Protecting
Your Firm Against Negligent Hiring Claims
Most HR
professionals know that reference checking and work history verification are
fundamental steps in applicant screening. What many may not realize is that
these simple steps not only weed out bad candidates but also may help protect
you from negligent hiring exposure if there is an incident of workplace
misconduct or violence later.
Unfortunately,
you may be tempted to skip these checks in order to make a quick hiring
decision. However, the consequences of omitting them can be devastating and
range from huge monetary settlements and bad publicity to, in the worst-case
scenarios, loss of life. You can help prevent these problems and limit your
organization's exposure by taking a few basic precautions in checking candidate
backgrounds.
What
is Negligent Hiring?
The
legal theory of negligent hiring is based on the premise that an employer can
be liable for the violent acts or wrongdoing of its employees if it did not
investigate adequately their backgrounds or qualifications. Negligent hiring
claims often involve employees both who are in a position to pose a threat of
injury to the public (such as a driver
or
deliveryperson) and who subsequently attack another employee or an outside
third party (such as a client or customer).
To
establish negligent hiring, the harmed person generally must show:
1. That
the employer did not exercise reasonable care in hiring the employee (for
example, by talking to former employers);
2. That
the employee had dangerous tendencies which should have been apparent if the
employer had exercised reasonable care (such as by conducting an adequate
preemployment investigation); and
3. That
the employer placed the employee in a position where others could be injured.
So, for
example, in Board of Cty. Commissioners v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397 (1997), the
Supreme Court determined that the plaintiff who was assaulted by a deputy had
to establish that the sheriff did not make preemployment inquiries to determine
the facts underlying the misdemeanors on a deputy's criminal record. In
addition, the plaintiff also had to show that if the inquiries had been made,
they would have revealed a risk that the deputy would use excessive force
against the public.
The
employer's legal liability typically depends on the circumstances leading up to
the employee's misconduct and on whether the employee was acting within the
scope of his employment duties. For example, in Judith M. v. Sisters of Charity
Hospital, 93 N.Y.2d 932 (N.Y. 1999), a hospital was not liable for the
negligent hiring of an employee who was
accused
of sexually assaulting a patient. The New York Court of Appeals found that the
hospital acted with reasonable care in hiring and supervising the employee and
that its management did not authorize, participate in, consent to, or ratify
the employee's alleged conduct.
Similarly,
in Vinci v. Las Vegas Sands, Inc., 984 P.2d 750 (Nev. 1999), the Nevada Supreme
Court determined that the employer could not be held liable for negligent
hiring since there was no evidence that it failed to conduct a reasonable
background check.
*
Simple Steps to Prevent Claims *
Clearly,
the best way to limit negligent hiring claims is to follow common sense
procedures to get as much information from the candidate as you can and then to
verify the information before offering a position. To accomplish these goals,
consider taking the following eight steps:
1.
Train your interviewers. Every interviewer should be familiar with your hiring
policy and know what types of background checks are required.
2. Have
each applicant fill out an application form which you carefully review. Pay
particular attention to gaps in employment and inconsistencies, and require
references.
3.
Question the candidate about any gaps in work history. Make sure you have an
accurate timeline of past employment dates and know what happened during any
periods of unemployment.
4.
Check references. At a minimum, confirm the applicant's dates of employment and
position. Try to get substantive information about past performance and
disciplinary records.
5. Ask
about criminal convictions. Remember, however, that asking about arrest
information (as opposed to convictions) could violate state discrimination
laws.
6.
Perform additional background checks appropriate to the position being sought.
For example, consider credit checks on candidates who will handle money and
review the motor vehicle records of potential drivers.
7.
Conduct criminal conviction checks on candidates who will be in "positions
of confidence." For example, if you are filling a position in which the
employee would work in a customer's home, with impaired individuals, or in a
daycare center or hospital, a criminal check is appropriate (and required by
some state laws). Make sure these checks cover each jurisdiction where the
candidate has lived.
8.
Document the steps you take to investigate the candidate. Even if you can't get
in touch with a reference or if a background check does not produce any
information, make sure you have a clear record of the steps you took. Remember,
too, if you ask a consumer reporting agency to conduct any of your
investigations, you must comply with the notice and disclosure requirements of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Better Safe than Sorry
As a
practical matter, most negligent hiring claims involve extreme but isolated
incidents of employee violent conduct. However, the risks of having to defend
against these claims, and the negative publicity surrounding them, far
outweighs the time and cost of taking a few simple steps to prevent them.
As a
general rule, your first line of defense is to weed out high-risk applicants
before making hiring decisions. Your last line is to have clear documentation
showing you took the reasonable steps a prudent employer is expected to take to
prevent a negligent hiring action.