INSIDE BACKGROUND SCREENING
5 Misconceptions about Background Screening – Busted By Sandra James
John is a marketing analyst. Recently, he got interviewed in a big marketing firms in CA.
He aced the interview with flying colors. The last words of his interviewer were, “We really like your profile. Once we are done with the background check, we’ll hand you the er letter.” John doubted that the interviewer is making a euphemistic excuse to say NO!
It is only natural to get skeptical when you are so close to get your dream job. No wonder, pre-employment screening has become vulnerable to misconceptions. Candidates are full of presumptions about screening process and more often than not, they have the wrong notions. Here we have busted the common 5 misconceptions about background screening.
1. Background checks are costly and can only be afforded by large organizations
The total costs of running a standard background check always turn out to be lesser than the eventual cost of bad hires. Bad hires cost heavily to the small organizations, much more that what they cost to large organizations. Background checks are essential for assuring a safe and sound work environment and both small and large organizations benefit immensely from such checks.
2. I can get all the candidate’s information I need, online
Online research has opened new ways to probe into the personal and professional details of an applicant. But it’s simply not enough. A compre - hensive screening goes much beyond the publicly available information. A detailed screening is based on confidential information that is available only on a permitted purpose to selective bodies.
Moreover, background information is sourced from diverse sources such as criminal history, medical history, etc. Screening companies have the right skills and expertise to go into fine details and extract all the right information from the right sources.
With the growing number of laws to govern the way social media is deployed for screening. Do it yourself screening might end up putting you on the wrong side of the law before you even know it!
3. Employers use pre-employment screening as an excuse not-to-hire
Many candidates believe that employers use background checks as an excuse not to hire them. In fact, it’s just the opposite. Employers conduct background screening to make sure they hire right people. If you are at the last stage of your interview and your offer is contingent on a background check, your future employer has probably zeroed in your profile and wants you to come out clean on screening before he actually makes the job offer.
4. When I share my personal information with a background screening rm, I am putting it at risk
That is so not true. The way your information is used and processed by background screening companies, is governed by state and federal laws. In case screening companies fail to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act, they become liable to pay hefty fines and penalties. The screener can share the detailed results of the background check only with the party that has requested to run the check.
5. An employment credit check can pull down my credit score It’s true that a credit check run by a mortgage lender has a negative impact on the credit score of the individual. But it is simply not true when it comes to a credit check run by your prospective employer. Employers usually do a credit check on you if you are being considered for handling a financial domain of the business. The reason for doing so is simple; they want to know how well you can manage their finances by knowing how well you manage your own finances.
Proper screening helps organizations to minimize bad hiring and increase workplace safety. As smart employers and smart candidates, you need to steer clear from such myths and misconceptions.
Read more
Why Checking an Applicant’s Criminal Past Should be About Convictions, Not Arrests!
Imagine being denied employment simply because of an accusation. That’s what it is like for people who lose jobs solely based on a record of arrest. In reality, many arrest records do not indicate what happened after the initial arrest. An arrest does not prove that criminal activity has even occurred. Without a conviction, it is only an accusation. The key is to substantiate the facts of the arrest and determine if the conduct that occurred renders an individual unfit for the position. Employers should give convictions much more weight than arrests in their hiring decision. Arrest records should not be used as the basis for an adverse employment decision.
Read more 17
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