Adam’s principle, Dennis DeMey, has cautioned various industry groups to become proactive and institute better hiring practices and background procedures for their specific circumstances for many years. Dating back to the mid 80’s he warned that legislators react to notorious crimes or catastrophes rapidly, often depending upon information provided by folks who most often are not involved or have no experience in the specific field. Though well intentioned, often times, laws, rules, and restrictions are imposed on employers that generate excess fees and often create tremendous time delays which will have a negative impact on the ability to attract, maintain, and have control over the workforce. It is never advantageous to allow outsiders to govern or promulgate rules on the industry they are not integrally knowledgeable about. In short, his belief is if we do not police ourselves, someone else will police us without our own input. We should set our own standards and policies and be able to substantiate that they are the most appropriate for a given time period and enterprise. We need to be the leaders, not the followers.

A lot of time and money is invested in recruiting, backgrounding, and hiring the “right” employees. For those companies, one of the most serious issues is the safety of all parties including employees, clients, customers, and vendors. Once of the primary purposes of employee screening is to prevent the criminal/dangerous element from entering this environment. Once the employee is trained and seasoned, our comfort level rises. The reality is that very often we really don’t know much about these folks outside of the workplace. Who are they several years down the road, how have they changed, or what’s going on in their lives.

While the focus is growing every year on new hires, the concern is still “who is working for us now?” Anonymous tips, local news coverage and papers have become a significant source of notification concerning criminal involvement by some very trusted employees. The internet has become another instant source of developing important data about employees which could affect their employment status. Every time one of these issues surfaces for somebody else, we wonder how can we find out if there are catastrophes in our workplace. We can’t check everyone every year, it just costs too much money; it wouldn’t be economically feasible. But that nagging thought persists, what can we do, knowing something needs to be done.

Furthermore, the obligation to protect employees, clients, visitors, vendors, and the public we come in contact with has greatly increased. Unfortunately, employers are held to a liability doctrine of “they knew or should have known” on any issue that causes harm or loss to any party. Primary evidence for defense is rooted in proofs of best practice, policies, and procedures. The ability to demonstrate that all reasonable, available and economically feasible measures have been performed, all the time, has proven to be of the most value in litigation management as well as in arbitration proceedings.

Remedy – “Random Employee Checks” (RECs)

Adam Safeguard introduces the next dimension in employee screening:Random Employee Checks, or RECs, provides a reasonable, fair, and economically feasible method to ensure a safe environment for all parties concerned.

Random selection of a predetermined percentage of the employee pool will determine who is subject to updated backgrounds. The updates should consist of a minimum of a Social Security Validation and Trace Report along with a Criminal History Search conducted in the appropriate venue. Specialty employers can elect to include additional items as a standard. Those checks could include verifying professional licenses, sanction checks or compliance issues such as OIG or GSA. For Health Care Facilities, all RECs must be uniform by company, category, and job position.

The selection process should be scientifically controlled, using an employee identification number or a payroll number and not names. The checks can be run monthly based upon 1/12th of the annual percentage established. There are a number of software programs commercially available on the market.

This new standard has been developed in response to Adam’s clients’ repeated request for an affordable way to maintain the integrity of their employee population. Once applicants are cleared and become a part of the work force, there has been no reasonable way to know if they become involved in criminal/adverse activity that could have a serious impact upon their job performance or violate corporate or regulatory requirements.

By engaging a recognized expert to guide in establishing the standards, one does not appear to have been “self serving” in the end. Arguments of not going far enough can be mitigated by an expert’s credibility, opinion, knowledge, experience, and input.
The DOT random drug testing program has passed all levels of legal attacks, even the supreme court. Rather than reinventing the wheel, utilizing some of their standards could establish a solid foundation for any random checking program.
The next key is what elements of a background should be considered. The selections would be dictated by industry job and employee impact. Further considerations are availability, cost, and reliability.

In the end, random checks can be justified. The percentage of employees and the level of checking to be done can be supported based on individual industry liabilities and exposures. Establishing our own rules and projected costs is a far better solution than having someone else come in and mandate that we do a higher percentage, more often, and include items that may not be of any value in reaching the true intended goals. It’s not a matter of if new rules will be imposed upon us, but rather when.

Note: Legal advise is required to ensure all laws are complied with.

If you wish to engage Adam Safeguard, call us at 800-722-ADAM or email us at dennisd@adamsafeguard.com for a confidential inquiry