)
Almeida confirms: “Pre-employment background screening remains a best practice for all employers, when conducted in a fair, lawful, and legally compliant manner.”
CriminalBackgroundRecords.com is a third-party background screening company with highly trained operators well versed in the needs and requirements of companies and organizations large and small utilizing public records, such as criminal background records, as part of a hiring process. Assisting companies in maintaining full compliance under the law is a central tenet of all client relationships with CriminalBackgroundRecords.com
Case Number: Case 1:18-cv-02993 (So New York District Court)