The City of New Orleans just recently passed an ordinance preventing city contractors from asking about potential new hires criminal history on their job applications.  This new “Ban-the-Box” legislation adds the city to the growing list of jurisdictions currently having such laws.

Ban-the-Box laws were created to give individuals with a criminal background record a fair shot at getting hired.  Instead of immediately disqualifying a candidate based on having a criminal record it is thought that an employer would evaluate the candidate by their skills and experience thus increasing the chances of attaining gainful employment.

The City of New Orleans recently joined a growing list of cities and related jurisdictions with “Ban-the-Box” legislation.

From TheAdvocate.com (Oct 18, 18):

The New Orleans City Council unanimously passed an ordinance that prevents city contractors from asking about potential hires’ criminal history on their job applications, a measure that extends an existing City Hall policy to people who want to work under employers with city contracts, cooperative endeavor grants or grant funding.

Councilmembers and proponents argue that applicants should be considered for employment on the merits of their skill and experience, not be automatically removed as a candidate because of their criminal history. (The measure does not prevent employers from performing background checks.)  _{theadvocate.com/gambit/new_orleans/news/article_15651392-d30e-11e8-8ac6-67759ad93438.html}

“Ban-the-Box” legislation relates to the use of criminal background records as part of an employment application.

Typically applications include the “Box” to check if the applicant had a criminal past.  Just by checking this box is it suggested that many applicants make it no further in the hiring process.

From the National Employment Law Project (Sep 25, 18):

Nationwide, 33 states and over 150 cities and counties have adopted what is widely known as “ban the box” so that employers consider a job candidate’s qualifications first—without the stigma of a conviction or arrest record. Borne out of the work of All of Us or None, these initiatives provide applicants a fair chance at employment by removing the conviction history question from job applications and delaying background checks until later in the hiring process.  _{nelp.org/publication/ban-the-box-fair-chance-hiring-state-and-local-guide/}

Background checks like criminal background checks are still conducted but are delayed until the end of the hiring process.

In a similar move Duke University has joined other Universities and New Orleans in “Banning-the-box.”

From DukeChronicle.com (Nov 01, 18):

By “banning the box”—and therefore no longer requiring applicants to disclose their criminal records when initially applying—Duke follows a number of similar policies adopted at other colleges.

The move came after other university systems such as the State University of New York system and the University of California system banned the box for all job applicants in September 2016 and July 2017, respectively. Louisiana and Maryland have also instituted statewide bans disallowing colleges from asking about crimes during the application process, and the Common Application is set to follow suit for next year’s college application season.  _{dukechronicle.com/article/2018/11/dukes-move-to-ban-the-box-follows-trend-established-by-other-states-universities}

A best practice for Universities and cities, such as New Orleans, remains that a well-qualified third-party background screening agency be utilized in vetting new students and employees.

Removing the box on a job application that asks about a person’s criminal history gives them a better chance at being considered for a job.  Ban-the-box laws like the one just recently adopted by the City of New Orleans relates to the use of criminal background records as part of the employment application process.

Although recently passed ban-the-box legislation by another US City and another University doesn’t necessarily eliminate the use of a criminal background check in the employment screening or applicant screening process it certainly would delay it until for instance an initial offer was made.

At some point background-screening-reports will still be used to vet new students or employees and it is still a best practice for Cities, Universities and any other US Jurisdiction or Organization to make sure whenever they vet a new student or employee that they are using a well-qualified professional third-party background screening agency to attain the most current, comprehensive an accurate reports.

To read more about why more cities and Universities are enacting ban-the-box laws across the USA and why using a professional employment screening company helps keep them legally compliant read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  NOLO & Duke Join Growing List of Cities & Universities “Banning-the-box” on Employment & Academic Applications

Every year in the USA lawsuits involving action by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and based upon the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) come to trial.  Regardless of the result of a court trial, litigation is a costly expenditure for a company.

The use of public records such as criminal background records in the hiring process or rental process are regulated by certain entities and specific rules apply to when and how they can be used.  Additionally, employment screening utilizing employment background checks like criminal background checks are not just regulated by a number of agencies including the EEOC but also by State and Local laws; enforcement of these laws means these entities can sue companies that violate any applicable law.

