Crime can happen anywhere, even in the best of neighborhoods. Another place that crime can happen is in the workplace. Many companies fail to put safeguards in place that protect their employees, often because they do not realize that those safeguards are needed. With that in mind, some employees are becoming increasingly concerned about crime in the workplace, and what their risk of workplace crime really is, as the world heads into 2016.

Workplace crime falls into several categories.

Workplace crime also falls into a lot of different categories, with some types of crimes being more of a safety concern than others. Violent crimes are often more of a worry for employees, whereas property crimes such as theft are a larger focus of employers who do not want to have their items stolen. Both types of crime should be studied, though, because they can be very significant for employers, employees, and customers of nearly any type of business.

There are indications that workplace crime has been on a downward trend for a number of years, and that trend does not show any signs of stopping or reversing. That does not mean that workplace crime will not happen in 2016 and beyond, but only that the number of crimes that occur in the workplace are not growing. That is very good news for employers and employees, as well as customers. Everyone who comes into a business, whether they work there or not, wants to feel safe. Statistics show that the opportunity to feel safe is greater now than it ever was in the past. The National Crime Prevention Council offers a few tips, though, for those who may be at risk or who may be worried about crimes occurring in their workplace.

Naturally, taking care in the hiring process is one of the biggest ways to reduce violence and other types of workplace crime. That helps to ensure that only the best and safest employees are hired, and that all employees can be trusted not to steal from the company or harm others. By checking credentials and verifying references, there is a higher chance that only good employees will be selected, and that any problems with a person’s background will come to light before an offer of employment is extended. While that does not guarantee workplace safety, it does help to continue the downward trend of workplace crime into 2016 and moving forward.

Disclaimer Statement: All information presented is for information purposes only and is not intended to provide professional or legal advice regarding actions to take in any situation.

Marijuana is now legal or decriminalized to varying degrees in a number of states. Unfortunately, some confused employees may think that makes it perfectly fine to report to work or to a job interview under the influence. Across the nation, medical and safety-sensitive positions still generally include drug testing as part of the employment screening process. And it’s almost never OK to show up for work stoned, even in states that have legalized marijuana.

In Oregon, where recreational marijuana recently was legalized, employees of various cities have been warned that showing up to work high still constitutes a policy violation, The Oregonian reports. Most city policies revolve around a common theme: Workers may smoke when they’re off the clock, but they may not arrive at work stoned. For workers whose jobs involve driving or dealing with safety issues, federal law still prohibits using marijuana at any time.

Quickly changing laws

Use, possession, cultivation, sale or transportation of marijuana remain illegal under U.S. federal law, but individual states may decriminalize the drug for medical or recreational use. In 2013, Colorado became the first state to adopt rules for recreational use of the drug. As of July 2015, marijuana is legal at the state level in Colorado, Alaska, Oregon and Washington. Ten states have legalized marijuana for medical purposes, and 12 have decriminalization laws along with medical marijuana. In 22 states, any use of marijuana remains illegal.

Legalized marijuana and employment

In some states that have legalized marijuana, pre-employment screening rates for the drug appear to be increasing. And a recent survey indicates that in Colorado, one in five employers has initiated tougher drug-testing policies since legalization, the Denver Post reports. Despite the legal status in some places, courts so far have backed employers’ rights to fire employees who use marijuana, even when off duty.

None of that appears to be stopping some people from smoking before reporting to work and even before job interviews. One study indicates that positive results for pre-employment drug testing are up nearly 6 percent since 2011, and experts say employers are having a tough time finding prospective workers who can pass drug tests.

What’s next for employers?

Most U.S. employers aren’t legally required to test for drugs, and some states and local governments have laws in place that prohibit or limit workplace testing for their employees unless required by the federal government for certain positions. As the legal landscape evolves, private employers will continue to develop policies that respect employees’ free time while abiding by the law and establishing clear policies for the workplace.

Disclaimer Statement: All information presented is for information purposes only and is not intended to provide professional or legal advice regarding actions to take in any situation.

