In response to consumer concerns regarding privacy and public access to personal identifiable information (PII), some counties across the United States – including in Michigan, California, Kansas, South Carolina, and Virginia – have already enacted rules that limit access to PII, including for background checks.
Background checks are an essential step in vetting a potential employee to ensure workplace safety and other qualifications necessary for an open position. Many of the new county and state measures protecting PII include partial or full DOB redactions, which prevent public access to date of birth information in court records and can stall background screening processes even for “authorized individuals” and researchers who require information for an employer background screening.
Although these measures are intended to protect consumer information against identity theft and discrimination, they can delay and complicate background screening processes for the large percentage of employers who require this information to make informed and responsible hiring decisions.
In this article, we’ll discuss the state and county rules that are impacting access to DOB information and what Orsus is doing to ensure that its background screening processes remain thorough, efficient, and adaptive despite these changes.
Recent restrictions on DOB access through public court records have manifested in a variety of ways across the country. In California, several major counties have barred public access to DOB information online or even when using courthouse public access terminals. This information is now only accessible in person at a courthouse and usually requires the assistance of a county clerk. Some counties have also limited the number of in-person queries that any individual or entity can make on a daily basis. Although the Public Background Screening Association (PBSA) continues to work in partnership with other organizations to appeal the decision made in All of Us or None – Riverside Chapter vs. W. Samuel Hamrick, Clerk case, for now, access to court-held DOB information remains restricted in some parts of California.
Similarly, as of January 2022, Michigan has redacted all DOB information from its public-access court records. In contrast to some counties in California, however, the Michigan State Court Administration Office (SCAO) now accepts applications from those who wish to be designated as authorized individuals or researchers, especially for the purpose of conducting employment-related background screenings. As a result, authorized individuals and researchers in Michigan can access the usual identifiers required for background screening, including date of birth. Although some authorized individuals and researchers continue to encounter issues with local courts that mandate in-person DOB requests with clerk assistance, the Michigan SCAO has been receptive and adaptive to feedback on how to streamline and simplify ID and DOB access for qualified individuals and researchers.
Other states like Virginia, Kansas, and South Carolina have their own unique policies regarding DOB information and DOB redaction. For instance, in certain counties in South Carolina and Kansas, only year of birth information is available through a public county record check, whereas in Virginia, certain courts provide only month, day, or year DOB information.
Limiting or barring access to DOB information can have a significant impact on background screening processes in terms of timeline and efficacy. To legally confirm a criminal record and link it to a potential candidate, consumer reporting agencies require more than just a name; they also require other personal identifiers (most commonly, date of birth). When DOB access is limited or fully restricted during the screening process, this makes court record verification much more difficult, tedious, expensive, and time-consuming. When the subject of a screening has a common name, this process can be even more challenging, especially in larger jurisdictions where multiple individuals with distinct records have the same name.
Of course, in some industries and jurisdictions, criminal background checks are strictly required, making these changes all the more disruptive. Likewise, many employers must request candidate records outside of the state where they operate and in another state that does redact DOB information, creating delays. In areas where DOB redaction rules are in place, background checks are a bigger hurdle for employers, CRAs, and background screening providers, opening the door for issues with the accurate reporting of criminal records, increased time spent identifying other (non-DOB) identifiers, and required/costly in-person visits to county courthouses.
Although organizations like PBSA are working to improve employer, CRA, and researcher access to DOB information and other identifiers necessary for responsible background screening, the trend towards enhanced protection of PII is likely to continue and expand to other jurisdictions across the United States. As a result, employers should be aware of best practices that can help their background screenings stay on pace and as comprehensive as possible despite DOB redaction rules. The following practices will help employers adapt to these changes:
Consistently request middle names from any new job candidates, as well as your existing employees. This can expedite successful searches of common names in larger jurisdictions.
Collaborate with your screening provider to collect new or additional identifiers from candidates that can replace DOB when necessary.
Initiate background checks at an early stage of the hiring process. Excluding situations where ban the box laws are in place, starting the background screening process earlier can give your background screening provider the time they need to complete an in-court DOB verification that doesn’t compromise your hiring decision timeline.
Utilizing additional (non-DOB) identifiers to create matches between candidate information and record data.
Collaborating with researchers to improve the efficiency of DOB verification, especially in instances when in-person record verification is required
Offering guidance to employers who operate within (or frequently require record checks from) jurisdictions where DOB redaction is currently in place or under consideration.
Regardless of the DOB redaction rules in your jurisdiction, employers across the country should take regular steps to keep their background screening and hiring processes streamlined, compliant, and adaptive to changes in regulatory policy. Don’t leave your hiring decisions to chance. Partner with the Orsus Group for reliable and thorough background checks that help you hire the best candidates for your organization.
Ready to expedite your background screening and hiring processes? Contact us today to get started.