Further, employment screening practices are regulated by a number of agencies and laws governing the use of public records including the proper use of criminal background records and can vary between jurisdictions.  Well-qualified background screening agencies understand that the actual screening process can be very complicated and requires a number of steps that are regulated by law.  That is why partnering with a reputable employment screening company can greatly assist in avoiding hiring-related litigation.

Proper and compliant background screening is a critical tool utilized by hiring managers to make a well-informed and legally compliant decision on a job applicant.  The information drawn from a typical pre-employment background check can verify and confirm information provided by an applicant.  From credit worthiness to criminal history data, a background check can be extremely valuable to an employer.

As has been seen in recent court cases the cost of hiring-related litigation can be very expensive; however if employment screening practices are legally complaint and background reports obtained are used according to Federal, State and Local mandates the whole ordeal of going to trial can be avoided.  A best practice remains for an employer to work with a well-qualified third-party background screening agency to remain fully compliant with all existing laws governing employment screening.

In 2012 the EEOC released guidance to employers regarding how to lawfully manage the use of criminal history records as part of pre-employment background screening.  This action created some concern for hiring managers.

A Texas court took up the matter and pushed back against the EEOC in a lawsuit, State of Texas v. EEOC, No. 5:13–CV-255, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30558 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 1, 2018).

From Lexology.com (Feb 28, 18):

The Court granted the EEOC’s motion for summary judgment, and denied Texas’s motion for summary judgment and request for declaratory relief. First, the Court opined that Texas did not have a right to maintain and enforce its laws and policies that absolutely bar convicted felons (or certain categories of convicted felons) from serving in any job that the State and its Legislature deemed appropriate.  lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=24076a67-0f45-44e8-ade3-976815d65eba

In three recent cases brought under the guise of FCRA enforcement employers prevailed. In Lewis v Southwest Airlines; Branch v Geico; and, Culberson v Walt Disney results varied but the ultimate outcome shows the employer victorious.  jdsupra.com/legalnews/employers-prevail-in-fcra-class-actions-49345/

But at what financial cost?

Larger companies with legal departments can bear the brunt of a court case brought forth due to background screening concerns.  But this prospect for small to mid-size companies could be financially devastating.  Maintaining compliance with laws governing the use of employment background checks is a prudent best practice.

From JDSupra.com discussing conclusions from recent FCRA related lawsuits (as cited above) (Mar 1, 18):

The law in this area is dynamic, and employers should continue to monitor case law and regulatory developments.  To mitigate risk, employers should also arrange for a privileged review of their disclosure documents and pre-adverse action notices and procedure.  In addition, employers should continue to be mindful of their obligations under expanding state and local ban-the-box laws, which intersect with the FCRA’s required processes.  jdsupra.com/legalnews/employers-prevail-in-fcra-class-actions-49345/

Ultimately a best practice remains for companies large and small to work with a well-qualified third-party background screening agency in order to remain fully compliant with all laws governing the use of reports related to background screening and the practice of background screening itself.

EEOC and FCRA lawsuits can be very expensive for any company and may be avoidable by partnering with a professional well-qualified background screening agency.  Having a legally compliant hiring process can help thwart lawsuits and protect a company from financial risk.

Decisions related to hiring, firing, promoting or reassigning should be backed by compliant employment background checks that abide by current laws including, Federal, State and Local laws as well as remaining compliant with regulations enforced by the EEOC and based on the FCRA.  Knowing the rules and regulations pertaining to the hiring process and partnering with a reputable and highly qualified employment background screening company that also knows the rules and regulations required by law is the safest route in mitigating risk.  Then all it comes down to is the proper implementation of such polices and that can help any company or organization in the USA avoid costly litigation and at the same time give all job applicants a fair chance at gainful employment.

To read more about the EEOC and FCRA and how companies and organizations in the USA can avoid costly litigation due to improper and non-compliant hiring policies and procedures read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release: EEOC and FCRA Lawsuits Can Be Costly & Might Be Avoidable

Arizona Governor Doug Ducey just recently signed an executive order banning the question of criminal history on state employment applications thus joining many of States and Municipalities that already have enacted ban-the-box related laws.  This trend of legislative action regarding the use of criminal background records as part of pre-employment background screening has been spreading across the county.  The goal of such litigation is to help individuals in the USA that have a criminal record have a better chance of getting employed.

