While criminal history should not be used as a blanket hiring measure, as this practice discriminates against minorities, when an individual is found to have previous charges, what is a company to do? Ideally, a company needs to examine how the charges relate to the job, and if the past crime does not, the applicant should still be in consideration.

For the former Wells Fargo employee, Yolanda Quesada, the criminal charges on her background check were from the early 1970s, when she shoplifted twice to get work-appropriate clothing, but has had no other charges since then. Quesada worked at Wells Fargo for five years in customer service, where she does not handle money, and earned several awards and certificates during her time there. The bank started looking into her background the week before she was terminated, but she was not aware such an investigation was going on, and upon receiving notification she was being terminated, she was not given a chance to explain herself.

Wells Fargo, on the other hand, was simply following changes to banking regulations, and regarding Quesada, a spokesman said:

“Because Wells Fargo is an insured depository institution, we are bound by federal law that generally prohibits us from hiring or continuing the employment of any person who we know has a criminal record involving dishonesty or breach of trust.”

Should the bank have taken such an absolutist stance regarding criminal convictions? Or should each employee’s background have been evaluated on a case-by-case basis? Should 40 years without criminal charges and performance awards on the job hold more weight than a crime in 1972? And, why weren’t these charges discovered originally before Quesada was hired?

Related articles

• Woman fired from position for 40 year old crime.(backgroundchex.wordpress.com)

  ---

• Wells Fargo Fires Employee For Shoplifting 40 Years Ago(inquisitr.com)

  ---

• Wells Fargo Fires Employee for Crime Committed 40 Years Ago (jdjournal.com)

Thompson claims he has a bachelor’s degree in computer science from Stonehill College, but in fact, he earned a bachelor’s in accounting. His information listed in Ebay, where he previously was an executive, includes the accounting degree, and early Yahoo press releases also touch on this aspect of his background. Yahoo’s website, however, still lists the computer science degree.

Since Thompson stepped down, Yahoo’s board is going through significant changes. Ross Levinsohn, head of global media, will assume Thompson’s former position.

Although those entering and climbing their way through the corporate world, or at least preparing for employment, need to be extremely prepared for background checks, this recent incident indicates that fudging a resume can lead to the downfall of just about anyone. While Thompson does have an impressive resume of experience behind him, this incident could end up belying all of that hard work, branding him as a not-fully-honest individual.

This incident also indicates that professionals and workers of all levels must not cave into tweaking a resume ever-so-slightly to get in front of the competition. Although a few stretched statements may get you past the rejection group, what happens when a background check is conducted? Or even, later down the line, in an employee background check, which is routine at many companies and even done in the event of a promotion?

Related articles

• Captain tossed from troubled Yahoo! ship(rawstory.com)

  ---

• Yahoo’s New CEO is Toast: WSJ (sys-con.com)
• Firing of CEO throws Yahoo into turmoil (sfgate.com)

Guidelines set by this organization have not been revised since 1990. As hiring, technology, and the job market have changed drastically over the past 20 years, revising recommended standards for employers is absolutely necessary not just for applicants but also for avoiding excessive lawsuits. Along the lines of more background checks conducted are greater instances of false or inaccurate information added to a report – from identity theft or simply a company’s poor investigation – or rejecting anyone with a criminal past, regardless of whether the crime is related to the job or not.

According to Associated Press, the updated guidelines specifically address hiring for individuals with criminal backgrounds. New specifications include allowing applicants to explain their past crime before rejection, to point out any inaccuracies, and to mention if a listed conviction has since been removed. Employers, on the same note, are recommended to no longer ask about convictions up front and to disregard arrests without convictions.

On the other hand, employers find the new recommendations burdensome. The screenings could possibly become more expensive and difficult, as applicants will have a chance to counteract false information. Sources in the Associated Press piece even think that these far more stringent guidelines will result in employers forfeiting background checks in the application process altogether.

Considering the drastic and life-altering errors background checks can produce, do you think these new guidelines for employers are necessary?

Related articles

• New gov’t guidance on employee background checks (kansascity.com)
• New rules set on background checks for job seekers (bottomline.msnbc.msn.com)
• New US Guidelines on Background Checks (myfoxboston.com)

Such an issue surfaced in Osage, Ia., recently. Parent Kim Koenigs was researching bus safety issues for Kadyn’s Law, a recently-passed measure emphasizing greater penalties for motorist that violate school bus arm laws, and found that Iowa bus companies do not require background checks in the hiring process.

Since Koenigs proposed this measure, local education officials authorized thorough background checks for all district bus drivers.

