Employment Background Checks

This case analysis involves the study of two companies; Dollar General and BMW manufacturing plant that is suspected to discriminate employees due to their criminal backgrounds. In addition, the two companies were accused of discriminating employees due to their skin colors. The BMW Company didn’t have prior screening convictions for employees. However, after a new logistics service was hired, any employee with a conviction record was terminated despite the number of years which they had worked for the company. The Dollar General Company was accused of terminating an employee due to a six-year-old conviction despite her honesty during the time of the interview.

II. Problem                          

It is unethical for companies to terminate employees due to their criminal records or their skin color. Employers are expected to give everyone an equal opportunity to employment; this is despite their gender, race or creed. From the case of the two companies however, employees were terminated from their job positions due to their prior convictions and their skin color (Holzer, et al, 451). The terminated employees were said to be African Americans.

III. Significance of the Problem

Terminating employees due to a prior conviction is an issue because even criminals deserve a second chance. Most employers have made up the reason that criminal background checks is a way of preventing them from hiring thieves. In my opinion however, this is just another way of screening process and discrimination and is not a valid reason. Research shows that people with criminal records are less likely to embezzle funds or take bribes at work. However, the most people who embezzle company funds are most likely the company current employees. This is because they are familiar with the company system and have gained their employer’s trust. Credit check is therefore not a significant way of stopping crimes in organizations.

IV. Development of Alternative Actions

Focusing on the key problem

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has set guidelines to ensure that job applicants are not discriminated according to their race, pregnancy, color or even religion. The EEOC found out that this may highly impact on minorities as they are at high risk of getting arrested which might result in discrimination during interviews (Bushway, et al, 30). This gives employers the chance to focus on the root problems of the company and not prior criminal records.

            The first benefit of focusing on the root problem is that, employers are given an opportunity to eradicate discrimination and unfair treatment of workers. For example, from the case analysis, BMW should not have fired a three-year-old employee because of a prior conviction. Focusing on the root problem is advantageous in that employers would put more effort on inspecting their current employees who are more likely to embezzle funds.

            Focusing on the root problem is disadvantageous in that employers might not feel comfortable with hiring convicted personnel simply because the EEOC demanded so. Conducting a background check gives employers the assurance of the well-being of their company. Failure to conduct a background check deprives the employer the opportunity to have an honest relationship with their employees. 

Rehabilitation certificates

The certificates would be granted after a person who has a criminal background has achieved the criteria of no positive drug tests, or completion of community service. The person would then be able to present the certificate to their employers during job interviews(Bushway, et al, 30).

            A rehabilitation certificate is advantageous in that it proves to the employer that the job seeker is willing to take necessary actions to amend their prior mistakes. A rehabilitation certificate is also advantageous in that the employer will feel more secure with trusting the job seeker with private information of the organization.  

A rehabilitation certificate does not necessarily mean that a person has changed their life. For example a person could stay sober or drug-free for the specified period just so that they can be granted the certificate which is a key to a job opportunity. A rehabilitation certificate is also disadvantageous in that most people who have been convicted with crime may take advantage of the certificates. 

V.  Recommendation

Employment background checks lead to discrimination of employees or job seekers. There are alternative solutions to background checks which are less discriminative. For instance, focusing on the root problem of the organization or issuing of rehabilitation certificates to people with prior crime convictions. 

References

Bushway, Shawn D., Paul Nieuwbeerta, and Arjan Blokland. “The predictive value of criminal background checks: Do age and criminal history affect time to redemption?.” Criminology49.1 (2011): 27-60.       

Holzer, Harry J., Steven Raphael, and Michael A. Stoll. ”Perceived criminality, criminal background checks, and the racial hiring practices of employers.” The Journal of Law and Economics 49.2 (2006): 451-480.