Typically ban-the-box laws prohibit employers from inquiring about criminal history on their job applications, thus banning the question of criminal history from the job application.  At some point, usually after a conditional offer of employment is made the employer can then perform a criminal background check.

This new legislation signed by the Governor of Arizona highlights an urgent need for all hiring managers and human resource personnel to work with a professional employment screening agency to ensure compliance with existing laws as well as new potential laws.

When Arizona Governor Doug Ducey signed an executive order banning the box on state applications the state joined dozens of other states and municipalities in delaying when the question of criminal history can be asked as part of the pre-employment background screening process and signals to Arizona business, as well as businesses across the country, that now is the time to review any existing pre-employment background screening policies to ensure full compliance with existing and potential law.

Ban the box moves when the question of criminal history can be asked.  It goes from being a part of the application process to a question asked post-offer and one that has to be very specific to the position in question.

From Lexology.com (Nov. 07, 17):

On November 6, Arizona governor Doug Ducey signed an executive order making Arizona the most recent state to adopt a “ban the box” law. The state joins Pima County and Tucson – Arizona localities that have already joined the “ban the box” movement.

Under the new policy, state agencies will delay questions related to an employment applicant’s criminal record until after the initial stages of interviewing (i.e., until an applicant has submitted an application and received an initial interview).  lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e47d3ced-bb50-4bfb-aa34-2882d5242805

Ban the box policy is designed to assist formerly incarcerated individuals gain a more equal footing during the application process.

If the question of Criminal History is delayed in theory the application process should become more equal.  Studies have shown that many applications that have the box checked regarding criminal history are often ignored or discarded, thus creating an inequitable hiring situation for formerly incarcerated individuals or those with criminal records that did not result in imprisonment.

It is critical that businesses and organizations ensure their hiring policies are current with existing law and the action by Arizona is a clear indication that these policies should be reviewed by a third-party background screening company as changes in laws governing the use of criminal background records in pre-employment background screening effects all businesses and organizations hiring policies and procedures.

To read more about Arizona’s new ban-the-box bill and how the trend to help previously incarcerated individuals and those with criminal records get a job and how this strategy is aimed at leveling the playing field for job applicants read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release: http://www.criminalbackgroundrecords.com/news/2017-11-22-Ban-the-Box-Activity-Highlights-Immediate-Call%20to-Action-for-Hiring-Managers.html

Unfortunately it is far too often in the news we hear about employed and volunteer youth sports coaches abusing their young players.  In some cases these coaches have been convicted of crimes against the youth in the past, and if proper background screening was in place prior to hiring either an employed coach or volunteer a second attack could have been prevented.  Employment screening for employed and volunteer youth coaches is a valuable tool utilized across a wide variety of industries and has proven successful in creating safe work environments.  It can also help prevent malfeasant individuals from having unsupervised time with youth sport athletes.

Hiring managers know that a thorough and legally compliant pre-employment background check is an enormously important tool, one that over 80% of all business and organizations use, and when combined with a thorough interview can be very powerful.  This same vetting process should also apply to all persons with unsupervised time with the youth in this country.  When a candidate understands that a background check is thorough and complete, one that utilizes public records and verification of employment and education it gives that individual pause should their information be purposely inaccurate.

Volunteer background checks are especially important with schools and churches, and any group involved with youth sports.  When combined with a well-publicized and thorough background check, one that includes public records search and data verification, a background check can act as a preventative tool.

Every day internet news sites are littered with articles regarding malfeasant coaches.

In Lafayette, Indiana an assistant boys volleyball coach was charged in child seduction and related charges.

From jconline.com (Aug 22, 17)

Lafayette School Corp. Supt. Les Huddle said Barmby worked as a paraprofessional and substitute paraprofessional, in addition to being an assistant coach, for less than a year before she was terminated following the criminal investigation.  jconline.com/story/news/2017/08/22/ex-jefferson-high-school-coach-accused-child-seduction-allowed-travel-out-state/571896001/

A Minnesota high school recently put a paid coach on administrative leave due to inappropriate and illegal behavior with a minor.

