Bias in Background Checks

With so many issues of bias in the news and social media, I would like to address some possible bias within the hiring process, partially with background checks. We hope that no organization is making any decisions based on bias or poor practices, but we trust this list can serve as a reminder of what not to do. The goal should be to review your current practices and make sure you are staying fair and neutral in your hiring process. Look for implicit bias within your practices and aim to correct if any are found.

1) Generally excluding applicants because they admit to a criminal history on their application. Keep in mind many states and municipalities have enacted ban the box laws, to name a few: CA, IL, MN, WA. Ban the box removes the question from the application process regarding criminal histories. Although this law varies from state to state, it generally makes it unlawful to ask about a criminal history prior to the interview or even a conditional offer. This aims to give everyone a “fair chance” if they meet the minimum requirements of the position.

2) Failing to have a policy in place. Or failing to review/update your policy for changes in the law or your business.

3) Using blanket policies, such as “we do not hire felons”. Excluding employers that have regulated business necessity, (ie: sex offenders at daycares or long-term care facilities) be sure your policy aligns with business necessity.

4) Failing to consistently apply your policy. Your policy states “we only review 7 years of criminal history” however, you selectively determined you will use a case from 10 years ago against one candidate. Or your policy states you will “hire the candidate whose assessment score best aligns with the position”, but you randomly pick an individual who you liked their personality more in the interview.

5) Failing to have a policy that meets business necessity. Look at each position and make sure your background check policy aligns with the EEOC’s guidance. A few examples are using a DUI conviction against a candidate that is not required to drive. Or running credit, bankruptcy, or financial information on candidates that do not maintain any type of financial, supervisory, or managing role in your organization.

6) Using arrest or non-conviction data to make decisions. Many states restrict arrest data, but if your state does not be very cautious when using. There are many arguments that show arrests may be biased. Also, note many states have restrictions on using non-conviction data. If your state does not have any restrictions, note the FCRA limits its use to 7 years.

7) Failing to have an individualized assessment. Be sure your actions are fair. The best way to account for your decisions and show a consistent history when making decisions with background screening results. An individualized assessment will help you and your organization maintain consistent and fair decisions.

8) Failing to apply and adhere to the steps of Adverse Action, when needed.

9) Failing to allow candidates to explain their side of a situation and show any rehabilitation efforts they may have made.

As always, my lists are not inclusive and are not meant to replace any advice from your legal counsel. My goal is to help you make your screening plan fair and compliant.

Picture of Brittany Bollinger Boyle

Brittany Bollinger Boyle

With over 13 years of working expertise in the background screening industry, Brittany Bollinger Boyle is the dynamic CEO and Founder of AB Global. Often referred to as the “youngest old-timer” in the industry, Brittany’s career journey started early when she attended the inaugural National Association of Professional Background Screeners (NAPBS now PBSA) conference at just 12 years old. This early exposure sparked a passion that has driven her to become a leading figure in the field, with a deep understanding of the industry’s evolution.

Subscribe To Our Blog

More Blog Posts

Most people understand that background screening is a critical component of the hiring process, yet many HR professionals lack a clear understanding of how background screens are conducted and what they should expect from screening providers. One reason for this is that over the years background screening providers have become increasingly opaque about these details, which allows for more leeway to manipulate service offerings and pricing, and quite frankly, to cut corners.
Remote interviews have become a cornerstone of the hiring process, offering convenience, flexibility, and the ability to connect with top talent across geographic boundaries. However, remote interviewing presents unique challenges that require thoughtful planning and execution to ensure a smooth and effective process. Here are some best practices to help you conduct successful remote interviews that provide a positive candidate experience and lead to well-informed hiring decisions.
The background screening industry was once a pillar of trust and diligence, ensuring that companies could make informed hiring decisions with confidence. But over time, standards have eroded. The industry has devolved as companies prioritized speed and cost-cutting over accuracy and integrity.