Why Screen?

Employment screening helps corporations and businesses of all sizes save time and money during their hiring, recruitment process and protecting their assets.

Employment Screening will:

  • Help protect your company from negligent hiring lawsuits
  • Provide a safe working environment for your employees and your customers
  • Reduce workplace violence and accidents, which will reduce worker compensation claims
  • Attracting higher caliber applicants
  • Discourage applicants with criminal records from applying to your company
  • Decrease employee turnover and hiring/training costs

We are committed to creating a safer and more secure workplace through the responsible use of information. All of our business practices are FCRA compliant.

Our web-based ordering and retrieval system ensures the complete security of your data with dual redundancy servers and dual firewall protection. Whether you need to quickly pre-screen candidates or conduct in-depth background research, our services will enable you to make hiring decisions rapidly and with confidence.

It’s simple: The cost of a bad hire far outweighs the cost of a good background check.

You could be very much at risk

We can protect your company and customers without breaking your budget

Why not Screen?

Many employers unfamiliar with employment screening mistakenly think they will have to pay $100 or more on screening an applicant. In reality, a good background check is typically less than $50 and should not cost any more than the applicant’s first day of pay.

This is a small price to pay to ensure the peace of mind that comes with having done the due diligence necessary to protect your company from negligent hiring lawsuits, theft and workplace violence.  Negligent hiring lawsuits, theft and workplace violence results in thousands if not millions of dollars worth of damage to companies who don’t have an employment screening program in place.

All too often, the cost of a bad hire can cause a company to go into bankruptcy or even out of business altogether.  Sadly, the vast majority of these devastated companies could have prevented any trouble by simply ordering a $25-50 background check on their applicants. Again, it’s a small price to pay to protect your company.

Pre-Employment Screening Guidelines

The following is a good source of information from the National Association of Professional Background Screeners’ (NAPBS) publication titled "Pre-employment Screening Guidelines" which goes into more detail regarding the importance of employment screening:

“There are a number of reasons why an employer should perform pre-employment background screening. The most compelling reasons are:

  • Gaining a competitive advantage
  • Reducing turnover
  • Increasing productivity
  • Increasing morale
  • Reducing risk of business disruptions
  • Complying with mandates created by state or federal law for certain industries (health care, child care, etc.)
  • Fulfilling other legal or contractual obligations

Providing a Safe Work Environment

  • Protecting organization’s assets
  • Fostering peace of mind
  • Reducing risk of legal liabilities, including failure to perform due diligence, negligent hiring, and equitable treatment of applicant pool.

Making the Best Hiring Decision

It has been said that some applicants will only tell you what you want to hear. A good writer and storyteller can invent a good resume. The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) conducted two separate online surveys on resume inaccuracies. In August 2004, SHRM reported that sixty-one percent of the human resource (HR) professionals surveyed said they find inaccuracies in resumes after carrying out background checks. An April 2006 article in the New York Times reports that a study conducted by ResumeDoctor.com, a resume-writing service based in Burlington, Vt., found that 43 percent of the more than 1,100 resumes examined had one or more “significant inaccuracies," while 13 percent had two or more. Michael Worthington, the co-founder of Resume Doctor, said the most common transgressions could be found in three areas: education, job titles, and dates of employment.

By thoroughly verifying information given during the employment process, a company can improve the chances they are hiring an individual who has portrayed his or her background, experience, and skills honestly and accurately. Using pre-employment background screening to verify an applicant’s history helps employers make decisions based upon facts.

Providing a Safe Work Environment

An employer's obligation to maintain a safe place to work also arises from the legal principles that exist in most states under common law (the body of law derived primarily from judicial decisions based on custom and precedent, rather than from statutes, codes, or constitutions). These legal principles include:

  • Premises liability (the duty of a property owner to take responsible steps to guard against reasonably foreseeable violence)
  • Respondent superior (an employer’s indirect liability for the wrongful acts of an employee committed within the course and scope of employment);
  • Sexual and other forms of harassment prohibited under discrimination laws (when threats or violence are motivated by a victim’s protected status); and
  • A collection of negligence theories, including negligent hiring (the failure to properly screen job applicants, particularly for sensitive positions involving a high degree of interaction with the public); negligent supervision (the failure to supervise employees and to discipline violators of anti-violence rules), and negligent retention (the failure to terminate employees who have engaged in behavior in violation of company policies).

In the April, 2002 edition of Occupational Health and Safety magazine, attorney-at-law and author of The Safe Hiring Manual, Lester S. Rosen points out that the statistics on the consequences of even one bad hire are significant. Industry statistics suggest the cost of even one bad hiring decision can exceed $100,000, taking into account the time spent recruiting, hiring, and training, and the amount of time the job is left undone or done badly by an unqualified applicant. In addition, the financial cost from theft, violence, etc. can be enormous. Additionally, there are other costs that are hard to measure, such as the harm to employee morale or the entity’s reputation.

Legal Risks and Liabilities

The value of an objective, fair, and competent pre-employment background screening is that it will permit determination of facts not otherwise verifiable or known. As such, employers should pay particular attention to the legal implications associated with the employment screening process. While employers do not have the duty to provide an impenetrable island of safety, every employer has the obligation and duty to take reasonable precautions against preventable harm to employees, customers, and anyone else visiting the workplace. Under the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act and corresponding state statutes, employers have a “general duty” to protect employees against “recognized hazards” that are likely to cause serious injury or death. Specifically,

Section 5. Duties

(a) Each employer:

(1) Shall furnish to each of his employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees;

(2) Shall comply with occupational safety and health standards promulgated under this Act.2

Appropriate due diligence is necessary to ensure that the applicant hired does not pose a foreseeable risk to others with whom he or she might interact while on the job. The failure to properly screen out dangerous applicants may give rise to a negligent hiring claim, if the individual intentionally harms someone in the course of his or her employment.

Another legal risk arises from the inequitable treatment of individuals in the applicant pool. A properly crafted pre-employment background screening program gives all applicants of equal qualifications equal consideration and does not impose disparate treatment on anyone or any group. Employers are encouraged to objectively evaluate each applicant. To the extent it is possible, objective methods should be used to determine each applicant’s qualifications and suitability for the job. Such fairness not only provides the employer a legal defense if faced with a claim, but also helps ensure that the best applicants are consistently selected.”