From  kstp.com (Aug 30, 17):

A Hudson High School junior varsity girls basketball coach has been placed on paid administrative leave after sexual assault-related charges were filed against him this week.

… has been charged with first-degree child sexual assault for having contact with a person under the age of 13, according to the filing. … has also been charged with repeated sexual assault of the same child, using a computer to facilitate a child sex crime, and for causing a child ages 13-18 to view sexual activity.  kstp.com/news/hudson-high-school-girls-jv-basketball-coach-arrested-charged-for-sex-assault-louis-joseph-french/4590445/

A thorough background check on a youth coach both employed and volunteer should include:

•   Criminal Background Checks
•   Sexual Predator registry search
•   Employment and / or volunteer verification
•   Personal reference verification
•   Education / Certificate verification
•   Department of Motor vehicles record check

Ultimately a solid vetting process, one that includes a face-to-face interview, verification of claims, and a criminal background check will greatly assist in creating a safe environment for participants of youth sports.

To read more about why all employed and volunteer youth sport coaches should undergo a thorough background screening before being allowed unsupervised time with the youth read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  http://www.criminalbackgroundrecords.com/news/2017-09-15-Background-Checks-on-Employed-and-Volunteer-Coaches-for-Youth-Sports.html

There has been numerous incidents in recent history of volunteer coaches abusing their relationship with children and young adults.  With summer in full swing children across the country are participating in sport camps and other athletic programs.  Due to news articles regarding criminal offenses by volunteer coaches it now has become imperative that parents feel their child or children are safe with the sporting group coaches and staff.  The swiftest and most confident way to help achieve this kind of peace of mind is to make sure that all summer camp staff including volunteer coaches undergo a rigorous background screening including criminal background checks, sex offender registry checks and necessary interviews and reference checks.

Throughout the year children of all ages join sports teams.  After-school programs cover nearly every sport and clutter the country.  Each day, after school, parks and gymnasiums and pools fill with youth sports teams and volunteers work with parents to guide and teach their children.

The expectation every parent demands is that their child participates in a safe, friendly environment.

As current news reports that is not always the situation.

Recently in Kewanee Illinois local citizens requested background checks on all park district coaches.

From StarCourier.com (Jun. 15, 17):

Two women whose children participate in the Kewanee Park District’s baseball teams addressed the park district board of commissioners Thursday night seeking background checks for all the park district’s coaches.

The women said they are concerned about those adults who volunteer to coach the park district’s youth teams after a baseball coach was taken into custody from a Kewanee baseball field earlier this week.(1)

While the offense the baseball coach taken into custody appears minor it did create enough concern for parents to question the overall screening process of volunteer coaches.

However, in Sullivan, MO a more serious situation occurred.

From KMOV.com (Jul. 06, 17):

Sullivan police arrested a 30-year old assistant coach during a Sullivan Boys Baseball Association game at Jim Bottomley Park on June 28 after identifying him as a registered sex offender.

Sex offenders are forbidden by state law from visiting parks or coaching athletic teams involving children under 17-years-old. (2)

In San Jose a swim coach was arrested for sexting underage team members.

From MercuryNews.com (Jun. 26, 17):

An assistant coach at the prominent QuickSilver Swimming club, who also trained teens with several other teams and schools in San Jose, has been arrested after police say he solicited and exchanged sexually explicit text messages and images with young swimmers and later discouraged them from talking to investigators.

It’s the second child-predator case involving a QuickSilver-affiliated employee in the past decade — a coach for its predecessor, San Jose Aquatics, was convicted on a score of child molestation charges in 2009. There are also accusations that the swim club knew about the allegations for several months before alerting authorities. (3)

Proper Background screening for any individual working with at-risk populations such as the elderly and children should be mandatory.