In more recent years, a growing number of employers have turned to social networking sites to vet their job candidates. On the surface, venturing out into the socialsphere to gather information on candidates might seem like fruitful exercise for most employers. But, there are a host of legal issues that surround such an undertaking. Part I of this post reviewed federal laws that impact how organizations can use social media for screening candidates. But there are also legal developments at the state level, along with other recent landmark rulings, that affect how employers should conduct social media screenings.

State Laws

Since the earlier part of this decade, state-level lawmakers have introduced legislation aimed at limiting employers’ use of social media for screening candidates. In April 2012, Maryland became the first state in the U.S. to pass a law that prohibits employers from asking current and prospective employees to provide their username and password to their personal social media accounts.

Prior to this law being passed, an increasing amount of employers were starting to feel comfortable asking candidates for the sign-in information to their individual social networking accounts. Employers were aiming to access information beyond the content that they could view on a given candidate’s public profile. The Maryland General Assembly decided to put a halt to this trend with the passage of Senate Bill 433 (S.B. 433)/House Bill (H.B. 964).

In September 2012, California helped to further advance the model for other states to follow by passing their own social media privacy bill. It added §980 to the California Labor Code, which provides protections to employees that are similar to those found in the Maryland law.

Yet, Labor Code §980 went beyond the stipulations of Maryland’s law in addressing this issue. It bans employers from retaliating against any employee or candidate who does not comply with a request to disclose their username or password.

However, California’s law does provide certain exceptions for employers to request login credentials from their employees. The law allows employers to require employees to give them this information when it pertains to accessing an employer-issued electronic device.

Since the passage of S.B. 433/H.B. 964, more than 20 states have passed laws that restrict employers from requiring their employees and candidates to provide login credentials. Some of these state laws also prohibit employers from accessing their employees’ or candidates’ social media accounts indirectly through a friend or third party.

A new Virginia law (H.B. 2081), which becomes effective on July 1, addresses scenarios in which employers inadvertently obtain their employees’ social media login credentials through their employer-issued electronic devices. The law prohibits employers from accessing their employees’ social media accounts under such circumstances.

Also, Virginia employers can no longer ask candidates to modify their contacts lists on social media sites and urge adding “an employee, supervisor, or administrator.”

What is more, Oregon is already amending its relatively recent social media law to further broaden the scope of its protections for employees. Earlier this month, Oregon Governor Kate Brown signed a bill (S.B. 185 A) that amended Oregon’s existing social media law (H.B. 2654 B) passed in 2013. The amendment prohibits employers from requiring employees or candidates to create or maintain social media accounts. The new measure will go into effect on January 1, 2016.

Each of these state laws addresses important issues that every employer should understand. These laws draw attention to certain distasteful practices that employers may consider when using social media to screen candidates. Employers need to consult the laws for each state where they hire new employees.

Sweet v. LinkedIn Corp.

Every employer should also be aware of the landmark Sweet v. LinkedIn Corp. ruling that recently occurred in a California federal court. In the case, four plaintiffs filed a class-action lawsuit against LinkedIn on behalf of themselves and all other LinkedIn members who had reports run on their professional backgrounds through LinkedIn’s subscription-based Reference Search service.

Their suit claimed that any potential employer could use Reference Search to “anonymously dig into the employment history of any LinkedIn member, and make hiring and firing decisions based upon the information they gather, without the knowledge of the member, and without any safeguards in place as to the accuracy of the information that the potential employer has obtained.”

The plaintiffs contended that by “providing consumer reports” through its Reference Search service, LinkedIn “is, and at all relevant times was” acting as a consumer reporting agency (CRA) as defined under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). They alleged that LinkedIn had committed five violations of the FCRA, and had destroyed their chances of being hired for certain jobs.

But, the federal district court dismissed the claim. It stated that LinkedIn’s Reference Search reports do not fall under the FCRA’s definition of “consumer reports.” The court found that any information that LinkedIn shared with employers derived from the plaintiffs’ choosing to voluntarily provide such information online. The court further ruled that LinkedIn does not constitute a CRA as defined by the FCRA.

