Exam 5: Background Checks, References, and Verifying Employment Eligibility

1.Why is each of the following good legal advice? -For all persons hired,employers must view documents establishing identity and eligibility to work in the U.S.and record the documents examined on I-9 forms.

1.Why is each of the following good legal advice? -Former employers should verify the identities of persons seeking information about former employees,such as by requiring that requests be made on company letterhead.

Which of the following is true regarding criminal background checks?

A valid background check should NOT include:

In order to avoid liability for negligent hiring,the primary question an employer must consider is:

1.Why is each of the following good legal advice? -Employers should consider,on an individual basis,the seriousness,job relatedness,and recentness of any criminal convictions before using them as grounds for denying employment.

1.Why is each of the following good legal advice? -Employers should document all efforts to obtain information on job candidates,even when those efforts are not successful.

Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act,employers must do which of the following?

A former employee of your firm was dismissed when it was suspected that she had stolen from the petty cash account.It could not be proven,but suspicions were strong enough that the firm decided to let her go.She has now applied at another firm,and listed your firm as a reference.What should you do?

After three weeks in your new position as Assistant Human Resources Director,the HR Director has asked you to take a candidate all the way through the process,from application to interview,to background check.The firm has an opening for an electrical engineer who is proficient with construction blueprints.The engineer will be helping to build the company's new warehouse,which is about to begin construction.Which of the following steps would be necessary to take during the background check?

Which of the following is a defense to a defamation claim against an employer?

The Immigration Reform and Control Act:

You have been hired as the assistant director of a company's Human Resource Department.The director calls you in and tells you that she is considering a suggestion to the Board of Directors that the company adopt a policy of refusing to give substantive information on employee references.She asks you if adopting such a policy makes sense.What advice will you give to her?

Mike is the chair of the management department at a local university and Tom is an Ethics professor in that department.They dislike each other immensely due to a number Of professional and social disagreements.Mike calls Tom into his office and closes the Door.He then informs Tom that he believes that Tom is guilty of plagiarism and also Guilty of an improper sexual relationship with Kathy,a 19 year old management student. In fact,Tom is a happily married man who is extremely well respected in the community And has never committed adultery.Deeply believing in ethics,he has never committed Plagiarism in his life.Furthermore,he has always been absolutely professional with Regard to his student Kathy.Tom vehemently denies these charges and as he gets up to Leave,Mike states,"Give me any more trouble and I go public." Tom goes right to his Attorney who files a defamation law suit that afternoon.

A salesman was to attend a meeting in a nearby city,but as he traveled there in his car,traffic was light,and he arrived about an hour early.Deciding not to waste the time,he went to a nearby shopping center to search for a birthday gift for his son.He found a tablet that he knew the boy would like,and headed out to drive to the building where the meeting was to be held.As he backed out of the parking space,however,he hit another car,damaging the car and injuring the driver.Under the doctrine of respondeat superior,is his employer liable for the accident? Why or why not?

Which of the following statements is NOT true?

While doing a background check on a candidate who is superbly qualified for the sales job for which he has applied,you learn that he was dishonorably discharged from the U.S.Army.When you ask him about it,he explains that he was 18 years old at the time,and the death of his father,whom he had only recently met,had a devastating impact on him.He began to drink to excess,often failed to report to his duty station.After his dishonorable discharge,he righted himself,started working,and got counseling.Everyone at your firm who has interviewed him found him to be very personable,and very able,and they're eager for him to start.You've told them about the dishonorable discharge,and it's made no difference to their decision.Should you tell other employees about the dishonorable discharge?

A project manager applied for a job,and listed his previous employer as a reference.When the prospective employer called,the man who gave a reference for the project manager falsely implied that the project manager was incompetent,even though he had never worked with or supervised the employee,nor checked any employment records.The project manager did not get the new job.If the project manager sues his former employer for defamation,the court will likely rule that:

A company hired a file clerk,but did not inquire into his criminal history.In fact,he has had several convictions for driving while intoxicated.On a lunch break,he got drunk and assaulted a waitress at a nearby restaurant.If the waitress sues the employer,a court would most likely decide that:

"Knowledge" as an element of the tort of negligent hiring,means that: