Book Read Free

Inge Sebyan Black

Page 23

by 4<8=8AB@0B>@

works with children, including volunteers

  •

  September 11, 2001, resulted in heightened security and required iden-

  tity verification

  Internal Investigations and Controls

  151

  •

  The Enron scandal increased scrutiny of corporate executives, officers,

  and directors

  •

  Increasing use of inflated and fraudulent reśumeś and applications

  •

  New federal and state laws requiring background checks for certain jobs,

  for example, armored car employees

  •

  The Information Age added to the increase in checks because informa-

  tion is now available through many computer databases

  Privacy legislation coupled with fair employment laws drastically limit what

  can be asked on employment application forms. The following federal leg-

  islation relates directly to hiring and dealing with employees:

  •

  Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

  •

  Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978

  •

  Executive Order 11246 (Affirmative Action)

  •

  Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967

  •

  National Labor Relations Act

  •

  Rehabilitation Act of 1973

  •

  Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974

  •

  Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (Wage and Hour Law)

  •

  Federal Wage Garnishment Law

  •

  Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970

  •

  Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986

  •

  Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988

  •

  Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA)

  •

  Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (Plant Closing Law)

  •

  EEOC Sexual Harassment Guidelines

  •

  Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (for a more complete list, see

  Table 12.1)

  •

  Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA)

  •

  Bankruptcy Act

  •

  Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)

  •

  Equal Pay Act 1963

  •

  Privacy Act of 1976

  In some respects, these regulations had a streamlining effect, eliminating

  irrelevant questions and confining questions exclusively to those matters

  relating to the job applied for. The subtler kinds of discrimination on the

  basis of age, sex, and national origin have been largely eliminated from

  the employment process. In making these changes to protect the applicant,

  state and federal laws have created new dilemmas for employers and their

  security staffs.

  152

  Table 12.1 Who is Protected, Who is Affected? Federally Covered Employers and Protected Classes Origin/

  Federal

  Legislation

  Race/Color National

  Ancestry Sex

  Religion

  Age

  Disabled Union Covered Employers

  Agency

  The

  Title VII Civil

  X

  X

  X

  X

  Employers with 15 +

  EEOC

  Art

  Rights Act

  EEs; unions,

  of

  Investigati

  employment agencies

  Equal Pay Act (EPA)

  X

  Minimum wage law

  EEOC

  as amended

  coverage

  ve

  (“administrative

  Interviewin

  employees” not

  exempted)

  aAge Discrimination

  X

  40 +

  20 + EEs (unions with 25 +

  EEOC

  g

  in Employment

  members), employment

  Act (ADEA)

  agencies

  Age Discrimination

  X

  Receives federal money

  EEOC

  Act of 1975 (ADA)

  Executive Order

  X

  X

  X

  X

  X

  All federal contractors

  OFCCP

  11246.11141

  and subcontractors

  Title VI Civil

  X

  X

  X

  X

  Federally-assisted

  Funding

  Rights Act

  program or activity—

  Agency

  public schools and

  and EEOC

  colleges also covered by

  Title IX

  Rehabilitation

  X

  Receives federal money:

  OFCCP

  Act of 1973

  federal contractor,

  $2,500 +

  National Labor

  X

  X

  X

  X

  X

  X

  ER in interstate

  NLRB

  Relations Act (NLRA)

  commerce

  Civil Rights Act of

  X

  All employers

  Courts

  1866

  Civil Rights Act of

  X

  X

  X

  Private employers usually

  EEOC

  1871

  not covered

  Revenue Sharing

  X

  X

  X X

  X

  X

  State and local

  OFCCP

  Act of 1972

  governments that receive

  federal revenue sharing

  funds

  Education

  X

  Educational institutions

  Dept. of

  Amendments of

  receiving federal financial

  Education

  Internal

  1972 Title IX

  assistance

  Vietnam Era Vets

  X

  Government

  OFCCP

  Investigations

  Readjustment

  contractors—$10,000 +

  Act—1974

  Pregnancy

  X

  All employers 15 + EEs

  EEOC-

  Discrimination

  OFCCP

  and

  Act of 1978

  Controls

  Continued

  153

  154

  Table 12.1 Who is Protected, Who is Affected? Federally Covered Employers and Protected Classes—cont'd Origin/

