By
The Wildcat Opinions Board
The UA human resources department and the Staff Advisory Council are discussing the implementation of background checks for prospective UA employees. Because the plan is in the early discussion stage and there is no actual policy in the works, many details need to be hammered out, and human resources is looking to do so with a university-wide dialogue.
The UA should be careful about implementing new background-check policies, as they could constitute an invasion of employee privacy.
A certain level of background checks is already a part of the hiring process, such as contacting former employers and asking about criminal records. Currently, the closest the UA comes to background checks is asking prospective "classified employees" to indicate whether they have had any felony convictions and to confirm that all information provided is accurate. The applicant has the opportunity to refute damaging information. If a background-check policy is implemented, this balancing mechanism should be worked into it.
Apparently, this idea is not in response to any particular incident, though human resources has acknowledged concern over an incident last semester in which a UA employee was charged with misuse of university funds. But it is in response to inquiries from various UA departments about implementing background checks.
One question immediately springs to mind: Which departments will this impact? Is there any real reason to perform background checks in academic departments? NAU runs the checks on every prospective employee, faculty included. The UA would do well to leave this out of any future policy. The chilling effect it would have on faculty applicants is not only detrimental to the academic environment, but would do little to relieve our already overworked faculty and TAs.
Aside from privacy issues, there are closely related confidentiality issues. SAC member Gary Hansen has raised these concerns, and we echo them. If background checks are adopted, how will the information gained be handled? How will the information be stored? How will it be protected? Who will have access to it? Will it become a permanent part of an employee's employment record? Though some of these questions can be answered in more detailed planning discussions, there will always be concern over how to protect this information and how to keep it out of the hands of those who are not authorized to see it.
Finally, if the UA adopts a background check policy, the potential cost ranges anywhere from $25 to $75 per check. The university is the second-largest employer in Southern Arizona with more than 11,000 employees and a payroll of more than $517 million. For each of the last two years, the UA has added about 100 to 200 employees. This could get expensive if applied across the board. ASU only checks the backgrounds of employees working with money - UA could adopt this as part of its policy.
Allison Villaincourt, acting head of the department of human resources, has the right idea when she addresses the need "to weigh the benefits of screening against the needs of the hiring process."
But there is more at stake here. Without a demonstrated need for background checks, risk management becomes bureaucratic doublespeak for invasion of privacy. The UA needs to avoid this trap.
