U.S. to change airport background checks

WASHINGTON - The Homeland Security Department is tossing out huge chunks of a multi-million-dollar plan to run background checks on airline passengers.

So many people objected to the Computer-Assisted Passenger Pre-screening System, CAPPS II for short, that the makeover will even include a new name.

Critics especially disliked CAPPS II because it would check identity by running a passengers' personal information against government and commercial databases.

Homeland Security officials say the new plan will likely use a different system to check identity. Officials also say the new system will give passengers the ability to correct mistakes if they're wrongly identified as terrorists or suspects.

The makeover will include a new name, though that, too, is turning out to be a dilemma for the Homeland Security Department.

The working title, "Secure Passage," was abandoned because it had the same initials as another aviation security program. In a city that loves its acronyms, it's best not to double up.

No one thinks a name change alone will be enough to resurrect CAPPS II.

Dennis McBride, director of the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, a research institute that focuses on science and technology, was briefed by Homeland Security officials on CAPPS II's progress last week.

"Getting there from here won't be easy," McBride concluded.

The Homeland Security officials working on the project are likely to get rid of one element that CAPPS II's critics dislike: making sure people are who they say they are by running their personal information against commercial and government databases.

Any new system would probably have a different process for verifying identity, according to Homeland Security officials.

Another problem is how to give airline passengers the ability to correct mistakes if they're wrongly identified as terrorists or suspects.

Homeland Security spokesman Dennis Murphy said the department is working on that.

"That's something we clearly intend to test, to have a process for people to get redress if they feel that they're being screened unnecessarily or too frequently," Murphy said.

But what's really needed, say CAPPS II's numerous critics, is for the project's developers to drop their passion for secrecy.

Business Travel Coalition chairman Kevin Mitchell said CAPPS II wouldn't have become a political debacle if Homeland Security officials had been open about how the system was supposed to work. The coalition is an advocacy group that tries to lower the cost of business travel.

"It was badly handled," Mitchell said. "It scared everybody. The lack of transparency and inclusiveness is what really doomed it."

Mitchell said privacy advocates and airline passenger groups might not have objected so strenuously to CAPPS II if they'd been included in the project's development.

"People would have been able to contribute solutions and buy into the process," Mitchell said.

But privacy advocate David Sobel thinks CAPPS II may be so fundamentally flawed that no amount of reshaping or repackaging can save it.

Sobel characterizes CAPPS II as a secret system of surveillance on tens of millions of people who fly on commercial airlines.

"It's a fundamental dilemma that arises when the government attempts to use intelligence information against average citizens," said Sobel, general counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington-based research group.

But Paul Rosenzweig, a researcher with the Heritage Foundation think tank, predicts Homeland Security officials will come up with a successor to CAPPS II.

"They're strongly committed, as I think they should be, to the idea that we need to know something about people who travel on planes," said Rosenzweig, who attended the meeting last week with Homeland Security officials.

Article published by: Associated Press

Wal-Mart to Require Background Checks

BENTONVILLE, Ark. - New employees at Wal-Mart stores will have to undergo background criminal checks before being hired, according to a plan announced Thursday by the world's largest retailer.

"We have hundreds of thousands of trustworthy women and men serving our customers," said Sue Oliver, a senior vice president at Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s stores division. "By adding another level of security to our hiring practices, our associates can be assured that we are strengthening our efforts to try to intercept anyone who might otherwise damage that integrity. We also believe this will add yet another level of comfort for our customers."

The move follows a South Carolina legislator's proposal last month that would require all large companies that sell to children to conduct background screenings. The bill was proposed after two Wal-Mart workers in the state were convicted of fondling children in the stores. The employees were both convicted sex offenders.

Wal-Mart, which employs 1.3 million people worldwide, said the program would start next month in all types of stores run by Wal-Mart and Sam's Club in the Midwest and expand nationally over the next several months. It will eventually reach into other divisions, such as distribution. The company will check each applicant's history for various criminal offenses.

Wal-Mart said that anyone who lies on the application will not be hired.

The program follows a year of pilot programs nationwide. In a statement, Oliver said that setting up the checks was a relatively complex issue and that Wal-Mart has worked to create a process that abides by each community's regulations and fairly screens all applicants.

"A process that meets the requirements in one geographical area may actually violate a rule in another," Oliver said.

Article published by: Associated Press

Ten Safe Hiring Tools
Les Rosen : By Lester Rosen

When recruiters, hiring managers or human resources professionals need to fill a position, it's not enough to simply look for the proper skills set, experience or a good fit. Employers must also determine if there are reasons not to hire the candidate. It is estimated that 10% of job applicants have criminal convictions, and up to one-third of resumes contain serious falsehoods or omissions. Without taking some measure to ensure safe hiring, it is a statistical certainty that a firm will make costly hiring mistakes.

Fortunately for employers, there are ten evaluation tools that can be used immediately at no cost. These techniques protect a firm; yet do not discourage good applicants, who also are anxious to work with qualified co-workers in a safe and profitable environment. Here are the tools:

1. Have each job applicant sign a consent form for a background check, including a check for criminal records, past employment and education. Announcing that your firm checks backgrounds may discourage applicants with something to hide, and encourage applicants to be truthful and honest about mistakes they have made in the past.
   
   
2. Employment applications should ask about criminal records in the broadest possible terms allowed by law, and should not be limited to felonies.
   
   
3. Towards the end of an interview, advise applicants that the firm will perform a criminal background and reference check as a standard business practice, and ask whether the applicant has any concerns to share. Good applicants will shrug off the question, while applicants with a problem may either reveal something or withdraw.
   
   
4. Applicants should also be asked during an interview what they think a former employer will say about them. For example, "If we were to contact past employers, how would they describe your job performance?" Since the applicant has signed a release and has been told such checks may occur, they may be more motivated to reveal information about past jobs.
   
   
5. Applications must clearly state that any false or misleading statements or material omissions are grounds to terminate the hiring process or employment, regardless of when discovered. This is particularly important if a criminal record is found. Under current law, a criminal record may not be used to automatically disqualify an applicant unless there is a sound business reason. However, if an applicant has lied about a criminal matter, the falsehood can be the basis for an adverse decision.
   
   
6. If employment begins before a background check is completed, state in writing that employment is conditioned upon a background report that is satisfactory to the employer.
   
   
7. Verifying past employment is probably the single most important tool for an employer. Generally speaking, past job performance can be an important predictor of future success. Some employers make a costly mistake by not checking past employment because past employers may not give detailed information. However, even verification of dates of employment and job title is critical because an employer must be concerned about unexplained gaps in the employment history. Although there can be many reasons for a gap in employment, if an applicant cannot account for the past seven to ten years, that can be a red flag. It is also important to know where a person has been because of the way criminal records are maintained in the United States. Contrary to popular belief, there is not a national criminal database available to most employers. Searches must be conducted at each relevant courthouse, and there are over 10,000 courthouses in America. However, if an employer knows where an applicant has been, it increases the accuracy of a criminal search, and decreases the possibility that an applicant has served time for a serious offense. Finally, documenting an attempt to obtain references can demonstrate due diligence.
   
   
8. Obtain a listing of all past addresses for seven to ten years. This is also needed for a criminal search.
   
   
9. Include future screenings in the consent language. This becomes important if a future investigation is required for some form of workplace misconduct.
   
   
10. Check for criminal records. Since criminal records are public information, employers can check at the local courthouse. An employer may consider convictions or cases currently pending, but not arrests. Also, certain cases may not be legally used for employment decisions. There are services that can obtain such information from courthouses all over the United States, as well as provide other assistance.