PI Newswire

Is it any wonder given the economic uncertainty that a culture of fear and mistrust is growing across employee groups? People simply don’t believe the rhetoric pronounced by their leaders and this lack of trust can disenchant the most loyal employees.

We mustn’t forget that this economic downturn has had a significant impact on people’s personal lives – the threat of redundancies and pay freezes can push people to extremes in order to compensate for financial shortfalls. Having a good set of policies is key, but they need to be clearly articulated to staff on a regular basis so that they understand what is and is not, acceptable behaviour. Then of course staff need to be vigilant, in particular line managers as they are probably best positioned to spot any potential issues early.

Although statistics show a broad profile of the most likely employee to present a security threat, the truth is there is patently no universal giveaway- otherwise the problem would no longer exist. There are however some pointers, some a lot more obvious than others. The whole key to stemming any attack from the inside, as stated above, whether malicious or unintentional however, remains awareness. Awareness of how damaging sending sensitive data via non-encrypted methods can be, and awareness that a member of staff’s change in circumstance or work habits could flag up something potentially of wider concern.

But line managers may not always be able to stop an obvious candidate for wrongdoing slipping through the net, staff culture is the key. It’s not about providing a snooper’s charter, but it’s essential that staff know how and to whom they should voice their concerns in a confidential setting. More than that, they also need to know the potential consequences for the individual concerned and the organisation if they do not take any action.

Read more…

Companies are increasing their use of background checks on potential employees as information becomes more readily available online at a time when more people are looking for jobs.

“In down times, the likelihood is greater that someone is misrepresenting themselves,” said David Lewis, president of Operations Inc., a Stamford-based human resources consulting firm. “It’s amazing how many people we have who fail those checks.”

Screenings help make sure a candidate is not only qualified for a position but is also a safe individual to work with the company’s employees, said Lewis, who estimates that at least 10 percent of resumes from prospective workers contain false information.

“In this day and age, you have so many issues that can come up on an employee,” he said, adding that many human resource managers don’t bother to check references. “If you don’t have that, then what are you left with?”

All job candidates for Stamford-based Pitney Bowes Inc. are screened by an outside service to ensure that they will not endanger fellow workers or their clients, said Laura Tirenzi Khaleel, Pitney Bowes’ director of talent acquisition.

Read more…

The types of background checks companies choose to perform is largely dependent upon their line of business, staffing needs and the expense involved. Some may say that more information is better, but sometimes “more” may just mean more time and more expense.

Whatever determination you make, maintain a consistent approach in order to prevent possible discriminatory practices. Check all employees or those with a legitimate business reason, like all company drivers. Don’t be selective. Following are some of the basic background checks that should be considered.

Prior Employment

At the very least, all companies should be doing reference checks on applicants. Offers can be made prior to phone calls being placed, but candidates should be aware that offers are contingent upon successful results of reference and background investigations. Statements that convey this message should be included on applications and always signed and dated by the applicants. Applications are considered legal documents. (See sidebar for a good example of an authorization and acknowledgement of information to use on applications.)

Besides asking for confirmation regarding position titles, dates of employment, salary and whether or not the applicants are eligible for rehire, companies should be asking for specific information about performance on the job both in terms of quantity and quality, lateness and absenteeism, and both employee strengths and areas for improvement. Most human resources departments will only confirm minimal information, so it is better to call direct supervisors who are not as hesitant to divulge details. Smaller companies are often more willing than larger companies to give more in-depth information because they typically receive less human resource training. At least two references should be attempted on every candidate, but the hiring process should not be held up waiting for responses. Therefore, good judgment on hiring decisions is crucial.

Read more…

According to a recent article on MSNBC – “Job Candidates Undergoing Credit Scrutiny” – applicants applying for jobs these days can expect prospective employers to verify resume information, contact references, possibly do a criminal background check, and even be asked by companies to allow credit checks to scrutinize their credit histories.

The article cites a recent survey by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) in which 60 percent of the responding companies claimed they perform credit checks of some or all job candidates. Breaking down the survey results further, only 13 percent of organizations performed credit checks on all job candidates while 47 percent performed them on selected job candidates, usually for positions with fiduciary and financial responsibility such as handling cash, banking, and accounting.

MSNBC also reported that credit checks are required about half the time for senior executive positions and that the SHRM survey also showed that potential candidates with outstanding judgments, accounts in collection, or a bankruptcy in their file may be passed over for a job.

Lester Rosen, President of Employment Screening Resources (ESR), was quoted in the MSNBC article as saying employers are “looking at the debt level compared to the potential income from the job” and added that “if someone is under water financially as shown by the credit report, the thought is perhaps there could be a motive to embezzle or steal.”

However, while Rosen says credit checks are one method employers may use to hire honest and trustworthy employees that also provide some legal cover if that employee turns out to be dishonest, ESR does not encourage routine credit checks on all candidates since credit checks often contain errors and can feel like an invasion of privacy to applicants.

Rosen’s advice in the article for employers is to limit credit checks to relevant positions such as those that involve money. In fact, with many states recently passing laws limiting the use of credit checks for employment purposes, employers need to be careful when, to whom, and how they perform credit checks on prospective job applicants.

For jobseekers, ESR also provides information – at no charge – to job applicants on background checks and credit check reports can help job applicants navigate the background check process and maximize their chance at employment. The information is available on ESR’s ‘Applicant Resources’ page at: http://www.esrcheck.com/Applicant-Resources.php.

Read more…

A Maryland Department of Human Resources employee was placed on administrative leave after posting the Social Security numbers and other personal information of nearly 3,000 clients of a state agency on a third-party website, a spokeswoman for the agency said.

There’s no evidence that the information was used for identity theft, said DHR spokeswoman Nancy Lineman, but DHR, which provides benefits such as food stamps and other aid, will offer affected clients a year of credit monitoring. They will receive a letter that was mailed Monday with further details about the data breach.

Under state law, businesses that expose the data of Maryland residents must inform them in writing, but governments are not required to do so, Lineman said. The employee is on administrative leave during the investigation of this incident and could face disciplinary action, she said.

* Watch the AC360 VideosWhere Truth Got in the Way of an Agenda. Get the Unvarnished Facts. FreedomMag.org/AC360_Videos
* Scientology TodayLearn about the fastest growing religion of the 21st Century. Scientology.org

The breach was discovered by staff of the Liberty Coalition, a nonprofit that promotes individual freedoms, including privacy. The group’s privacy director, Aaron Titus, said the information was posted from April 27 to July 14. They tried to notify DHR officials July 9, he said, but were not successful until July 12. The data was taken down Wednesday, Lineman said.

Read more…

From the mailbox: Why shouldn’t employers simply do their own background checks in-house? They can hire people from the screening industry and can certainly figure it out.

Answer: First, the fact that a firm may be able to set up an internal screening program does not mean it makes sense. All sorts of professional services could be done in-house. Successful firms typically spend time and energy doing what they are good at (their core function), and they outsource functions that although critical, do not need to take up in-house resources. Of course, if a firm is large enough it may make sense. Of if the firm has a special place in the market where there is a need to be able to tell people they control the process, then that may be a good reason to perform services in house. Most successful firm outsource those HR endeavors that are unusually complicated or regulated, which would include many human resource services such as benefits, retirement planning and screening.

Secondly, it can be a trap to think that the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the law that controls third party background checks has no application to in-house processes. An employer that performs these activates in-house can easily hit an FCRA “tripwire” thus invoking the FCRA. There are numerous examples. Hiring an out of state agency to pull a court record for example could, per an FTC staff letter, make what appears to be a non-FCRA investigation into an FCRA regulated activity. Accessing non-public databases can make it an FCRA event. California has applied some FCRA type rules on a limited basis to employers that do public record checks in-house. So unless every single thing an in-house department does is done by your own W-2 employees and you only access public records, you may end up tripping the FCRA. Our advice is that even if done in-house, act as though the FCRA applies.

One argument made in favor of in-house processes is that a firm can conduct better reference checks because it knows what it is looking for. Verifications are an interesting issue. There are two types of verifications. Managers may call to determine if someone should be hired. Screening firms are typically called upon AFTER a tentative hiring decision has been made for the purpose of a methodical review of the work history to confirm employment. Hiring managers cannot always be counted on to document the entire work history. Either Human Resources, an internal department or an outside vendor needs to ensure that all employers have been contacted.

Finally, there are a number of specialized skills and resources that are needed, such as figuring out education fraud, or if a criminal record can be used. Unless a firm has access to experts on the laws of all 50 states, and an understanding of EEOC rules, etc, doing it in-house can be very risky. Accessing records from 1,000’s of different courts can be very tricky. A great deal of knowledge is required,

Read more…

Federal Bureau of Investigation officials in New York are increasingly employing tools and techniques used to hunt terrorists to take aim at a different kind of criminal: white-collar con artists and inside traders.

At a time when the public has grown suspicious of Wall Street and lost confidence in the government’s ability to police it, investigators say they are expanding a number of methods, including the use of human sources, so-called tripwire programs, and internal intelligence reports, to try to get a better handle on crimes in the marketplace.

“We’re trying to apply the principles of the national-security side so we can prevent something from becoming a $50 billion fraud by catching it early on,” FBI Special Agent-in-Charge James Trainor said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Trainor, who is head of the New York field office’s intelligence division, said he is trying to change what he says is the culture of silence on Wall Street along with the culture of investigative work in his office.

“Say there’s somebody at a hedge fund who is considering investing. The folks who do this kind of research are very bright, and presumably many people did not invest in Bernard Madoff or somebody like Madoff. Instead of just not investing, I’d like them to also give me a call,” he said.

Read more…

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) – the nation’s consumer protection agency – issued “FTC Facts For Consumers” in May 2010 that explains “Credit Reports and Employment Background Checks” to consumers who have applied for jobs. The FTC asks consumers the following question about background checks and credit reports:

Did you know that when you apply for a job, an employer is permitted to do a background check before hiring you? Depending on the employer and the job, that background information might include your employment history, your driving record, and your credit report.

