An article from MSNBC calls this a “bad history lesson” – and the title essentially works two ways. The article mentions several candidates applying for positions – with the Census Bureau, in this case – and being denied for the part-time, temporary positions because of distant criminal convictions or poor credit; the majority of the candidates being affected by these hiring practices are black and Latino.

Back in March, we wrote about an amendment to the Fair Credit Reporting Act because of the effects of background checks on minority applicants. Nevertheless, background checks are the only solution for finding if a candidate has criminal charges – even more than a decade old — relating to the job at hand. So, what is an employer to do?

No one solution exists, but with so many unemployed and unable to get jobs at the moment, a small degree of leniency is necessary to help reduce the unemployment rate. As the MSNBC article mentions, Illinois recently passed a law that prohibits investigating credit history in a background check and using such information to make a hiring decision about the candidate; as credit scores for many have been affected by the current recession, denying a job because of recent bill-paying habits will only keep many unemployed. A candidate, however, shouldn’t be a threat to the work environment, and a background check will reveal if a candidate has any criminal charges related to the skills or work environment of the position.

According to a recent news story from The Concord Monitor, a business administrator in the school district was fired recently after a background check revealed that she has a history of theft. The worker, although not a teacher, managed funds for the school district, and the crime involved stealing $64,000 over four years.

Background check procedures vary with each town, but the state gives school districts two options to run background checks: a basic screening that only checks felonies on a “prohibited” list (murder, rape, and crimes against children) and a comprehensive investigation that lists all types of felonies of which a candidate could have been convicted. The cost is identical for both, and candidates need to get fingerprints, which are then checked against a national criminal database.

The article, additionally, mentions a weakness in Franklin’s hiring policy: not asking candidates if they have ever been convicted of a crime. Although other school districts ask this question, Franklin doesn’t give candidates for teaching and administrative positions the space to discuss their criminal past.

As this instance shows, an employer should always be careful with background checks. A candidate, such as this business administrator in Franklin, could have a criminal history directly related to his or her job. While criminals shouldn’t be barred from hiring, employers should consider those with misdemeanors and felonies in their pasts on a case-by-case basis. In this case, a more thorough background check should have been conducted on the business administrative candidate and should have included a history of all felonies – especially those involving money and funds. If this incident is any indication, New Hampshire should revise its background check policy.

Not to be confused with “degree mill” (a term often used to describe online schools like University of Phoenix and DeVry), diploma mills essentially charge a person a fee for a diploma. When it comes to background checks, however, this lack of education isn’t always detected, and a background check company needs to investigate the legitimacy of the degree.

The article above gives some good points for detecting a fraudulent diploma. Some of their suggestions include:

• Investigate the school. See if it’s an accredited and certified institution. Not all schools, particularly legitimate trade schools, are accredited and certified, but check for which organizations they’re certified and accredited. If these organizations aren’t legitimate, the diploma is probably not authentic.
• Consider the dates of the degree. Is it about three to four years for a bachelor’s or was the program completed in a number of months?
• Is the degree for “real life” experience?
• Was the tuition per degree or per credit hour? Was a discount offered for multiple degree programs?
• What are the admittance criteria?
• Does the school only use a PO box address?

Additionally, a background check company or human resources department conducting an investigation should compile a list of common diploma mill programs for future use.

Unlike adult cases, however, children having their identity stolen know the criminal, who is often a parent or other relative, according to the article above. Five percent of identity theft victims are now children and, in most cases, an adult with poor credit uses their child’s name to take out a loan, open a credit card, or to start a new gas or electric account. Responsible parents and adults will make sure that the balance is paid back and, once his or her credit is in better shape, close the child’s account. Parents who are being negligent, engaging in behavior that shot their credit score in the first place, end up leaving the child with thousands of dollars in debt and unpaid bills.

The child, now grown into a young adult, isn’t aware, until he or she needs to have a background check done for a loan, car, credit card, apartment, or job. The thousands of dollars in debt and bills often block this person from obtaining any of these necessities.

And, adults should be more mindful about doing this to their children. An article in the Washington Post explains that credit checks are on the rise in employment, although their actual rate of increase is vague. Credit may play a role in obtaining stable employment in the future, and parents or relatives should consider the financial ramifications of taking their child’s identity, even if it’s only for a brief time, for bills, loans, and credit cards.

On a positive note, this practice has lowered crime in Irving, but who is being excluded has the NAACP concerned. As the article illustrates, residents who have criminal pasts – the resident had a drug conviction in 1993 – are being excluded, although the complexes are taking each resident on a case-by-case basis. Nevertheless, those who have solid renting histories, but long past convictions, are being evicted.

But, as the comments to the article show, people in the complexes want to feel safe in their homes. How should you use background checks to determine if a resident or apartment applicant should stay or go?

For a typical apartment background check, the landlord examines a candidate’s history at each residence and if a person has past criminal convictions pertaining to their past apartments. As landlords want a tenant who isn’t noisy or disruptive and pays on time, the candidate’s past history indicates whether or not he or she will be a good tenant. At the same time, however, residents have the right to feel safe in their homes; they shouldn’t be worrying if a criminal is lurking around the grounds.

