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

Question 1

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) Tom will win because the statements are both lies, challenging his integrity and character
B) Tom will win because his reputation has been damaged
C) Mike will win because as chair, he has a qualified privilege to make these types of statements
D) Mike will win because the statements were not published

Answer 1

D

Question 2

Which of the following is true regarding criminal background checks?

A) an employer is required to do a criminal background check for all applicants; otherwise, it may be deemed guilty of discrimination if it does checks for some types of jobs but not for others
B) a thorough criminal background check is required only when the applicant will be working with money
C) employers should consider the seriousness, recentness, and job-relatedness of convictions before denying employment on that basis
D) all of the above
E) none of the above

Answer 2

C

Question 3

In D.D.N. v. FACE, a music-festival organizer hired a man who had a conviction for criminal sexual assault without doing a background check. The man was hired to be camping staff, front. He was given a staff T-shirt, and a wristband that gave him access to all parts of the concert venue. He sexually assaulted a concert-goer, and she sued for neghligent hiring. Although the hiring manager acknowledged an increased risk of sexual assault in that venue, the employer argued that they owed her no duty, and her injury was not foreseeable. The court ruled that:

A) the employer was liable under respondeat superior because the assault occurred on concert grounds, and was carried out by a management-level employee
B) the employer was liable for negligent hiring because employers are legally obligated to perform criminal background checks and contact references for all persons hired
C) the employer was liable for negligent hiring because sexual assault was an increased risk in this venue, it was foreseeable that an unfit person hired as for this position could harm others, and the employer failed to conduct an adequate background check
D) the employer was not liable for negligent hiring because even if it had undertaken a more thorough background check, clear evidence of unfitness for the job was not available
E) none of the above

Answer 3

C

Question 4

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:

A) the employer is liable under respondeat superior for the harmful act of the employee because it occurred during the workday
B) the employer is liable for negligent hiring because the employer had an obligation to check his criminal background, it did not do so, and this led to him harming another person
C) the employer is not liable for negligent hiring because the employee did not assault the waitress on company property
D) the employer is not liable for negligent hiring because the job does not subject people to risk, and the evidence of unfitness was not related to the job
E) none of the above

Question 5

The Immigration Reform and Control Act:

A) requires that employers not hire or employ aliens
B) requires that employers not discriminate based on national origin and citizenship
C) allows employers to hire an unlimited number of foreign nations under the H-1B visa program
D) all of the above
E) none of the above

Question 6

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

A) whether the employer s own written hiring policies are adequate
B) whether placing an unfit person in the particular job could be expected to result in harm
C) whether there is evidence of a candidate s unfitness that could be found through a thorough personal interview with the applicant
D) all of the above
E) none of the above

Question 7

A valid background check should NOT include:

A) checking an applicants marital status
B) verifying an applicants military service
C) checking an applicants driving record
D) verifying an applicants degrees and/or licenses
E) none of the above may be validly inquired into

Question 8

Which of the following is a true statement regarding employer compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act?

A) employers must verify a person s eligibility to work in the United States before the new employee begins work
B) employers are required to copy and retain copies of the documents used by the employee to prove eligibility to work in the United States
C) if they appear to be genuine, employers are not required to investigate or verify the authenticity of documents presented or supplied by the employee
D) employees must present certified copies of whatever documents they use to verify eligibility to work
E) all of the above

Question 9

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) Yes
B) No

Question 10

Which of the following statements is NOT true?

A) Employers must always perform a criminal background check before hiring an employee
B) Employers must always conduct a thorough and comprehensive background check of every applicant
C) Employers must obtain an applicant s consumer credit report
D) all of these are true
E) none of these is true

Question 11

Which of the following steps could an employer take that would help to eliminate possible claims of defamation?

A) obtaining a signed consent from a former employee, authorizing the employer to provide information about her job performance
B) negotiating an agreed letter of reference for an employee who is leaving
C) giving only information that verifies that the former employee worked for the employer, the rate of pay, and the dates of employment
D) all of these

Question 12

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

A) notify an applicant that the employer plans to reject her based on information from a credit report
B) obtain the consent of an applicant before conducting any background check
C) verify that the information in a credit report reasonably appears to be accurate
D) all of the above
E) none of the above

Question 13

In Sigal Construction v. Stanbury , a project manager sued because statements made by his former employer in the course of providing a reference untruthfully minimized his abilities. The court ruled that:

A) the employer did not defame the former employee because its statements were merely opinions and did not purport to be factual
B) the employer did not defame the former employee because he had consented to having information about him shared with the prospective new employer
C) the employer did not defame the former employee because the statements, although harsh, were truthful
D) the employer defamed the former employee because statements made in references are not subject to qualified privilege
E) the employer defamed the former employee because the employer was recklessly indifferent to the truthfulness of the statements made

Question 14

In M.P. v. City of Sacramento , a 24-year-old woman working as a photographer attended the Porn Star Costume Ball. A firefighter captain attended, and allowed other firefighters to attend, drive their trucks to the event, and pick up women. Some of the firefighters were on duty, and some were drinking. This was not the first time firefighters had been allowed to bring their fire trucks to bars and parties. The woman was asked to take pictures of the firefighters in the truck, and two of them (one of whom was on duty) sexually assaulted her. She sued, contending that the City of Sacramento was liable for the assault against her. The court ruled:

A) the city was not liable because under California law, a public employee who commits a sex crime on duty is not acting within the scope of employment, so that the employer is not vicariously liable
B) the city was liable because under California law, a public employee who commits a sex crime on duty is acting within the scope of employment, so that the employer is vicariously liable

Question 15

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

A) the employee gave his consent to make the statement
B) the statement was within the employer s qualified privilege
C) the statement was truthful
D) all of the above
E) none of the above

Question 16

You ve now been on the job for a few months in your role as Assistant Human Resources Director, and have acquired some experience in interviewing and background checks. While doing a background check on a candidate for a secretarial position, you discover that the candidate was arrested several years ago while in college, and accused of damaging university property. What should you do?

A) disqualify the candidate for unfitness
B) talk to the candidate to find out what the report is all about
C) disregard the report, as it s an arrest, and not a conviction
D) none of these

Question 17

The Fair Credit Reporting Act refers to which two kinds of reports?

A) a consumer credit report, which reports only credit-worthiness, and an investigative report, which reports the results of interviews with neighbors, colleagues, and the like
B) a consumer credit report, which reports credit information and general character information, and an investigative report, which reports the results of interviews with neighbors, colleagues, and the like
C) a fair credit report, which guarantees accuracy, and a character reference report, based on personal interviews of neighbors, colleagues, and the like

Question 18

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?

A) do a thorough criminal background check through all 50 states
B) check to see that the applicant has a degree in electrical engineering
C) check references at the applicant s former places of employment
D) all of these
E) b and c only

Question 19

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

A) the employer knew the employee was unfit
B) the employer should have known the employee was unfit
C) the employer would have known the employee was unfit if it had done an appropriate background check
D) any of these might constitute such knowledge
E) none of these constitutes such knowledge

Question 20

Negligent hiring:

A) makes employers liable for harm that occurs when employees act within the scope of their employment
B) makes employers liable for any harm that is caused by their employees
C) makes employers liable for harm that occurs when employees who were not properly screened act outside the scope of their employment
D) all of the above
E) none of the above