This is a question that many people have been asking over the years since the turn of the millennium. Originally, criminal background checks were a tool used to reward people with “clean” criminal backgrounds with an opportunity to gain meaningful employment and encourage them to “stay on the right track” as far as not engaging in crime. Although the use of background checks has been in practice for over 100 years, their use really didn't become prominent until the 1990’s as a way to prevent “negligent hiring”. What this means is that employers want to minimize their risk of being sued ever since that first case in which the employer was found liable after an employee was killed in Kentucky due to an employee killing another with an air hose because he was using it in manner deemed dangerous while performing the duties of their job.
In a nutshell, it was found that the employer was engaging in negligent hiring because he witnessed the employee having a pattern of “wrongdoing” and did nothing to prevent it. Another case occurred around 1951 in which a woman was a victim of an indecent attack by a Deliveryman, and it was found by the courts that the employer should have hiring measures in place to extend employment only to those who were found to be “fit and competent” for the particular job function. And as you would suspect over the years more and more companies around the country took notice and so the focus became workplace safety and the prevention of workplace liabilities (i.e. the avoidance of lawsuits).
Fast forward to 1993 when the Brady Act was introduced to stop convicted criminals from buying guns. Much good did it do in the 1990’s as that was one of the worst times in this country in terms of gun violence. Fast forward again to 2003 with the National Instant Criminal Background Check (NICS) was introduced, then soon after that private third-party background companies and screeners came into play.
But with all of the background screening systems that have come about over the century the question still remains - do background checks really work? For some employers, they absolutely work. Those employers typically fall into industries such as government and law-enforcement where a person without a criminal record is desirable. There lies the question: what if the person doesn't have a documented criminal history of any kind; are they still considered a criminal?
The answer is not that much; hence criminal background checks become not as relevant.
For the average person, a background check serves as nothing more than as a barrier to gainful employment more than anything especially since according to a 2021 joint workforce analysis conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) and the Charles Koch Institute found that:
You can read
With most people having some sort of criminal background in America the next question is: do we really need to screen the backgrounds of average people looking for average employment opportunities?
The answer is no.
Affirming the position that conducting background checks for average people seeking average employment opportunities isn’t needed is Servcorp, an international business production and solutions company that had this to say regarding the utilization of background checks for employment purposes:
“The results of a background check can cause an unfair bias in the hiring process. Background checks can disqualify criminal offenders who committed a crime, learned from their mistakes, and have since developed into responsible, qualified, and experienced candidates for the position. Just because a potential employee received a DUI at the age of 21 doesn't automatically mean they're unfit for the position. If you're going to conduct an employee background check, come up with specific grounds for disqualification before you review the report.”
Food for thought well over 30 percent of the population in America have some sort of criminal record/history. And the reasoning for this positioning is because in a 2015 article by the Wall Street Journal entitled: “How Many Americans Have a Police Record? Probably More Than You Think:” written by Jo Craven McGinty states:
“There is no way to pinpoint the exact number because a complete data set of arrests and prosecutions doesn’t exist. And second, the statistic depends on how you define “criminal history.”
She goes on to say:
“Researchers who study the issue typically include anyone who has been arrested or taken into custody by police, regardless of whether the charges were ultimately dropped. By that definition, many people who have never been convicted of a crime have a criminal history.”
Are you a criminal - maybe?
コメント