  Federal

  Legislation

  Race/Color National

  Ancestry Sex

  Religion

  Age

  Disabled Union Covered Employers

  Agency

  The

  Fair Labor Standards

  Includes

  Art

  Act

  minimum

  of

  wage law

  Investigati

  and equal

  pay act with

  ve

  DOL

  Interviewin

  complex

  method of

  coverage

  g

  Rehabilitation

  X

  Receives federal money:

  OFCCP

  Act of 1973

  federal contrac
tor,

  $2,500 +

  Americans with

  X

  Covers employers with

  EEOC

  Disabilities Act of 1990

  15 or more employees

  Federal Privacy

  Federal agencies only

  Act of 1976

  Freedom of

  Federal agencies only

  Information Act

  Family Educational

  Schools, colleges, and

  Rights and Privacy Act

  universities, federally

  assisted

  Immigration Reform

  All employers

  INS

  Act of 1986

  EE = Employee; ER = Employer; EEOC = Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; OFCCP = Office Federal Contract Compliance Programs; NLRB = National Labor Relations Board; DOL = Department of Labor; INS = Immigration and Naturalization Service.

  Applies to federal agencies, contractors, or assisted programs only.

  aMandatory retirement eliminated except in special circumstances.

  Internal Investigations and Controls

  155

  Various federal and state laws prohibit criminal justice agencies (police

  departments, courts, and correctional institutions) from providing informa-

  tion on certain criminal cases to noncriminal justice agencies (for example,

  private security firms or human resources departments). The Fair Credit

  Reporting Act requires that a job applicant must give written consent to

  any credit bureau inquiry.

  All states have some type of privacy legislation meeting the guidelines set

  forth in the Federal Privacy Act of 1976. The most controversial portion of

  the Act states “that information shall only be used for law enforcement and

  criminal justice and other lawful purposes.” The crux of the issue is the way

  that “other lawful purposes” is defined. Does this meaning include human

  resources departments and private security operations? The verdict is mixed.

  Human resources, security, and loss-prevention operations must be aware

  of the interpretation of the privacy legislation in each state in which they

  operate. Recent legislation regarding the Department of Homeland Secu-

  rity has allowed for greater access of government agencies and private

  security firms to criminal histories, financial records and medical records.

  Understandably, there is some confusion regarding the rules governing

  employment screening. In spite of such confusion, the pre-employment

  inquiry remains one of the most useful security tools employers can use

  to shortstop employee dishonesty and profit drains. Security management

  should consult with legal counsel to determine which laws relate to their

  locality and establish firm and precise policies regarding employment appli-

  cations and hiring practices. An employer should be as familiar as possible

  with the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which governs what

  employers must do when contracting record checks with third parties.

  Generally speaking, look for and be wary of applicants who:

  •

  Show signs of instability in personal relations

  •

  Lack job stability; a job hopper does not make a good job candidate

  •

  Show a declining salary history or are taking a cut in pay from the

  previous job

  •

  Show unexplained gaps in employment history

  •

  Are clearly overqualified

  •

  Are unable to recall or are hazy about names of supervisors in the recent

  past or who forget their address in the recent past

  In general, all or some of the following information might be included in a

  background check:

  •

  Driving records

  •

  Vehicle registration

  156

  The Art of Investigative Interviewing

  •

  Credit reports

  •

  Criminal records

  •

  Social Security number

  •

  Educational records

  •

  Court records

  •

  Workers’ compensation

  •

  Bankruptcy

  •

  Character references

  •

  Neighbor interviews

  •

  Medical records

  •

  Property ownership

  •

  Military records

  •

  State licensing

  •

  Drug tests

  •

  Past employment

  •

  Personal references

  •

  Arrest records

  •

  Sex offense lists

  If the job applied for is one that involves handling funds, it is advisable to get the applicant’s consent to make a financial inquiry through a credit bureau.

  Be wary if such an inquiry turns up a history of irresponsibility in financial

  affairs, such as living beyond one’s means.

  Application forms should ask for a chronological listing of all previous

  employers in order to provide a list of firms to be contacted for information on the applicant as well as to show continuity of career. Any gaps could indicate a jail term that was “overlooked” in filling out the application. When checking with

  previous employers, verify dates on which employment started and terminated.

  References submitted by the applicant must be contacted, but they are

  apt to be biased. After all, since the person being investigated submitted these references’ names, they are not likely to be negative or hostile. It is important to contact someone—preferably an immediate supervisor—at each previous

  job. Such contact should be made by phone or in person.

  The usual and easiest system of contact is by letter or, in recent years, by

  email, but this leaves much to be desired. The relative impersonality of these

  forms of communication, especially one in which a form or evaluation is to

  be filled out, can lead to generic and essentially uncommunicative answers.

  Because many companies as a matter of policy, stated or implied, are reluc-

  tant to give someone a bad reference except in the most extreme circum-

  stances, a written reply to a letter will sometimes be misleading.

  Internal Investigations and Controls

  157

  As noted, over the past several years the letter has often been replaced

  with an email. However, the pitfalls of the letter apply to email as well,

  yet the ease of use and virtually no cost benefits often put this form of ref-

  erence check at the top of many budget-conscience managers’ preferred

  means of contact.

  On the other hand, phone or personal contacts may become consider-

  ably more discursive and provide shadings in the tone of voice that can be

  important. Even when no further information is forthcoming, this method

  may indicate when a more exhaustive investigation is required.

  REVIEW QUESTIONS

  1. Do you need to have videos to support your claim of a criminal act

  being committed prior to conducting your interview?

  2. If the employee is successful at stealing, will they continue to steal?

  3. Does the size of the company determine whether they will suffer losses

  from internal theft?

  4. Can anyone fu
lfill the ideal of total honesty?

  5. Can anyone recognize a potentially dishonest employee?

  6. By looking at a fraud triangle, what 3 elements are usually present

  when an employee steals?

  7. What do many experts agree is the most important deterrent to inter-

  nal theft?

  8. What percentage of business failure was reported in 2007 as a result of

  employee dishonesty?

  9. Is theft of any kind by employees contagious and how does it affect

  general employee conduct?

  10. How much higher is internal theft compared to external theft?

  11. What is the single most key to reducing internal theft?

  12. What federal act governs what employers must do when contracting

  record checks with third parties?

  13

  CHAPTER

  Investigative Interviewing: One

  Hundred Things You Should Know

  1. Be confident.

  2. Be positive.

  3. Research the background of the interviewee.

  4. Do online research of all details.

  5. Know your purpose.

  6. Control your comfort zone.

  7. Tailor your demeanor.

  8. Admit to mistakes.

  9. Eliminate possible answers.

  10. Maintain high professional standards.

  11. Use the skills you’ve developed.

  12. Be ready for denial.

  13. Have a conversation.

  14. Try to develop something in common with the interviewee when

  necessary.

  15. Assess the interviewee.

  16. Stay calm.

  17. Be adversarial when necessary, perhaps if working with another

  interviewer.

  18. Be adaptable.

  19. Know yourself.

  20. Know your biases.

  21. Expect the unexpected.

  22. Control the interview.

  23. Properly handle confidential informants.

  24. Know the respective laws.

  25. Know your company policies.

  26. Know the interviewee’s rights.

  27. Understand your limits.

  28. Help subjects recall events.

  159

  160

  The Art of Investigative Interviewing

  29. Use props if you have them.

  30. Consider the time of day for your interview.

  31. Listen and avoid questions that have a yes-or-no reply.

  32. Protect any and all evidence.

  33. Maintain confidentiality.

  34. Be ready for rationalizations.

  35. Be empathetic.

  36. Observe, attentive, and concentrate.

  37. Be alert.

  38. Be mentally prepared.

  39. Don’t have a timeframe to end the interview.

  40. Confirm simple details.

  41. Have necessary documents.

  42. Have questions ready and be ready to take a statement.

  43. Be flexible and objective.

  44. Always assume there is more information.

  45. Observe body language and body posture movements.

  46. Set baseline for nervousness by asking innocuous questions.

  47. Compare and contrast body language when answering innocuous

 

‹ Prev