In recent history “Ban-the Box” legislation has swept across the country and has been adopted in many local and State jurisdictions as well as with some private companies.  The core tenant of this type of policy is the removal of the “Do you have a criminal record” question on the job application form.  However, not all Ban-the-Box polices that have been enacted are identical as some differ significantly giving the movement a non-ubiquitous face. Now in 2016 this movement has reached Colleges and Universities in the USA.  The initial aim to protect job applicants from having to immediately divulge their criminal history is now being considered as an option for admission policies concerning student application forms and the student application process.

Certain College campus officials say the question of criminal history on the application helps them learn as much as they can about a prospective student and allows them to take the necessary steps to keep all the students on campus safe.  However opponents to this line of thinking believe the criminal history question creates an unnecessary barrier that harms some groups of students.

New York University is one key advocate of the new criminal history report policy but with critical revisions.  Instead of considering every criminal conviction as part of their admission application process they will now ask new questions like, “Have you been convicted of or disciplined for violent incidents.”

From the August 2, 2016 Gothamist.com:

(1)   Starting this month, New York University will no longer consider every criminal conviction on an applicant’s record, regardless of severity, as part of the undergraduate application process. Instead, the school is instating a new set of questions that require applicants to disclose whether they have been “convicted of or disciplined for violent incidents,” according to a press release from the school.  gothamist.com/2016/08/02/nyu_crime_disclosure_box.php

Recent new studies shows that the question of criminal history on college applications may not predict behavior in a significant way and may not make college campuses any safer.

Also from Gothamist.com (Aug. 02, 16):

(1)     Studies have shown that having the box on college applications doesn’t make campuses any safer, and NYU reached the same conclusion after an internal assessment of its own disciplinary records. “NYU took a look at the NYU disciplinary records of enrolled students who had checked the box against the overall undergraduate NYU population,” Knoll-Finn stated. “We found no meaningful differences in the rates of infractions.”  gothamist.com/2016/08/02/nyu_crime_disclosure_box.php

In Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti has added his voice to those pushing for change in the application process.

From LATimes.com (Jul. 01, 16):

Eric Garcetti has recruited 32 other mayors across the country to join him in urging college admissions companies to stop asking applicants about their criminal histories.

(2)   In a letter, the mayors petitioned the Common Application Association and Universal College Application — two companies whose standard applications are used by many private universities — “to remove any box that inquiries into a person’s past criminal history from your admissions applications.”  latimes.com/local/education/la-me-garcetti-criminal-history-applications-20160701-snap-story.html

Changes concerning whether or not to ask applicants for their criminal history records along with if and when to ask for such information has substantially changed in the employment screening and tenant screening arenas.  Now it has found its way to College and University campuses.  These institutes of higher learning are now taking a hard look at their admission application policies and some are trying to enact ban-the-box type of policies.

The verdict is still being discussed as some people think keeping the question of an applicant’s criminal history on student application forms can harm certain potential students while other campus officials think that asking as much as possible on the application form helps them learn as much as they can about an applicant which enables them to take the steps necessary to ensure the safety of everyone on the campus.

Other research such as that conducted by NYU shows that having the criminal history question on student applications doesn’t predict behavior in a significant way and does not make college campuses any safer.  In any case it is a best practice for Colleges and Universities to partner with a professional background screening company to help them remain compliant with current law and if criminal background checks are performed for them to be accurate, current and complete.

To read more regarding what impact ban-the-box type polices may have on Colleges and Universities admission practices and why institutions of higher learning should use professional third-party background screening companies read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  http://www.criminalbackgroundrecords.com/news/2016-8-24-Ban-the-Box-Type-Policies-May-Impact-Public-and-Private-Institutions-of-Higher-Learning-Admission-Policies.html

With more and more States allowing the use of medical marijuana employers need to revisit their employment related policies. Even though the use of marijuana is illegal under Federal law, it is legal under some State laws. In addition to the legalization of medical marijuana at the State level some States even made the recreational use of marijuana legal as well. Specifically Colorado and Washington both now allow recreational use of marijuana. However, just because a State legalizes the use of marijuana it doesn’t mean that you can’t get fired from using it. In Colorado the most marijuana friendly State in the country a man was just fired for using marijuana. According to the NY Times on June 16th, 2015 a Colorado man lost his court case of an alleged unlawful dismissal due to marijuana use during non-work hours. A random drug test led to his forfeiture of employment. Once hired for a position in a company the employee must understand an employer’s policy on drug testing.

Employers in the USA now have to cope with State laws legalizing marijuana use and urgently need to revise their employment screening policies and employment related policies in order to reflect how they deal with employee drug use specifically the use of marijuana. Some companies in marijuana friendly States may allow marijuana use during non-work hours while others may not want any employee using marijuana both at the job and away from the job. Certain jobs certainly warrant the non-use of drugs such as marijuana and these positions can only be filled by job candidates that agree not use such drugs while under employment. Depending on what the job requires it will most likely be up to the employer as to what drug behaviors are acceptable and what are not. What is clear is that potential employees and current employees must understand the employment conditions and policies of the company they want to work for or already work for.

