全球经济衰退的挥之不去的影响，加上据报道缺乏合格人才，导致许多雇主寻求非传统的人才管理方法，例如要求现有员工承担额外的责任、采购具有外国背景的员工以及寻求临时员工工人承担关键业务的职责。

不幸的是，正如观火背调 的2020 年就业筛选基准报告所揭示的那样，许多雇主的背景筛选计划尚未赶上这些新颖的方法，从而给组织留下了不必要的漏洞。

其中一个关键差距是，根据 观火背调 报告的数据，53% 的雇主一旦正式领取工资就不会重新筛选员工。

[推文“53% 的雇主可能面临来自他们自己员工的风险。”]

也许这可能归因于一种错误的安全感——毕竟，不是通过就业前背景调查成功管理了风险吗？——或者根本不知道雇主是否被允许进行这样的检查。

虽然就业前筛选的许多方面都是静态的（例如，证明候选人实际获得了声称的教育学位），但这当然并不意味着员工在某些情况下不能给您的组织带来重大的未来风险。

如果在您受雇期间，会计文员被判犯有信用卡欺诈罪，或者一名负有驾驶责任的工人被判犯有酒驾怎么办？

由于此类行为可能不会导致员工明显错过工作日或主动通知，因此您有责任对这些潜在问题保持警惕。

雇主还需要注意他们赋予现有员工额外责任或提拔现有员工的情况。在这些情况下，招聘时进行的背景调查可能不足以解决与增加责任相关的标准。

考虑给从未进行过信用记录检查的员工承担重大的受托责任——这可能会让许多组织感到非常不舒服，但不幸的是，类似的情况在许多工作场所并不少见。

考虑对现有员工进行持续筛选，那些希望更好地管理此类不必要风险的组织将得到很好的服务。如果您不确定从哪里开始，请从基础开始：谁、什么、何时以及如何。

这些基本组成部分将由您自己的预算和风险状况驱动。您还应该聘请您的法律顾问来确定您对现有员工的限制和/或责任。

例如，许多雇主想知道员工在就业前筛选过程中提供的授权是否足以解决经常性的背景调查。对于此类问题，最好的指导来源将是精通劳动法的内部或聘请的法律顾问。

通过对现有员工进行背景调查，组织可以在弥补整体筛选计划中令人遗憾且完全不必要的漏洞方面迈出重要一步。

Unfortunately, as revealed by HireRight’s 2013 Employment Screening Benchmarking Report, many of these employers’ background screening programs have yet to catch up to these novel approaches, leaving organizations with unnecessary vulnerabilities.

One of these critical gaps is that, according to data from the HireRight report, 53 percent of employers are not re-screening employees once they are officially on payroll.

[Tweet “53% of employers could be at risk from their own employees.”]

Perhaps this may be attributed to a false sense of security—after all, wasn’t risk successfully managed with a pre-employment background check?—or simply not knowing whether the employer is even allowed to perform such a check.

While many aspects of a pre-employment screen are static (for example, certifying the candidate actually earned a claimed educational degree), that certainly does not mean that the employee cannot present significant future risk to your organization in certain scenarios.

What if, while employed by you, an accounting clerk is convicted of credit card fraud, or a worker with driving responsibilities is found guilty of drunk driving?

Because such actions may not result in noticeable missed days or proactive notification by the employee, the onus is then on you to remain vigilant as to these potential issues.

Employers also need to watch out for situations in which they’re giving additional responsibilities to or promoting current workers. In these instances, the background check performed at hire may not be sufficient to address the criteria associated with added responsibilities.

Consider giving significant fiduciary duties to an employee who never had a credit history check performed—this may make many organizations very uncomfortable, but unfortunately, similar scenarios are not uncommon in many workplaces.

Those organizations that want to better manage unnecessary risks like these would be well-served by considering the ongoing screening of current employees. If you’re uncertain where to start, begin with the basics: who, what, when, and how.

These foundational components will be driven by your own budget and risk profile. You should also engage your legal counsel to determine what your limitations and/or responsibilities are with current employees.

For example, many employers wonder whether the authorization provided by the employee during the pre-employment screening process can sufficiently address a recurring background check. With questions like these, the best source of guidance will be internal or engaged legal counsel that is well-versed in employment law.

By performing background checks on current employees, organizations can take a significant step in closing an unfortunate and wholly unnecessary hole in their overall screening programs.