It has been reported that over 200 un-credentialed emergency medical technicians (EMT), and other first responders, have been working in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Massachusetts Department of Public Health officials became aware of this after being tipped off by properly certified EMT's. There were complaints that many of their coworkers had not been trained, but had received certification. It has been discovered that the un-credentialed EMT's received their certifications from certificate mills. The Department of Public health will be continuing their investigation and expect more EMT's without valid credentials to be discovered. So far no injuries to patients were reported, but this remains a large fear for citizens and ambulance companies alike.     References Slack, D. (2010). Hundreds of EMT's, paramedics said to be working with fake credentials.The Boston Globe.http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/05/sources_hundred .html     For more information on background checks visitwww.NESAdvantage.com    ...read more

Child molested by an employee with a criminal history Charles Ballentine, an employee of UT Health Science Center's University of Texas Eye Consultants, had a terrifying criminal past. In the 70's he was found guilty of sexual assault, indecency with a child, and indecency with a child by exposure. He is now accused of molesting an eight year old girl who he was performing an eye exam on. UT Health Science stated that they were completely unaware of his criminal past because he was hired before they implemented a background screening policy (Villarreal, 2009). While implementing a background policy is a great step, it is most effective if it is done on a recurring basis. Background checks should be conducted on employees every two years. This would have uncovered Ballentine's past long before he was able to harm this child. A policy such as this will also identify criminal records of employees who were clean when they were hired, but have committed crimes while employed.   References: Villarreal, M. (2009). Clinic employee had a criminal past employers never knew about. Retrieved from http://www.woai.com/content/troubleshooters/story/Clinic-employee-had-criminal-past-employers-never/WJwCjtRImUmjlr_2sfJmHg.cspx Contact us at www.NESAdvantage.com ...read more

By: Stefan Miller www.employerslawgroup.com Written For:  www.nesadvantage.com In addition to the obvious challenges that businesses today are confronting in the face of the recent economic downturn, employers have an equally difficult challenge of complying with a complex, ever-changing array of employment-related laws and regulations. Moreover, with more people out of work, employment-related claims and lawsuits are substantially on the rise. At the same time, federal and state government agencies are reportedly increasing their audits and investigations of employer practices nationwide.   While many of these circumstances are matters over which employers have little control, there is one area in which – for a relatively small sum of money – employers can take effective action to substantially reduce, if not eliminate, their potential risk of liability. Specifically, by simply conducting pre-employment background investigations on prospective new hires, employers can avoid claims of negligent hiring stemming from acts of theft, violence and other wrongful acts committed by their employees.    The Negative Impact of Negligent Hiring Claims   Under the doctrine of negligent hiring, employers can be liable if one of their employees injure or cause harm either to another employee or to a member of the public, particularly if the employer knew or should have known that such conduct was likely to occur. In fact, an employer's decision to forgo a basic and inexpensive background checkin a single instancecan lead to costly litigation, damage to the employer's reputation and, ultimately, have a ruinous financial impact on the employer.    And if you think that a negligent hiring claim could never happen to your company, consider the following cases, all of which resulted in punitive damages awards against employers who, under the circumstances, were deemed to have had a duty to conduct a background investigation of the individuals who, after being hired, caused harm to members of the public.   Specific Examples   A company which hired an employee to deliver furniture was sued for negligent hiring after the employee brutally attacked a customer to whom he was delivering furniture. Because the company failed to conduct an investigation into the employee's background – which would have revealed a history of a violent past (including charges and convictions of armed robbery, burglary and several counts of battery and aggravated battery), heavy drug use and hospitalizations for psychiatric problems – the jury awarded the plaintiff $2.5 million for negligent hiring and retention. Mindful that such an employee would be routinely interfacing with and entering the homes of members of the public, the employer could have avoided this tragic situation if it had simply required the employee to undergo a criminal background investigation and checked the employee's references.   Similarly, an company was found liable for not investigating the background of a truck driver/delivery person who – while under the influence of crack cocaine – brutally assaulted and attempted to rape a customer while delivering furniture to her home. Had the employer done so, it would have discovered that the employee had a history of substance abuse problems and, in fact, had been forced to resign from his prior employer because he refused to take a drug test after admitting he had a substance abuse problem. In fact, considering the issue of punitive damages on appeal, the appellate court found that the employer's failure to conduct a pre-employment background investigation directly contributed to the violence perpetrated on the victim and, therefore, the employer showed a conscious disregard for the rights and safety of others.   Likewise, a company was found liable after one of its employees who was driving a company truck struck another vehicle, killing one of the passengers in the vehicle and injuring another. The evidence revealed that the driver of the truck had not only been convicted of numerous prior traffic violations, including reckless driving, disregarding traffic devices, speeding, and failure to stop at a stop sign but also had had his license suspended and had been involved in a prior collision.   These cases are merely exemplary of the numerous cases in which employers have either been found liable or had to settle cases for substantial sums of money. Typically, these cases involve theft, substance abuse and/or acts of violence by employees. Worse yet and more often than not, they result in employer liability or in substantial settlement payments to the victims. ...read more