As you know, not all background checks are the same. Will drivers for Osage schools simply be put through a state records criminal background check or more rigorous measures? These background checks, apparently, will examine dependent child abuse, child abuse, and sex abuse registries and review Iowa Courts Online for driving violations and criminal history. To decrease the possibility of incidents like those at Miramonte Elementary in California, the district plans to screen drivers every five years and will pay for all investigations.

As incidents like the series at Miramonte show, even the most tenured and apparently trustworthy teachers aren’t all they appear to be. Just as the teacher instructing a class of 30 students should honest about his or her background, from education credentials to an absence of criminal convictions, bus drivers coming in contact with students should have to pass a similar set of standards.

Related articles

• Letter: Safety on school buses needs to be a paramount concern (tcpalm.com)
• Bus Driver, Teen Honored For Stopping Hit-And-Run Driver (dreamindemon.com)
• Bus Driver Accused of Sexual Misconduct (myfoxphoenix.com)

Why Ohio and why now? According to the Washington Post, a state resident owning 48 wild animals, including lions and Bengal tigers, let all of them lose and then committed suicide. Because the animals were not contained properly (the property only had a three-foot-tall livestock fence surrounding it), all were shot rather than saved.

If this bill becomes law, far stricter standards for owning exotic animals will be in place. First, background checks will be required for all current owners in order to obtain a permit. Owners with past felony convictions cannot acquire permits and, thus, will have their animals taken away. Additionally, new ownership will not be possible, with the exception of snakes.

Even owners of constricting and venomous snakes need to follow certain rules, however. While breeding and acquiring new animals will be legal if the law passes, owners must have an effective safety plan in place in case one or more animals escape.

All owners, as well, will have a strict set of standards to meet, if the law goes into effect into 2012. Aside from background checks and permits, all owners will need insurance, microchips for tracking the animals, and to meet care requirements, and must register them within 60 days. All properties, as well, must be surrounded by an eight-foot-tall fence. Organizations with several animals, such as zoos, research facilities, and circuses, are exempt from such potential requirements.

Ohio has some of the weakest laws regarding exotic animal ownership. Do you think these proposed measures are necessary not only for the safety of other people within the vicinity but also for the animals themselves?

Related articles

• Bill to regulate exotic animals introduced in Ohio (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• W.Va. exotic animal restrictions bill will be postponed (catswhatshesaid.wordpress.com)
• Scary safari in Ohio ends in carnage Exotic-animals…ohio/… 18 Oct 2011 – Dozens of lions, tigers and other wild animals were shot or caught after the owner of a farm released dozens of animals then killed himself. Exotic Animals On the Loose in O (celebrityimagesphotosandwallpapers.wordpress.com)

According to a Reuters piece, claims of identity theft surged in 2011, with 12 million Americans victims during that time. Although, the article mentions, credit card companies monitor accounts better, hackers or thieves refined and shifted their strategies to other media, including usurping data from a network, stealing smartphones, and scanning social media accounts for individuals’ personal information.

Individuals who find their data stolen are 9.5 times more likely to experience identity theft. In these instances, however, the user or consumer is rarely to blame and, in fact, often entrusts a large corporate infrastructure with personal details, be it credit card or social security numbers or medical records. Large companies or organizations, such as PlayStation in 2011, combat these attacks by implementing effective network security policies that include regular vulnerability audits.

In other instances the Reuters piece mentions, individuals have more control. Smartphones, particularly, are an easy source for a hacker or thief to obtain and exploit an individual’s information – unless the device is password protected. Free apps, as well, may be a hidden threat, and what’s seemingly innocuous is, in fact, a disguised data monitoring program.

Third, social media’s increased popularity ends up often as misuse. Those on Facebook, Twitter, or another platform are advised to post as little personal information as possible. Telephone numbers, social security numbers, addresses, and birthdays should never end up in a profile or a status update, as a hacker, surreptitiously observing, could find it, assume an identity, and possibly wreck your credit and reputation.

Related articles

• Little-to-no cost ways to avoid identity theft (abclocal.go.com)
• Four Ways to Protect Yourself from Identity Theft (couponshoebox.com)
• Careful!!! It’s SENSITIVE: The 5 Major Types of ID Theft (vistage.com)

It’s not an easy question to answer, and as NBC Los Angeles points out, California significantly revised its background check policy in 1997, after a Sacramento teacher was killed by a just-hired janitor with a criminal record. Since that point, NBC explains, potential teachers, administrative employees, and all other staff go through a live scan with fingerprints to bring up all records. At the time of the Sacramento incident, 50 teachers in Los Angeles were found to have criminal convictions.

