Thursday, January 28, 2016
7 things you need to know about background checks, employment screening
Background checks hold big sway with firms Jason Morris, is president and chief operating officer of EmployeeScreenIQ, which surveyed employers about background checks and other employment screening. In its findings were that most employers will reject applicants who lie about their degrees and diplomas. (Chuck Crow,The Plain Dealer) Olivera Perkins, The Plain Dealer By Olivera Perkins, The Plain Dealer on June 01, 2015 at 9:00 AM, updated June 01, 2015 at 12:38 PM WARRENSVILLE HEIGHTS, Ohio – You are confident you could do the job, but you don't exactly have all the credentials the employer is requesting. If you are tempted to embellish your resume -- even just a tad -- to make yourself a perfect fit for the job, think again. Counterfeit on your resume about degrees and diplomas is a Back certain way to have an employer eliminate you from consideration, according to a national epitomerevealing trends about how employers use background checks and other employment screening methods.
The digest found that most employers were more accepting of people with certain types of criminal convictions than they were of people who lied on their resumes. The artless survey of more than 500 managers, executives, and other employees representing U.S. employers, was done by EmployeeScreenIQ, the local company that performs employment background screening services for employers.
Exclusively about 20 percent of respondents are clients of the company. The online survey was conducted in January and February. This is the sixth year EmployeeScreenIQ has done such a survey. 7 things you need to know about background checks and employment screening 1. Theadulthood of employers said they wouldn't hire applicants who lie about their degrees or diplomas. Three-quarters of employers said they would not hire applicants who lied on their resumes about degrees or diplomas. Forty-four percent would reject applicants who lied about their dates of employment. Thirty- four percent would reject those who lied about job titles. Jason Morris, president and chief operating officer of EmployeeScreenIQ said he wasn't surprised that rejecting candidates who misrepresented degrees or diplomas came in Mischievous by such a wide margin. "We see it so often," he said of employment screening done by his company. "I am talking hundred of times a week." Morris said such misrepresentation included trying to pass off a fake degree from a diploma mill.
2. Employers would continue to test for marijuana even if recreational marijuana became legal throughout the United States.
Fifty-four percent of employers said they would continue with drug testing programs even if recreational marijuana were legal. Abandoned two percent said they would discontinue testing. (Other responses included "don't know" or employers said they didn't have a drug-testing program.) Such a question asked of employers about the drug could be relevant in Ohio since legalizing marijuana may be on the ballot as early as November. "Just because it is legal, doesn't mean an employers has to accept it," Morris said. "You are going to see a lot of companies test onsite to see if people have smoked that day."
3. Having a criminal history will not automatically disqualify you from employment. Foranyhow, while the survey found that at least 90 percent of employers would disqualify candidates who had felonies for crimes of violence or theft and dishonesty, Unescorted 32 percent would disqualify someone with a misdemeanor drug conviction. "It looks to me that employers are only concerned with the most serious crimes," Morris said. "That would be crimes of theft and dishonesty, violence, felony drug convictions and anything with any type of felony violence.
Epigrammatic drug offenses and minor infractions that didn't result in convictions? Employers don't really care about that."
4. Fewer employers are asking applicants to divulge criminal histories on job applications. Only 53 percent of employers this year said they ask about criminal history on job applications, versus 66 percent of respondents last year. On the other hand, 75 percent of employers still ask candidates to divulge conviction later in the application process. The survey found that the decliningmiddle of employers asking about criminal history on job applications could be the result of two factors. First, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has recommended that the question of criminal history be brought up further into the application process. Supporter, the ban the box movement has led to legislation in many jurisdictions that eliminates the box on job applications that candidates must check if they have criminal convictions. For crate, the City of Cleveland has such a policy for municipal jobs. Monday, Ohio became the 17th state to adopt a ban the box hiring policy for state jobs. Nationally, an estimated 70 million adults have records that will show up on background checks, according to the National Employment Law Project. "I can see the side of the applicant because it gives them a fair shot," Morris said. "But I also see if from the employer's point of view. Why go through the expense and time of a background check, if you are going to find out that an applicant had something very, very serious?" Morris recommends that job candidates with criminal histories be upfront early in the process. "Tell your (prospective) employer at the first meeting, so you don't waste anybody's time," he said. "In an employer's eyes, that says a lot. They will say, 'You didn't have to tell me, but you are telling me anyway.' "Let them know the circumstances of the criminal history and explain away what some of these things were," Morris said.
5. Nearly half of employers said ban the box laws are unfair to them. Employers appear not to like ban the box laws. Forty-eight percent of those polled said such laws are unfair to employers. Twenty-six percent said they were confusing to employers and 25 percent said they unnecessarily delay hiring decisions. "These companies are simply trying to reduce their risk, and bring in the best qualified candidates, while at the same time protecting their workforce and their clients," Morris said. "The most important take away is that companies aren't looking to disqualify a candidate," he said. "They want to find good people; and more and more companies are looking past a person's criminal record."
6. If you don't reveal a past conviction, and an employer later finds out through a background check, you may risk the chance of being disqualified. Forty-four percent of employers said they would flatly reject candidates who did not divulge past convictions that were later found through background checks. Alternative 39 percent said they would give the candidate an opportunity to explain the convictions. In either conflict, Morris said this is the bottom line: "There is no reason to lie because every company is going to do a background check on you, and they are going to find out one way or another," he said.
7. The length of existence of employers will give applicants a chance to explain the circumstances of criminal and other convictions. The EEOC guidance, or recommendation, to employers allows for job applicants to explain the circumstances of their convictions. Seventy-two percent of employers said they perform individualized assessments in which the circumstances of a person's convictions are evaluated in relation to the job they are seeking. The number is up from 64 percent the year before. "I am very happy to see that the number is climbing," Morris said. "This shows me that they (employers) are looking at the circumstance behind the crime."
7 things you need to know about background checks, employment screening
at 3:31 PM
Monday, January 25, 2016
It's better to be safe than sorry when hiring new employees: You probably have a lot riding on the success of your business, so bringing in the wrong person can have some pretty grave consequences. Although most organizations may be able to tolerate the consequences of hiring an underqualified candidate or someone who is a bad cultural fit, they might not be able to survive the ramifications of welcoming in an employee who is dangerous or dishonest. - See more at: http://intelligater.comLooking For The Best Background Check Site To Check Someone's Background?
at 5:35 PM
It's ideal to be protected than sorry while procuring new representatives: You likely have a considerable measure riding on the accomplishment of your business, so getting the wrong individual can have some really grave results. Albeit most associations might have the capacity to endure the outcomes of contracting an underqualified applicant or somebody who is an awful social fit, they won't not have the capacity to survive the consequences of inviting in a worker who is perilous or unscrupulous. - See more at: http://intelligater.com Best Background Check Site For Individuals Looking For Cheap Alternative
at 5:29 PM