A credit report, according to the FTC, has information about where a consumer lives, how they pay bills, whether they have been sued or arrested, or have filed for bankruptcy. Credit report companies sell the information in credit reports to employers and other businesses that use that information to evaluate applications for employment, credit, insurance, or renting a place to live. Employers also are allowed to use credit reports to evaluate an employee for retention, promotion, or reassignment.

The FTC enforces the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), a law that protects the privacy and accuracy of the information in a consumer’s credit report. The FCRA spells out the rights of a job applicant and an employer’s responsibilities when using credit reports and other background check information to assess an application for employment.

The FTC also details key employment provisions of the FCRA, most notably that employers must get permission from job applicants before asking for background check reports about them from a credit reporting company or any other company that provides background check information.

In addition, if an applicant does not get a job because of information in a background check report, the employer has certain legal obligations: 1.) an employer must show applicant the report, and 2.) the employer must tell the applicant how to get his or her own copy. The report is free if the applicant asks for it within 60 days.

Read more…

Dealing with a data security breach is a difficult task for any enterprise. Cleaning up after a data security breach involves many time-consuming steps, including identifying what data was breached, reporting details from the incident and implementing the necessary controls to prevent future incidents. (This is just a short list of the necessary action items.) The fallout from such an event is daunting enough, but doing so with limited staff resources can seem like an impossible task. However, this doesn’t have to be the case.

In this tip, we’ll outline how to leverage non-security-specific staff members to put together a computer security incident response team (CSIRT) that can carry out a data breach response plan.

Incident response process: First steps
The best way to ensure a data breach causes minimal damage is to make preparations in advance, and the first step is to assemble a computer security incident response team (CSIRT). Staff from several different areas of the organization should be involved: IT, legal, human resources and corporate management. Staff members involved in the incident response process need to be highly trusted since they will have access to potentially sensitive data, depending on the incident.

Any person involved in the data breach response team needs to understand that the details of their involvement must remain confidential and they must protect the data they have access to or store during the course of the investigation.

Read more…

Flooded with resumés making false claims about salary and qualifications, several city firms are hiring private detectives to check the background of recruits, from driver to chairman.

Human resource managers agree that resumés making false claims are not new but their number has multiplied since the downturn last year leaving companies with little option but to hire security experts.

“The number of background checks has gone up 40 to 60 per cent in the past year,” said Satnam Ahluwalia, the CEO of Kolkata Response Group, a private security agency in the city.

According to the agencies that specialise in running such checks, about 25 per cent of the resumés that are submitted to companies contain false claims.

“Earlier, when we failed to locate a company that an applicant claimed to have worked for, we took a declaration from him or her that it had shut down. Now an applicant has to establish that it has indeed shut down,” said a senior official of a Sector V company.

The companies have intensified in-house checks in addition to employing detective agencies to check details given in the resumé and even provide a character profile and report on an applicant’s credit exposure (see below).

Industry insiders say security concerns have also prompted the stringent assessment of applications.

“We get more high-end jobs than before and clients want that the credentials of those who would work on their projects to be verified,” said Kalyan Kar, the managing director of Acclaris.

Applicants who would deal with sensitive information like bank and credit card details are scrutinised the most. Their credit status is put under the scanner too.

Read more…

Depending on your state and what type of business you are in, employee background checks may or may not be mandated by law. In businesses that deal with children or seniors, Federal law requires background checks on all employees and/or volunteers. The reasons should be obvious: the Federal government wants to ensure that those served are safe from hard and employers need to safeguard themselves against negligent lawsuits.

If an employee will be doing any type of driving for the business, it is important to know their driving history. For insurance purposes, employers need to have up-to-date information regarding the candidate’s Motor Vehicle Records (MVR) report. This report details any moving violations or accidents. Information such as this can assist the employer in making a solid decision regarding the hiree. This type of information is usually available at the state level for a minimal fee.

Employers conduct employee background checks for a variety of reasons. With the rise of lawsuits for negligence, many employers are considering employee background checks a standard part of their Human Resource guidelines. A growing number of child and elder abuse cases, as well as child abduction cases, make it important for all employers hiring people to work with these groups to perform detailed background checks. Following the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001, many employers are now screening new hires with a scrutinizing eye. Concerns over potential terrorists obtaining positions within sensitive agencies have increased the popularity of employee background investigations.

Read more…

So your data are encrypted, and you have access controls on your computer systems to prevent outside attacks from hackers. But you’re still not totally protected from unauthorized outside access.

Your former employees may be able to get back into your system.

Many practices and hospitals focus on how to prevent current employees from snooping or stealing information, but they forget about people who have left the organization and still could do damage.

“You wouldn’t let [departing employees] leave with the keys to the clinic. You shouldn’t let them leave with the keys to the data,” said Andrew Sroka, president and CEO of Fischer International, a data security technology vendor.

Yet many employers do. And not just in the health care field, either.

A survey by Courion, an identity and access management solutions company, found that 93% of organizations think terminated employees pose no security threat, and 53% are unaware of those employees’ access rights to systems.

Todd Chambers, chief marketing officer for Courion, said former employees cause many security breaches because organizations do not understand their risks.

Read more…