Two of the accused former teachers had been at the school for several years, if not decades. How both passed background checks is uncertain, although a few possibilities exist: neither had been convicted previously of crimes, or the background checks conducted around 1997 were not thorough enough. Before appointed, the new Miramonte staff members, on the other hand, were rigorously screened. On the other hand, parents of students don’t think this measure is enough, and rather, they prefer all teachers to be screened periodically.

For those not up to date on the incidents at Miramonte, the buildup to the staff changeover essentially began in December 2010, when authorities discovered then-teacher Mark Berndt to have dozens of pictures of students. Suspended and then fired, Berndt reached a settlement on his case in June 2011. In January 2012, Berndt was arrested for committing felony molestation with 23 children, which is documented by nearly 40 photographs of the teacher performing lewd acts. Originally held on a $2.3 million bail, the amount increased to $23 million.

Aside from Berndt, another teacher, Martin Springer, was arrested for lewd conduct, and a former teacher’s aide, Ricardo Guevara, was discovered to have been convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison in 2005 for similar crimes.

Related articles

• Second Teacher Under Investigation at Miramonte Elementary (laist.com)
• School sex-abuse scandal: Parents protest Miramonte transfers (latimesblogs.latimes.com)
• Why Miramonte Was the Perfect Stalking Ground (newser.com)

Investigating a tip, the local news station found Eric Ellis, who is listed as a Registered Sex Offender on the Illinois State Police Website, was placed by a temp agency at the Little Green Tree House daycare. Ellis committed related crimes in 2000 and 2001 and spent four and a half years in prison, before being added to the state sex offender registry. When asked, Ellis told the news station: “I work through a temp service. I don’t mess with kids. I got wrongly accused and people are trying to put that on me.” He additionally mentioned the temp agency is aware of his background.

The daycare, on the other hand, counted on the temp service to run thorough background checks on all workers and never screened any of the placed employees in its facility. As a result, the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) is conducting a child protection investigation and filing a daycare licensing complaint. DCFS responded in a statement: “By law, child care centers are prohibited from hiring registered sex offenders, and are required to notify DCFS of new hires and complete background checks on those new hires.”

No or incomplete background checks for daycare workers isn’t isolated in Chicago. Last year, a National Study revealed that most daycare centers do not conduct background checks on workers, including investigating child abuse records and education histories. Washington is one such state. A recent news piece focusing on Yakima, Wash., revealed some preschools do not screen workers and are not obligated to. While licensed facilities are required, unlicensed daycares are exempt.

Although some states require dating websites to disclose risks and preventative measures, Illinois would mandate that all operating in the state must conduct background checks on all applicants and prominently and clearly display such policies. If a dating website fails to adhere, it violates state laws against consumer fraud and deceptive business practices.

If such a law is passed, all dating websites operating in Illinois will need to check government databases before approving an applicant. More specifically, the site would pull criminal records and sex offender registries to examine each applicant’s history, especially as convicted sex offenders, former criminals, and scam artists have been known to set up dating profiles for luring unsuspecting users.

Widely-used dating websites, such as Match.com and eHarmony.com, already screen all applicants with public sex offender registries. True.com takes it a step further by running thorough background checks, ones that examine state records, on all applicants; according to a piece in the Chicago Tribune, the site has turned away two percent of its applicants.

Online dating is less of a taboo, but risks are still present, from getting ensnared by a con artist looking for cash to ending up assaulted by a convicted sex offender. While caution must be taken with this medium, individuals also have a right to feel moderately secure.

On January 11, the EEOC revealed that 300 blacks were affected by Pepsi’s use of criminal background checks in hiring, which excluded such individuals from permanent, full-time employment. The Minneapolis location of Pepsi, where the charges were filed, implemented a policy that blocked applicants with arrests pending prosecution from employment, even if the individual was not convicted or had a minor offense. The hiring policy, as a result, negatively affected individuals of color, which is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Aside from the large amount of money Pepsi paid to settle the EEOC charges, what happened to the victims of the company’s hiring practices? EEOC Chicago District Director John Rowe told the press:

“We obtained significant financial relief for a large number of victims of discrimination, got them job opportunities that they were previously denied, and eradicated an unlawful barrier for future applicants. We are pleased that Pepsi chose to work with us to reach this conciliation agreement, and that through our joint efforts we have been able to bring about real change at Pepsi without resorting to litigation.”

Pepsi, as well, has a new hiring policy and is required to provide the EEOC with better reports of its practices. To make sure the new policy is enforced, hiring personnel and managers are being trained on Title VII.

Criminals should not be blocked out of employment – especially when the job description does not pertain to his or her past offenses. Companies, to avoid discrimination lawsuits like Pepsi’s, must consider each candidate’s background – and not eliminate an individual simply for an unrelated criminal conviction.