INSIDE BACKGROUND SCREENING
Debunking Seven Myths About Drug Testing By Dr. Todd Simo, Medical Review Officer, HireRight
With substance abuse ranking as
the third leading cause of workplace violence, according to the Drug Free America Foundation1, employee drug use is a critical problem for organizations of all sizes and across all industries, but it can often be neglected or managed incorrectly. Part of the problem is that when it comes to employment drug testing, there are several common misunderstandings and misconceptions, both on the part of the employers and their workers that can diminish an organization‘s ability to conduct an effective drug testing program. This article examines seven of the most prevalent myths to help guide employers to evaluate and improve their drug screening policies to help safeguard their workplace.
Read m ore
2014-15 BACKGROUND SCREENING INDUSTRY BUYERS GUIDE
Finding out that one of your employees was previously arrested for theft, or had been terminated from previous jobs for fraud and other transgressions, is even more troubling to an employer. This is especially the case knowing that the resources are available to uncover these facts before such shady characters ever make it onto your employee roster.
Stories like the case shared in this article are fairly common and underscore the importance of conducting background checks.
Read m ore
Employment Screening: Identifying Organizational Risk in Your Screening Program
By Mary Poquette, Owner and Principal Consultant, Poquette Screening Solutions
According to a SHRM July 2012 report, over 87% of U.S. businesses conduct some type of background screening before hiring a new employee. Among the most common reasons for doing so are: 1) legal or regulatory requirement; 2) protect assets of the organization including other employees, customers, physical plant, technology, and intellectual property; 3) provide protection from potential claims of negligent hiring or negligent retention; and 4) recognition that some candidates falsify their history and qualifications. In short, employers seek to mitigate their risk.
Unfortunately, employers may unknowingly create a different type of risk depending on how their screening program is designed, how the program is being used, or both. This risk may crystalize in the form of class action litigation or regulatory investigation costing employers money, time, and creating a business distraction. This risk can be mitigated – without impacting the effectiveness and outcomes of the program.
Click here to get your Free Copy Read m ore about mitigating your risk
Companies Turn to Professionals to Screen out Rogue Employees
by Sobia Syed,CRI Group
It's no secret in business that what you don't know can hurt you. Business leaders know that the most harmful piece of information is the one they don't have. This is true when it comes to industry trends, products, competitors' activities and other aspects of their trade. It also applies to those they would hire and put in positions of trust at their business because a dishonest hire can threaten a company, whether it be through fraud, ethical violations or pure incompetence.
WORKPLACE VIOLENCE NEWS Fit For Duty
Security professionals are a company‘s first line of defense in preventing and dealing with employee threats, violence, corporate sabotage, and other wrongdoing in the workplace. Amid the recent rise in workplace violence, security executives have led efforts to implement procedures aimed at countering cyberthreats, establishing a drug-free workplace culture, and eliminating hostility and harassment on the job.
These types of issues, however, can make both employees and supervisors hyper vigilant of their
Continued on page 16 15
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