At a minimum a typical volunteer background check may include:

1.       Sex Offender Registry Check
2.       Criminal History Report
3.       Department of Motor Vehicles Records

Criminal background checks protect youth as a first line of defense against potential predators.  A well-known, well-advertised background check program by a youth sports organization may give pause to potential predators attempting to coach kids.  It is society’s responsibility, as adults, to protect children in any way possible, and making volunteer’s go through a thorough vetting process certainly aids in this pursuit.

Ultimately, conducting a thorough volunteer background check need not be a burdensome task.  The simplest approach is to use a professional background screening company to perform the background checks necessary to fully vet a volunteer before they are given access to children.  The cost for this approach is minimal and the benefits are undeniable as thwarting an attack against a youth is priceless.

To read more regarding the need to perform a rigorous background screening on volunteer coaches and other athletic program volunteers read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  http://www.criminalbackgroundrecords.com/news/2017-07-10-Volunteer-Coaches-Must-Be-Background-Checked.html

The United States population is aging and care for elderly is a growing business.  Most of the aging population expect to grow old in a safe environment and that they will be properly cared for.  However, crimes against the elderly has continued to grow over the years and is only now being seen as a hidden epidemic in our society.

Enter caregiver background checks the best way to weed out malfeasant individuals looking to take advantage of the elderly.  This form of risk mitigation is not always used when hiring caregivers for the elderly especially if it is the family that hires the caretaker.  All caregivers given unsupervised time with the elderly population should all be thoroughly vetted before being hired.  It is best to use a third party background screening company to conduct these background checks and should include criminal background checks, social security validation with address history, reference checks and the appropriate verification checks.  The information gathered from these reports and background checks can then be compared to the information given by the caregiver on their resume and interviews.

As people age the risk of abuse grows and astonishingly that abuse comes from those hired to protect, assist or help the elderly in everyday activities and happenings.  Depictions of elder abuse brought forth by caregivers are becoming rampant on the internet and their stories have been populating almost every news site.

Recently, in the Village of Oak Creek, Arizona, a caregiver was arrested for stealing from an elderly woman.

From VerdeNews.com (Feb. 22, 17):

…a 42-year-old caregiver of Village of Oak Creek, was arrested after the Yavapai County Sheriff’s office confirmed her as a suspect accused of stealing more than $100,000 from an elderly Sedona woman.

A family member of the legally blind 89-year-old victim contacted the Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office last month to report concerns of caregiver theft. The caller indicated it appeared more than $100,000 had been stolen from the victim, according to a news release from YCSO.  verdenews.com/news/2017/feb/22/caregiver-arrested-after-allegedly-stealing-190k-e/

Sometimes the abuse has a far greater impact than theft.  An extreme situation occurred in Texas.

From KCENTV.com (Feb. 21, 17)

Emily Springer, 96, died just four months after she was seriously injured in a vehicle crash. According to her family, a Visiting Angels caretaker responsible for Springer failed to properly strap her into the van, which caused her to fly out of her handicap seat and into the dashboard.

… The caretaker involved was indicted for injury to an elderly person and is awaiting criminal trial.  kcentv.com/news/local/elderly-woman-killed-by-negligent-caregiver-civil-suit-begins/409614262

An important deterrent in elder abuse by a caretaker is definitely by performing thorough background checks, reference checks and verifications on candidates before giving them unsupervised time with the elderly.  This process should include a complete interview as well as a professional criminal background check.  With more and more stories of elder abuse hitting the headlines and as more people in the USA enter their elder years it needs to become mandatory for caregivers to go through an in-depth employment screening before being allowed unsupervised time with the elderly.

To read more regarding the elder abuse epidemic in the USA and how thorough caregiver background checks can help avoid these situations read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  http://www.criminalbackgroundrecords.com/news/2017-3-21-Elder-Abuse-A-Hidden-Epidemic.html

There have been many headlines about the challenges our nation faces when it comes to our at-risk populations.  Specifically the elderly and the abuse that can happen from caregivers with unsupervised timed with an elderly patient.  There have been numerous cases of such abuse to the elderly portion of our country in recent news articles.  As the elderly population of the USA continues to increase so does the need for in-home caregivers.  This is why it is becoming paramount that a thorough background screening be performed on all caregivers before being allowed into the home.

