Firms Spurred to Boost Employee Screening

Aug. 27 -- — When a door-to-door magazine salesman killed a 66-year-old woman, his employers said they weren't responsible because they didn't know about his criminal record for assault. Is it enough for companies to claim ignorance to avoid liability?

Courts are increasingly taking the stance it is not, according to lawyers and corporate security professionals. They say the justice system is holding companies accountable for what their employees do, if they commit a crime while in their role as an employee.

In the case of the door-to-door salesman, who pleaded guilty to murder, days before the murdered woman's family was to bring a lawsuit to court against the two companies involved, the firms reached a settlement for "a substantial amount," said Chris Coffey, the family's lawyer.

But now magazine subscription processor American Community Services, based in Michigan City, Ind., is facing another suit, also brought by Coffey's firm.

In the latest case, the subscription processor and The In Crowd, the Indiana-based firm that hires the door-to-door salespeople, are accused of liability in the alleged rape of a young mother by a man who, according to the suit, was hired despite having been convicted of aggravated assault in Cook County, Ill.

According to the suit, filed in Rutherford, Tenn., County Circuit Court, a background check was done on the man, but he was hired anyway.

Mike Bergerson, a lawyer for American Community Services, said the company has severed its relationship with The In Crowd, which was formed after the original firm in the cases, called The Real Deal, was dissolved. But Bergerson argued American Community Services never had anything to do with the hiring practices of the companies that sold the subscriptions.

"All we did was process the magazine subscriptions that they sold," he said. "We certainly are concerned about the events that led up to this, but I don't know if it is really the responsibility of American Community Services."

At the heart of the cases is the question of whether companies could, should or did know an employee might have had a proclivity to commit a certain kind of crime, and if so, whether the employee was put in a position providing the opportunity to commit that crime.

‘Scary Simple’

A decade ago it was extremely difficult to do a thorough criminal background check on a job applicant. But now that most criminal records across the country are accessible via the Internet, the process has become much simpler and costs have dropped precipitously.