|
MINIMUM SECURITY OFFICER BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS
The security agency should conduct an investigation into the guard applicant's past five year work history to include verification of unemployed periods exceeding thirty days.
Criminal conviction searches utilizing fingerprints, where available and legal, should be conducted. However, in many areas, fingerprint checks take four weeks or more. It is felt it would be unreasonable to demand this check be completed prior to employing the applicant if the employment record is otherwise clear and there is no indication that a problem exists. In these cases a local police name check clearance might be appropriate for probationary employment. In some states, a statewide name check can be conducted immediately by phone through the state regulating agency, with a fingerprint check to follow. It should also be pointed out that in some states, only felony convictions will show up on a criminal conviction check.
Legalities in each state vary concerning security officer requirements, background checks and police records. It would be worthwhile for the client company to contact the regulatory agency in its state for specific information. In some states requirements and backgrounds conducted by the regulatory agency are stringent and a past employment check may be all the client would additionally ask of the contract service.
Drug testing of security applicants is probably a minor plus, but is certainly not as critical as most people think for the reason stated below. Additionally, I feel any subsequent testing of security officers should be predicated solely on probable cause, not random testing programs. It should be noted here that while drug testing was believed to be quite effective when it was relatively new, habitual drug users now regularly beat the tests, either through elaborate preparation, or simply by temporarily abstaining. Today, paper & pencil tests developed by psychologists seem to produce much more accurate results than the traditional laboratory tests. While this situation has been documented in security journals, such as the Security Business Practices Manual, published by the American Society for Industrial Security, International, our investigators have regularly confirmed this fact during in-plant undercover operations.
In most areas, the use of deception detection devices such as polygraphs and PSEs is prohibited for most employment purposes. I do not feel this type of screening was ever necessary, even where legal, except on isolated high risk assignments. However, many security agencies are excellent at screening or "vetting" applicants during initial interviews. Some of these interviewers are at least as effective as polygraphs, particularly those who have gone through comprehensive deception detection training programs available today.
Some security companies believe that the use of validated paper & pencil honesty tests has proven effective when the recommended criteria is followed precisely. One security firm reported that as a side benefit they found significantly reduced turnover, in addition to weeding out applicants with the potential for dishonesty.
In some cases, the client may want to require access to assigned officer's background checks, to insure they have, in fact, been conducted.
______________________________
|
|
