Data from background screening and identity services firm, Sterling, has revealed that while screening of new employees is being carried out by more companies, many lack consistency or strict policies, creating additional risks.
In a recent survey, the firm found that 63 per cent of Dutch HR professionals indicated that they perform background checks on candidates applying for full-time roles. However, only 37 per cent of HR professionals said they would perform a background check for part-time roles, despite the fact that many part-time employees will have access to the same systems and information that is accessible to full-timers. As a result, companies are exposing themselves to unnecessary, additional risks.
The research also revealed that many companies carry out employment screening checks in response to laws and regulations (60 per cent). However, it was the safety of colleagues and customers that was cited as the primary reason (77 per cent), followed by the prevention of costs of a bad assumption, and the possible reputational damage in case of a bad assumption.
Given today’s competitive labour market, it’s perhaps expected that when asked why they chose to skip the screening step, more than half of the HR professionals surveyed indicated that time was the determining factor. This was followed by the possibility of candidates viewing screening as an invasion of privacy, which is surprising when we consider that many organisations are obliged to run these checks under governing laws and regulations.
“It is quite strange that a distinction is made between full-time and part-time colleagues when they often have the same access rights,” notes Michel Franken, regional Director at Sterling. “The potential consequences of incorrect recruitment and screening are therefore equally harmful in both cases. Consequently, it is crucial that appropriate screening methods are carried out regardless of whether an employee works full-time or part-time.
“While a company needs to be able to trust a new colleague with sensitive data or a safe key, it’s also crucial that your current colleagues and customers are safe and know that they are,” he added. “It’s really encouraging to see the importance of colleague and customer safety not only reflected in our survey but held as the primary reason for conducting a background check.
“It’s a very common misconception that screening takes a lot of time, when in fact, some checks can be carried out within 24 hours. It’s also important to consider that undergoing the appropriate screening methods will save your firm much more time and money in the long term, especially considering the time it would take to re-hire, re-train after having to let go of an unchecked and unqualified candidate,” he concluded.
