In the wake of COVID-19 employers are striving to keep their businesses open and profitable. Doing this means that there is still hiring that must be done.

We know our employees do it. But, do we as their employer have a right to regulate it?

We are, of course, talking about social media.

HR asks this question all the time regarding social media, and the answer can be difficult to pinpoint. Every organization must decide the protocols they want to put, if any, in place, and how to write the policy so it’s fair to the employee and protective of the workplace.

Does a company have a right to require or prohibit their employees from certain social media posts? And what are the consequences of breaking such a policy? Read on to have all your questions answered.

This article was written by Ryan P. Lessmann and first appeared on the National Law Review website.

In an effort to prevent persons with criminal records from being automatically ruled out for job vacancies, Colorado Governor Jared Polis has signed “ban the box” legislation. The new law will go into effect in September 2019 for employers with at least 11 employees, and employers with fewer than 11 employees have until September 2021 to comply.

This makes Colorado the 13th state to enact “ban the box” legislation for private employers.

Data Facts periodically shares insights from other publications that are relevant to our audience. This article was written by Sharlyn Lauby of #HRBartender and first appeared on HR Bartender.

I knew that today’s title will get your attention. I’ve been waiting for someone to send me this question! I’m sure this reader’s note will resonate with many: 

I have a question regarding social media. Last year, we came across a candidate who had a number of recent social media posts expressing racially charged views. We decided not to move this candidate along in the selection process as these posts didn’t reflect our company’s values. Our thought process was:
1) They’re a reflection of our brand and we don’t want to be associated with those views and,
2) Those views probably wouldn’t be good for employee morale. 
Were we wrong to use social media in this way? Is there a legal issue with making decisions like this in the future? Would appreciate your insight!

Driving is risky. Rampant smartphone use, construction, weather, and a variety of other factors work against drivers. It’s especially challenging for those who drive for a living. Add to that long hours of exhausted driving, potential issues with drugs or alcohol, and the chances of causing or being involved in an accident are above average.

At first glance, HR Professionals may think this article doesn’t pertain to them if they work in an industry besides transportation. However, organizations offering deliveries or employing a traveling sales staff are open to the costly risks that having drivers on the payroll brings.

HR Professionals understand the importance of properly vetting their employees. Using background checks to make certain the job candidate has the skills and education that are listed on the resume (and doesn’t have recent, dangerous crimes or drug use in their past that could be detrimental to the workplace) is an important responsibility. 

With the eruption of social media, hiring professionals have been tempted to peek at job candidates’ profiles. It could be argued, after all, that the individual shares posts, tweets, and photos of themselves. Why not use those to build a clearer picture and form opinions about them during the hiring process?

A Lancaster Co., Pennsylvania nursing home is now paying $7.5 million after being held responsible for the sexual assault of one of its patients by a fellow resident. On the surface, that may sound incredibly unfair, but the details of the case highlight a growing problem in the senior care industry. The assailant was a man with a known criminal history of sexual misconduct, and the nursing home knew of his record. 

Effective June 6, 2018, Washington will be the next state to implement “ban the box” legislation, which restricts employers from executing a criminal background check on the job applicant during the initial stages of the application process.

Here are the ABCs of avoiding hiring lawsuits with background screening.

A: Adhere to adverse action procedures.

HR professionals must understand and execute adverse hiring procedures if they decide in whole or part to deny employment based on information obtained in a background report. Pre-adverse action letters must be sent, and then a few days (usually five or more) and a final adverse action letter is sent. Follow this every single time to avoid litigation.