Even though the Sweet v. LinkedIn Corp. ruling turned out to be a temporary victory for employers, every employer should recognize that there is likely a spate of similar claims to come. At the moment, the courts have granted some latitude towards employers by determining that social media platform providers like LinkedIn do not classify as CRAs. But given the evolving nature of this issue, employers should put into place practices that keep their organizations compliant with the FCRA. Every employer should create a policy document that highlights these practices for conducting social media employment screening.

Creating a Social Media Policy

If you are an employer that uses social media as part of your candidate screening process, then instituting a policy around this practice can help to further safeguard your organization.

Prior to drafting a social media policy, you should delve into the details of the FCRA. It provides helpful guidelines for CRAs and obtainers/users of “consumer reports” to remain compliant with the FCRA. The conditions outlined in the FCRA will enable your organization to establish best practices for using social media that follow the law.

When creating a policy, you should also consult the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) Best Practices for Employers and Human Resources/EEO Professionals. And during this process, you should be mindful of federal labor laws, your own state’s labor laws and any relevant local ordinances. Your organization would be best served to hire a labor lawyer to help address these areas when creating a policy.

Moreover, you should consider these following suggestions for drafting and managing your policy:

• Explicitly delineate the nature and parameters of your social media screenings and what you will report.
• Avoid reporting any information that you cannot verify.
• Consistency is critical throughout the search and verifications process. Establish standards for your employees to follow that explain which platforms they can use and to what depth they can research a candidate’s account. Treat all of your candidates the same.
• Regularly update your policy to comply with changes in relevant federal, state and local laws. Make sure your policy reflects any updates with anti-discrimination law.

Whether your organization is vetting information in-house or using reports provided by a vendor, it is imperative that you have a social media policy in place. After implementing your policy, you will want to thoroughly train your staff in all of the practices that it covers. They should learn how to properly review and vet information that they find either on social media sites or in reports provided by a vendor.

Finally, every candidate needs to be aware of your policy at the outset of the hiring process.

Disclaimer Statement: All information presented is for information purposes only and is not intended to provide professional or legal advice regarding actions to take in any situation.

The summer season is upon us. During this time of year, many employers hire additional staff to attend to the increased demands on their business. Many young people seize on these opportunities by landing jobs to earn some income during breaks in their academic calendars. But in the haste of looking to fill what are often viewed as “temporary” positions, employers often do not devote the time or resources required to ensure that they are hiring the right people.

Every summer season promises to bring a sharp increase in the amount of young people looking for work. Many high school and college students look for employment during their summer breaks. In addition, recent college graduate typically enter the full-time job market for the first time. In 2014, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that between April to July of that year, “the number of employed youth 16 to 24-years-old increased by 2.1 million to 20.1 million.”

Likewise, employers from various industries look to rapidly hire seasonal employees who can fulfill the growing needs of their businesses during the summer months. A huge amount of summer jobs open up in numerous industries like tourism, hospitality, entertainment, dining and farming.

But, far too many employers make the mistake of restricting their hiring budgets for the summer season. All too often, employers believe that it is not worth investing too heavily in the summer hiring process. They frequently make this decision based on the fact that many of their openings are for low-level jobs that will only exist for a temporary period. Employers usually convince themselves that there are ultimately no long-term requirements on their part.

As a result, business owners often take a frugal approach towards investing time and finances into finding out about the full backgrounds of their seasonal employees. They instead choose to scale back their usual processes for vetting regular full-time employees, when hiring seasonal employees.

This, however, can prove to be a serious mistake for several reasons. As a hiring manager, it behooves you to keep the following three variables in mind:

