INSIDE BACKGROUND SCREENING
Applicants Not Required to Disclose Criminal Past? Ban the Box Movement Spreads Across U.S.
Tackling Lateral Violence In The Workplace “Have you ever been convicted of a crime?”
While this is generally viewed as an acceptable – and standard – question on job applications, a growing number of cities and states are giving it a second look. Known as “Ban the Box,” the movement works to remove the aforementioned question from initial job applications, delaying any inquiries into an applicant’s criminal past until later in the hiring process. The thought is that by delaying questions about an applicant’s past, employers will not prematurely eliminate someone who may be qualified.
The question is, does this legislation protect an applicants' rights, or does it simply disguise their criminal past?
Like all legislation, Ban the Box has sparked a nationwide debate among supporters and opponents. Proponents of the movement believe removing any inquiries into an applicant’s past until later in the hiring process ensure they will not be automatically excluded from the pool of potential hires. They also say that employment for ex-offenders is the key to the successful societal re-integration. However, opponents argue that Ban the Box prevents employers from adequately screening applicants when questions about criminal history are not asked until very late in the process.
Ban the Box has also resulted in a patchwork of laws that create inconsistencies and make it increasingly difficult to perform what most would consider even the most basic due diligence in the screening process. What about businesses in multiple jurisdictions? Companies with multiple locations may have different regulations depend- ing on the Ban the Box legislation specific to that locale. Another source of contention in the movement are criminal convictions. If the convictions are clearly job related, should they be disclosed early in the hiring process to prevent instances of negligent hiring?
Read More Click here to get your Free Copy
About 20 years ago, Terry O’Connell, who was concerned at the high numbers of repeat offenders in the justice system, devel- oped a method for dealing with young offenders, victims and their respective families. He developed an alternative form of conflict resolution built around scripted questions, called Restorative
Justice.Today in Bendigo, lateral violence has become such a problem that the Bendigo and District Aboriginal Cooperative (BDAC) has introduced a Restorative Justice model to their grievance process. Instead of pursuing a disciplinary process, Restorative Justice allows them to aim for cultural change in an organisation, so that lateral violence is no longer regarded as acceptable. “It’s actually starting to change the workplace culture to a system of actually understanding what we’re doing to each other,” Badke says.
BDAC’s lateral violence resolution guidelines follow Privacy & OHS acts, and all parties must agree to participate. There can’t be any other lateral violence process between the involved parties in the past 12 months and once terms or resolutions are agreed, there can be no backing out; otherwise, formal disciplin- ary action will be taken.
The aim of BDAC’s Restorative Justice program is to reduce incidents of workplace lateral violence, which in turn, they hope will increase staff morale and create a more positive work environment. And so far, that’s what seems to be happening. “We’re actually coming together, discussing an issue, and coming to agreements to not continue to have this behaviour,” Joanne Badke says. “It has certainly been successful so far, but we’re only at the infancy stages.”
Read More
ANNUAL BACKGROUND SCREENING INDUSTRY BUYERS GUIDE
2013-2014
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27