But many with past criminal histories have moved on and should be given a chance to have fair and equal housing. If apartment complexes in Irving will screen each candidate, they should take each criminal history into context, much like criminal history is used in employment decisions. If the candidate hasn’t committed a crime in a number of years and if the crime didn’t involve others, he or she should be allowed to rent.

In some areas, such as Chicago, city officials want to make the gun laws tighter to make purchasing a firearm difficult. In Chicago, according to this recent news article, the mayor wants gun owners to register their weapons, purchase liability insurance, take periodic firearm training, and undergo a criminal background check. While the background check for anyone wanting to own a firearm seems fairly commonplace, the insurance issue in Chicago is proving to be cumbersome. What if a gun is used in self defense?

When it comes to firearms, having everyone purchase insurance seems unreasonable, particularly as guns may be used in various cases of self-defense. If a person is attacked and he or she uses a gun for self defense, for example, would that person be liable for hurting the person who had been attacking anyway?

As far as guns are concerned, the issue of background checks still looms. Those who legally purchase firearms often have clean backgrounds, but what about those who purchase guns illegally? Shouldn’t the mayor of Chicago – a city with a high enough murder rate – be focusing on cutting down illegal sales of firearms instead? Additionally, what about the gun show loophole, which allows anyone to attend a gun show and purchase a firearm without having a background check? Both of these issues pertaining to firearms are far more pressing in most states, and Chicago’s and Illinois’ issues should be no different.

Credit is another issue when it comes to hiring. With the current recession resulting in a significant amount of layoffs, bad credit is more common than it was 10 years ago. However, as this survey indicates, only one-third of these human resources professionals consider credit in hiring decisions.

So, if you’re a job applicant, what does this survey mean to you? As pre-employment background checks have a greater role in hiring now than they did in the past, job candidates should be prepared to have all aspects of their life analyzed – from employment and education history to their credit. Not all states have laws against performing credit checks in the hiring process, so all candidates should be prepared to have this information analyzed.

But, before you go on a job interview, shouldn’t you make sure that your background is clean? Many background check companies allow an individual to run a background check on his or her self. Identity theft is still a common crime, and a background check will reveal if your identity has, in fact, been usurped and used. But, on the other hand, you want to make sure that you have a clean background before you go on a job interview – don’t take any risks if employment is at stake.

Many dating websites don’t disclose this information, and, at the same time, they don’t bother to ask someone joining about a past criminal background. Should they have to? Or should there be plenty of fish in the sea, and you simply need to wade through it and discovery for yourself who has a murder conviction under his belt?

A recent article discusses the pros and cons of adding background checks to dating sites. On one hand, most people joining don’t expect to find a criminal trolling the site and assume everyone is relatively safe. The worst offender might be running across a person with an old picture or a drug habit.

However, as a recent incident indicated, this sense of security isn’t accurate, and users should be more aware of whom they might come across. Aside from New Jersey, which requires dating sites to disclose that they don’t conduct background checks, most states don’t have such laws in place. Nevertheless, the article suggests that someone with a criminal history has the right to find someone, too. But, at what cost? Should someone with a criminal past be banned from certain sites, or should they be restricted? And, what about those looking at sites – don’t they have the right to know if a former criminal is looking at their profile?

According to a recent news article, criminal background checks are part of college applications for 60 percent of the schools out there, but what counts as a background check and how these results are interpreted vary with each school – no system is in place. According to a survey conducted by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, this percentage of schools consider a student’s background according to the basic survey with an application to asking students and their parents to pay for a proper background check.

The Common Application asks students filling it out if they have any convictions of felonies or misdemeanors and about any academic or behavioral misconduct. What if a student, who had once been sent to juvenile court for truancy or assault, says, “No”? Would the school investigate the student’s statement or simply take his or her word?

Another factor in the admissions process is interpreting the results. Admissions personnel don’t run a background check company and only 38 percent have training to interpret criminal records. Schools, however, often associate a student with a criminal past with a greater likelihood of dropping out, expulsion, or causing trouble on campus.

A definite answer to this issue doesn’t exist, however. If background checks are to hold a place in college admissions, the personnel evaluating them need better training and to come up with a system for evaluating them. Who, with a criminal background, gets admitted and who doesn’t?

According to a recent article, the answer is no. According to the linked article, Virginia Rep. Bobby Scott proposed a bill that would require the FBI to verify and correct any inaccurate data in a background check before the report is given to an employer.

According to the article, this has been a common problem, particularly with the current economy resulting in unemployment and rises in cases of identity theft. Criminal records, in particular, fail to indicate the final result of a case. In more extreme cases, however, various inaccurate criminal charges, jobs, and debts end up on someone’s background screening report. If Scott’s bill were to become law, applicants for jobs would receive a copy of their background check before the employer does to challenge any false information. The FBI, then, would be required to research and correct this inaccurate information. In such instances, however, the FBI could raise fees to an employer if time is taken to clean up a candidate’s data.

Such a procedure parallels action taken with inaccuracies on a credit report. According to the FCRA, if a person is rejected from a position due to poor credit, he or she is allowed to see a copy of their report and attempt to get the false information removed. While this won’t get the candidate the job, it will improve his or her future chances.