Unfortunately many families do not have the proper insurance to cover in-home healthcare for the elderly members of their family.  This causes many families to pursue low-cost in-home care and that usually means hiring caregivers that are not properly trained or qualified in their profession.  In addition to not being highly trained these caregivers could also have criminal background records or other attributes that makes them not suitable for the job.  For these and other reasons it is imperative that a thorough caregiver background check be performed prior to letting an individual have unsupervised time with the elderly.

From KSTP.com (Dec. 22, 2016):

A caregiver at a Burnsville memory care facility has been charged after police say he smacked a vulnerable resident in the face…

…has been charged with fourth-degree assault and disorderly conduct. If convicted, he faces up to one year in prison and $3,000 in fines on the assault charge and up to 90 days in jail and $1,000 in fines on the disorderly conduct charge.  kstp.com/news/charges-burnsville-caregiver-vulnerable-resident-slapped/4351729/

Recent incidents in Massachusetts have brought into question the level of protective care provided toward the elderly regarding the hiring of personal care attendants. As attempts continue to improve the situation there are complaints about background screening, one of the best tools that can be utilized in protecting the elderly.

From MassLive.com (Dec. 28, 17):

James Fuccione, director of legislative and public affairs for the Home Health Care Alliance of Massachusetts, which represents home care agencies, said his group encourages consumers to hire workers through an agency because of the safeguards, like background checks and training.  masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/12/personal_care_attendants_have.html

Elder abuse comes in many forms and families should be well aware of the different types.  Some may be overlooked or held inconsequential, but each are equally disruptive and devastating to the elderly.

Elder abuse refers to intentional or negligent acts by a caregiver or trusted individual that causes harm to a vulnerable elder. Elder abuse takes many forms, including neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse, financial abuse and exploitation, emotional or psychological abuse and neglect (including verbal abuse and threats), abandonment and self-neglect.  acl.gov

As healthcare costs increase more and more family members will rely on each other for elder care, either through individual efforts or through hiring a caregiver.  It is critical that any individual working with the elderly, an at-risk population go through an extensive and thorough background check process.  For a complete investigation, an individual, family or home healthcare agency should utilize a well-qualified third-party background screening company to gain critical information needed in making a well-informed decision on a very critical matter.

The country as a whole needs to strongly advocate rigorous background screening of all caregivers which at a minimum should include criminal background checks, sex offender registry checks, social security number validation with address history trace, driving record checks (if the caregiver will be driving the elderly patient), credentials verification and reference checks.  As the population in the USA continues to age the need and importance of well qualified and properly screened caregivers will continue to grow.  It is critical that a thorough and complete background check be conducted, one that contains as much information that can be gained via public records and personal reference confirmation.  This is extremely important as proper background screening of caregivers is one of the best tools available in protecting the country’s at-risk population especially the elderly.  This tool if used correctly prior to hiring or access to the home is given can reduce cases of elder abuse by preventing past offenders from striking again.

To read more regarding the importance of properly background screening caregivers for the elderly especially those with unsupervised access to the home view recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  http://www.criminalbackgroundrecords.com/news/2017-01-13-Caregiver-Background-Checks.html

Governor Jerry Brown of California in September 2016 signed AB 1843 into law.  This new law prohibits employers from using certain juvenile criminal records as part of the pre-employment screening process.  California is leading the way in protecting individual’s rights and giving young adults a better chance at achieving gainful employment by disregarding the juvenile offenses of their youth.

The new California statewide law amends the labor code by broadening the types of criminal background records that employers cannot use or have access to when evaluating whether or not to hire an employee.  The law prohibits employers in California from inquiring about an applicant’s previous juvenile criminal record history making sure the employer cannot even consider certain juvenile criminal records as part of a hiring process.  This holds true if the jurisdiction the criminal record was created in was a juvenile court and the criminal records apart of a person’s juvenile offense history.  Under these conditions the juvenile records become off limits to employers when performing employment background checks on potential job applicants.

California Law AB 1843 updates the labor code in regards to the use of juvenile criminal records in the employment screening process.