Already with ban-the-box legislation sweeping across the country more and more employers are forced to change their hiring practices, mainly removing the criminal record checkbox on the application form and then only able to run a criminal background check after an initial offer is made. On top of this the EEOC is enforcing disparate impact by taking legal action against companies whose employment screening policies disproportionally discriminate against certain groups such as minorities. With the legalization of marijuana at the State level, the rapid adoption of the ban-the-box initiative and with the EEOC on the attack, now is the time for employers to review their employment related policies especially their employment screening policy and how they go about hiring new employees.

To learn more about the effects of the legalization of marijuana in the workplace and what employers need to do to stay legally compliant with relevant laws please read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release.

Despite the never ending winter in the North East the summer season begins around spring break as businesses like Disneyland and Six Flags begin to ramp up employment in early spring. Other amusement parks like Dorney Park and Wildwater Kingdown will be adding an additional 2,500 summer jobs to their employment roster. With businesses ranging from retailers to restaurants needing additional employees to get through the summer crowds, it is important that they take the time to screen these seasonal workers before hiring them. Typical background checks include a criminal background check, social security validation and sex offender registry check. However, the temptation for employers to skip the background screening process for seasonal hires can be high. Many employers make the assumption that employment background checks are not necessary for part-time or seasonal workers. This assumption is not accurate and for risk mitigation purposes and to create and maintain a safe working environment a thorough background check including criminal background checks can help reduce risk and provide a safer environment for existing employees and for customers.

According to the Global Retail Theft Barometer 2013 – 2014 released by Checkpoint Systems in October 2014, total shrinkage among retailers in North America was an astounding $42 billion. This enormous loss can be reduced going forward by employers conducting thorough background screening on new hires especially seasonal hires. Pre-employment background checks for seasonal hires should be the same background screening process as with full time employees. Making the mistake of not counting a seasonal employee as a representative of the company they work for can be costly and performing professional and thorough employment background screening is always more affordable than the cost of bad employees. To learn more about summer hires and why background checks should be performed even for part-time or seasonal workers please read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release.

There are a few steps a person with a criminal history can take to achieve gainful employment. One step has been taken for them by many US States who have already enacted ban-the-box legislation which prevents employers from asking if they have a criminal record in the early stages of the job application process. However, if an individual has committed a crime in the past, was convicted and then satisfied all the criteria of the court and is no longer in prison then they can petition the court for an expungement. An expungement of a criminal background record means that the person in questions criminal history is either sealed or destroyed. This means that in the eyes of the judicial system there are no criminal records on file for this person. This person can then apply for a job and honestly say they have no criminal records. Expungement is probably the best way to clean the slate and start new and is also the best way to achieve gainful employment.

There are a number of conditions that may need to be met in order to qualify for a criminal record expungement. Among them are: Satisfactorily completing the terms of any previous sentence, compliance with all probation requirements, and there cannot be any other pending criminal investigations against the person. In order for an expungement to be granted a judge needs to okay it and then it is as if the person never committed the crime to begin with. This means that if a criminal background check was conducted on this person after the expungement the background check should come back with no criminal records found. However, some background screening companies that pull from criminal record databases could still show the criminal record. However, the person need only notify such a company of the expungement and they will promptly delete the record from their database. To read more about how expungement helps with re-employment with individuals with a criminal past please view recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release.

As laws change on the appropriate use of criminal background checks in the employment screening process it is a good time to review current policy and work with a third party background screening company to stay compliant in your hiring practices. Ultimately the fair and lawful use of criminal histories will continue to be scrutinized and it is critical that companies work with third-party background screening companies in order to remain compliant with local, state, and federal regulation governing background screening. Failure to comply with law could result in significant penalty and costly legal action. Inappropriate use of criminal history reports by human resources could also result in a great injustice to potential job candidates. To read more about the evolving landscape of background checks in the employment screening process view recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release: http://www.criminalbackgroundrecords.com/news/2014-7-25-The-Evolving-Landscape-of-Background-Checks.html

The ban-the-box initiative is sweeping across the country. Most recently in California the Governor signed a new law banning government employers from asking criminal history questions on their job application. However, later in the hiring process they are allowed to perform criminal background checks. Also, recently the State of Minnesota expanded their existing ban-the-box law to now cover private employers as well. This includes Minneapolis based Target Corporation who upon learning about the new law went ahead and removed criminal history questions from their job applications all across the country. In addition the State of New Jersey is now considering ban-the-box legislation but has met opposition from the State Chamber of Commerce.

The use of criminal history checks in the pre-employment screening and employment screening process is the heart of the ban-the-box initiative. The difficult aspect of this issue is that many of the States that have enacted such laws vary significantly from each other leaving no conformity. Without consistent background screening standards and lack of uniformity a great deal of confusion has arisen in the marketplace. This is most especially true for employers that operate in multiple States. This is why it is a good idea for employers and government entities to partner with a professional third party employment screening company to help stay compliant with new and existing laws. Like wild fire the ban-the-box initiative is spreading rapidly from State to State and will continue to do so in the near future. To learn more about this subject read recent CriminalBackgroundRecords.com press release:  http://www.criminalbackgroundrecords.com/news/2013-11-15-Ban-The-Box-Comes-to-California.html