1.  Seasonal employees are on the front-line serving your customers. In most work settings, summer hires and regular full-time employees usually have the same level of access to customers. Seasonal employees often directly interface with the consumers that they are serving. As a consequence, they can really dictate a customer’s perception of your service delivery. Even worse, potential exists for a summer hire to unintentionally or intentionally physically harm your customers. Therefore, seasonal employees pose just as big of a liability risk as regular full-time employees. At a very minimum, a summer worker can damage your branding efforts.
2. Seasonal employees can easily access your inventory, cash-flow, and private data. For the most part, seasonal employees usually work in industries that grant summer hires immediate access to a variety of valuable commodities. Depending on the nature of your business, your seasonal employees may have the same level of access to its cash-flow, merchandise and confidential records as your regular full-time employees. The possibility of employee theft has to be top of mind issues when hiring seasonal employees. You need to be thinking about how to minimize your potential losses.
3. Seasonal employees can affect the mindset of your workforce and its productivity. Seasonal workers are typically integrated into the workforce of an organization just like any regular full-time employees. If you unknowingly hire a deceitful employee that has an unscrupulous past, their devious ways could corrupt your workforce. Other employees could now be influenced to behave in a deplorable and lawless manner. Moreover, even your hardest-working and most principled employees could become apathetic about working in such an environment. Worst of all, your employees could feel threatened if they end up having to work with a summer hire that is prone to acting violent.

As an employer, it is easy for you to rationalize not making a financial commitment towards vetting your temporary seasonal employees. But the aforementioned variables exemplify the inherent risks that exist in hiring summer staff. A deleterious seasonal employee could potentially damage your brand’s reputation and even cost your organization an enormous amount of money in lawsuits.

You need to approach your summer hiring cycle with a commitment towards implementing and executing a rigorous pre-employment screening program. You should establish a screening program that has definitive procedures and stringent requirements for hiring seasonal employees. You should be operating your summer hiring process with the same level of due diligence that you practice during your regular hiring cycles.

More often than not, it makes the most economical sense to work with an experienced background screening company that can provide the expertise needed to thoroughly vet your summer job candidates. You will want to be sure that they have the capacity to conduct comprehensive criminal background searches on all of your candidates. This will help to ensure that you do not risk unintentionally hiring a summer worker with a criminal history.

 It is also imperative that your background screening provider is able to confirm your candidates’ work histories, professional references, and educational record. You should only consider providers that can prove they can offer efficient verification services. Such a service will verify your candidates’ employment credentials and educational background.

By taking cues from other employers who do not conduct pre-employment screenings on seasonal employees, you run the risk of costing your organization its reputation and potentially thousands of dollars. Many young people are about to converge on the summer job market, and you want to be sure that you are taking the steps necessary to choose the talent that will directly benefit your business.

Employee background checks are effective tools to identify potential employees who are likely to exhibit unacceptable workplace behavior. From education verification and criminal record checks to prior employment verification services, these research tools can reveal possible problem areas. In addition, the U.S. Bureau of Justice reported that workplace violence accounts for 18 percent of all violent crimes, and the ACFE reported that companies lose 5 percent of annual revenue due to occupational fraud. Employee background checks open the window to the candidate’s prior history, which is a good predictor of future performance. Without a doubt, the pros of employee background checks should not be ignored.

Protection Against Negligent Hiring Liability

Employers are responsible for what they know and should have known about their employees, such as prior theft, reckless behavior and drug abuse. The courts continually affirm that employers have a duty to exercise reasonable care in the hiring of employees. A background check is a good defense against negligent hiring liability.

Reduction in Employee Dishonesty Losses

According the 2010 Report to Nations, 46 percent of employer theft was committed by employees, 37 percent was committed by managers, and 17 percent of employer theft was committed by executives. Some estimates indicate that the total amount averages out to roughly $4,500 per employee. With a background check, employers can look for signs of any misconduct in terms of fraud or stealing before hiring an applicant to avoid employee dishonesty losses down the road.

Reduction in Workplace Violence

OSHA reports that about 2 million employees are victims of workplace violence each year. These crimes include rape, assault, homicide and harassment. With a thorough background check, employers can increase safety in the workplace and safeguard clients and employees. Employee background checks can reveal if someone has a history of undesirable contact or violence, which is a red flag for future violence.

An Increase in Employee Quality

Once the word gets out that the employer conducts a background check, there’s an immediate improvement in the quality of applicants. It results in fewer applications with false information and discourages applicants who are trying to hide something. With comprehensive criminal background searches, the quality of hires are increased due to a more efficient selection process and improved applicant pool.

Disclaimer Statement: All information presented is for information purposes only and is not intended to provide professional or legal advice regarding actions to take in any situation.

Sources: www.nfib.com/article/preventing-employee-theft-29624/