From SHRM.com, the leading Human Resources industry group (posted Oct. 04, 16):

A.B. 1843 amends the labor code to broaden the types of “off limits” information that employers may not consider by prohibiting employers from inquiring about and considering information concerning or related to “an arrest, detention, process, diversion, supervision, adjudication, or court disposition” that occurred while the applicant or employee was subject to the process and jurisdiction of a juvenile court (juvenile offense history).

The bill also excludes from the labor code’s definition of “conviction” an adjudication by a juvenile court or any other court order or action taken with respect to a person who is under the process and jurisdiction of a juvenile court.  shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/state-and-local-updates/pages/california-juvenile-records-.aspx

As new employment screening laws like ban-the-box and 1843 are enacted across the USA employers need to partner with a professional background screening company to help them become or remain compliant with all State and Federal laws governing the use of criminal records in the employment screening process.  The FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act), EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) and now State Laws outlining the proper use of performing criminal background checks as part of a pre-employment background check come into law it makes since to work with a professional background screening company to stay legally compliant.

As employers begin to take notice of these new laws they need to complimentary make all necessary changes to their existing employment screening practices to stay current with an ever evolving legal structure.  By prohibiting the use of juvenile criminal records from being considered in the hiring process California has made it easier for individuals with a juvenile criminal past to get a job.  This new law is in line with a bigger national movement aimed at making it easier for all individuals with a criminal past to achieve gainful employment and then hopefully to avoid recidivism.

To learn more about the new California Law A.B. 1843 and how it aims to prevent employers from using juvenile criminal records in their consideration for employment and how laws in the USA are changing in favor of individuals with criminal pasts read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release.

Since “Ban-the Box” legislation has been adopted in some States and Jurisdictions a recent study shows that it may not be having the impact it was designed for.  This legislation which removes the check box on job applications that asks if the applicant has a criminal history might be having a reverse effect making it detrimental to minorities most specifically black people.

Under such legislation employers need to wait until a conditional offer is made before being allowed to perform criminal background checks.  However recent studies show that Blacks are not even getting to the point in the pre-employment screening process where a conditional offer would be made, and instead are being discriminated against.

The United States already has the highest incarceration rates in the world and needs legislation that helps minorities achieve gainful employment.  Up until recently it was widely believed that ban-the-box legislation would help minorities gain employment by removing the criminal history question on the application form, and then in turn would create a level playing field in the employment hiring process.  This philosophy has now been criticized due to new evidence uncovered in a recent study.

From the Nation Law Review (NatLawReview.com, Sep 09, 16):

New research by Amanda Agan, a Princeton economist, and Sonja Starr, a legal scholar at the University of Michigan, suggests that, at least in some cases, “ban the box” rules may result in the use of race as a proxy for criminal history. This may increase racial disparity in hiring– even in the absence of criminal histories. (1)

Troubling conclusions came from this research.

The racial gap in callbacks before the ban the box laws was 7% at companies that asked applicants about criminal history. After the laws were enacted, it went up to 45%, suggesting that black applicants were presumed to have a criminal past if the prospective employer was not permitted to inquire. (2)

Reaction to the claims stated in the Agan/Starr research study was swift.  Here is an excerpt:

From theAmsterdamNews.com (Aug. 18, 16):

NELP’s analysis reviewed the two studies in question and came to several conclusions: the core problems that were raised in the two studies has nothing to do with ban-the-box polices, but with racism that’s entrenched in the hiring process where Blacks are negatively profiled; the studies don’t support its own conclusions about ban-the-box being a detriment to Blacks looking for a job; the studies highlight the needs for more policies that deal with race discrimination in hiring and boost jobs opportunities for people with records; and ban-the-box has worked by changing some employers attitudes about applicants with records. (2)

Criminal background records can severely impact an individual attempting to reintegrate back into society. Many suggest that without gainful employment recidivism is more likely to occur.  Criminal history reports can indicate past offenses and sentencing information.  While certain State laws protect how far back in time a criminal record can be used the mere mention of a criminal record can become a limiting factor in fair access to employment.  Both the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Housing and Urban Development are tasked with enforcing laws governing the fair and equal use of criminal histories.  Along with the broad reach of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, criminal history information as used in the employment screening process is being scrutinized.  At this point in time it is clear that more needs to be done to eliminate surface racism on the parts of many employers who were willing to discard black applications simply because of race when they were not permitted to inquire about criminal history anymore.  As ban-the-box legislation is being implemented throughout the country, time will eventually tell if it is going to achieve its end in making it easier for Americans with a criminal record to get a job or not.

