Listen to this articlePressure to bring new employees on board in a tight labor market might lead a business to take shortcuts in the vetting process. However, that can create even bigger problems: tarred reputation, money loss, or legal liability if the wrong employee gets in the door.
Some Long Island legal experts say that while they understand the imperative to hire quickly, vetting is often needed to protect all parties—customers, employees and the business itself.
“Rushing through a background check could result in an employer skipping the analysis, thereby exposing itself to potential liability,” said Alyson Mathews, an attorney and partner with Bond, Schoeneck & King of Garden City.
In its most recent report for the Long Island region, the New York State Department of Labor estimated that unemployment here has hovered at around 3.8 percent—well below the national levels. In critical sectors such as healthcare, education and construction, the pressure to hire has increased against the necessity of vetting.
“The best way to avoid these pitfalls is to either train relevant HR personnel and/or speak with experienced employment counsel to ensure their policies are up to date,” said Nicholas Melito, counsel at Meltzer, Lippe, Goldstein & Breitstone.
“It has to be part of your normal onboarding process to decide as to whether a specific position warrants what type of criminal or other background check,”
said Christine Malafi, senior partner at Campolo, Middleton & McCormick in Ronkonkoma.
Malafi said that thorough background checks and robust HR procedures are essential to prevent potential liabilities. She stresses that businesses, especially those handling sensitive information, must have clear, consistent hiring and onboarding practices.
This helps ensure all employees are vetted appropriately for their roles and minimizes risks related to safety and security.
In one recent case, Malafi said a company hired an employee without conducting a full background check, only to find out a week later, after she visited clients’ homes, that the new member of the team actually had prior convictions for identity theft.
“They literally had to shut their computer system off, shut their bank accounts down, everything down, because she went into a place she shouldn’t have been in their computer,” Malafi said.
For example, a job description should clearly outline the role’s duties and whether it involves access to sensitive information. This clarity helps determine the appropriate level of screening for each position.
And, as in many scenarios, compliance requirements are often updating or changing. Later this month, the New York State Clean Slate Act goes into effect. That puts even more importance on getting all the steps correct.
“Under this law, employers that obtain a criminal history background check will be required to send a copy of the report to the individual and notify the individual of his/her right to correct any incorrect information,” Melito said.
This development means companies must adjust their background screening procedures to comply with the new law while ensuring they are not missing critical information.
“Employers will no longer have access to some records, which increases the importance of reviewing the available information thoroughly and adhering to legal obligations,” Mathews explained.
Another potentially tricky compliance measure: credit checks.
The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) mandates that employers must obtain written consent before conducting background checks via third-party agencies. If adverse action is considered based on the report, employers must provide a copy to the applicant, inform them of their rights, and, if action is taken, notify them of the reason, the reporting agency, and their right to dispute inaccuracies.
“If there is negative information on the report, and the employer wants to take adverse action, the employer must comply with a two-step process,” Melito said.
First, they must inform the applicant, providing the report and a summary of their FCRA rights. If they proceed with the action, the employer must notify the applicant of the decision, give the contact details of the reporting agency, clarify that the agency didn’t make the hiring decision, and inform the applicant of their right to dispute any inaccuracies or request a free report within 60 days.
One of the most common mistakes employers make is not providing applicants with the necessary notices before conducting background checks.
“Skipping this step, or failing to notify an applicant of their rights after a negative report, is a violation that can lead to penalties,” Mathews noted.
Businesses should ensure their hiring practices include specific, role-based requirements for background checks to protect both company assets and client safety. When evaluating a candidate, it’s essential to assess the particular responsibilities of the role and whether it warrants financial, criminal, or other background screenings.
Common advice for HR teams is to maintain up-to-date, detailed job descriptions and apply consistent screening practices. For instance, roles with access to financial information or direct customer interactions demand additional scrutiny to prevent risks like identity theft or embezzlement. In all cases, companies benefit from consulting with legal or HR experts to establish clear policies, reducing costly mistakes and protecting both reputation and resources.
“It’s important that employers be very specific,” Malafi said. “
Preparation is essential as the labor market continues to evolve and legal standards surrounding background checks become more complex. Companies must invest in robust HR procedures to ensure that background screenings are done thoroughly and consistently.
Sometimes, these tasks—including the background checks—can be outsourced if that expertise doesn’t exist in-house.
Malafi offers this advice to employers: “Preparation is key to avoiding potentially huge liabilities and losses down the road. In law, we say preparation, preparation, preparation.”