To read more regarding the recent criticism of ban-the-box legislation and the pros and cons of the legislation and how real life implementation has raised questions about the effectiveness of ban-the-box type laws and what that could mean for minorities read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release.

Before being entrusted with the responsibility of working with children coaches, teachers, caregivers and other volunteers need to go through a rigorous background screening to sift out malfeasant and dangerous job applicants from getting hired in a position with exclusive access to minors.  Throughout the year tens of thousands of kids participate in after school sports and parents entrust their children under the care of a coach or coaching staff.  However, recent news headlines show an urgent need for schools and other organizations to either create or update their current background screening policies.  Such a policy should include all available employment background checks.

In Maryland a soccer organization changed their employment screening policies after a coach was arrested for illicit behavior with a minor.

From NBCWashington.com (Jun. 30, 16):

The prior background system appeared to have failed last year, according to an April report by the I-Team. The report found … a man arrested in Fairfax County for trying to sexually exploit a young boy was able to continue coaching youth soccer for the Soccer Association of Montgomery after his arrest.

Changes have since been made to a year-round vetting process as opposed to a single annual check.

In Grand Rapids, Michigan a rowing coach was arrested for illegally recording female students changing from street clothes to athletic clothes.  He was subsequently fired.

From AOL.com (Jul. 11, 16):

Police say the Rockford men’s rowing head coach… was responsible for taking the videos by hiding the camera in the changing area. He was arrested and the Kent County Prosecutor’s Office has charged him with child sexually abusive activity, using a computer to commit a crime and child sexually abusive material.

In Florida a Titusville High School coach was arrested on a drug related offense forcing a greater scrutiny on background screening policies and procedures.

From a recent posting from WFTV.com (Jul. 07, 16):

9 Investigates discovered the Brevard County school district said it’s working to make sure people with a criminal past don’t slip through the cracks again and get hired to work with children.

This comes after an assistant coach failed to disclose his criminal history years ago on his employment application, and was recently accused of running a multistate drug ring.

It is imperative in the United States that persons working with or have supervision over children must be fully vetted as a first line of defense in protecting at-risk populations such as children.  The ever so common news of coaches or coaching staff being caught committing crimes as a coach or having demonstrated previous malfeasant behavior should never get the chance to work with or oversee children in any capacity.  Nefarious actions between coaches and children are being reported every month and now is the time for schools and organizations to either implement or update their background screening polices to further protect children.

A best practice to deter malfeasant individuals from being employed as a coach, athletic trainer or assistant coach either paid or volunteer having access to at-risk populations is to create a strong background screening policy.  A rigorous and thorough screening policy that is implemented correctly and is effectively publicized creates a strong barrier deterring potential nefarious individuals from applying for a coaching position as they would know their background history would be discovered.  Individuals seeking to harm or exploit children or young adults as a coach or related position would find it tremendously more difficult to get a job at a school or other organization that has a strong background screening policy.

To develop a strong and effective background screening policy it helps to employ a professional background screening company to assist with creating the policy as well as delivering the necessary background reports to ensure all critical data is used in determining who to hire for a coaching position.  Reports include criminal background checks, social security number trace, federal courts search, driving records check, employment verification, education verification and reference checks.

Recent headlines show a kind of epidemic across the country regarding coaches with criminal pasts or committing criminal acts as a coach or staff member.  Hiring coaches with a history of harming or exploiting children and young adults should no longer be acceptable.  Now is the time to make professional background screening for coaches and related staff mandatory in the USA.

To read more regarding why mandatory background screening of coaches is necessary in the USA and how schools and organizations can protect at-risk populations like children by creating a vetting process that is thorough and effective read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release: Background Screening Paid and Volunteer Coaches Should Be Mandatory, CriminalBackgroundRecords.com