Pre-employment screening is a vital part of the hiring process, but it should be continued during the employment phase as well. It helps employers verify the suitability of candidates and ensures they select individuals who will uphold the organisation’s standards. However, there is a crucial distinction between red flags and deal breakers, and understanding how to interpret screening results fairly is essential, both to protect the rights of applicants and to ensure legal compliance.

At iFacts, we assist HR professionals and job seekers in navigating this complex landscape with fairness and integrity. Here is a guide to help interpret screening findings accurately, without bias or discrimination.

Understanding Employee Screening Reports’ Red Flags and Deal Breakers

Red Flags are warning signs that may indicate a potential concern, but do not necessarily disqualify a candidate. They require further investigation or context. For example:

  • Minor criminal offences that are not recent or relevant to the job.
  • Gaps in employment history that could have valid explanations.
  • Inconsistencies in the provided information that might be rectified through discussion.

Deal Breakers are issues that fundamentally conflict with job requirements or legal standards and typically warrant immediate disqualification. Examples include:

  • A validated serious criminal record relating to dishonesty, violence, or fraud, if this is relevant to the position being applied for or working in.
  • Failure to meet essential qualification or certification requirements.
  • Unsafe behaviour or ongoing investigations that pose a risk to the organisation or its clients. This can be assessed through adequate reference checks or integrity assessments.
  • Claiming to have skills that they clearly do not have.

 

How to Contextualise Screening Results Fairly

Interpreting results fairly involves assessing each finding within the context of the candidate’s overall profile and the role they are applying for.

Here are some best practices:

  1. Examine the Nature and Relevance of the Finding: Not every red flag is a deal breaker. For instance, a non-violent, minor offence or bad reference from several years ago may have little bearing on the current role, especially if the candidate can demonstrate rehabilitation and positive changes.
  2. Consider the Time Lapse: The time elapsed since an incident occurred is often relevant. Older offences that are well behind the candidate and did not involve deception or violence are less likely to impact current job suitability. A thorough integrity assessment can also indicate if the candidate is likely to re-offend.
  3. Evaluate the Candidate’s Response: A candidate’s explanation or evidence of rehabilitation should be taken into account. Open communication and a demonstrated change in behaviour can sometimes mitigate concerns raised during screening.
  4. Analyse the Role-Specific Risks: Some positions inherently carry higher risks. For example, roles involving financial management or security require a stricter assessment of background checks. Ensure the screening criteria align with the specific risks of the position.
  5. Another critical aspect of pre-employment screening is ensuring that the qualifications, industry registration certificates or driver’s licenses presented by candidates are genuine. Unfortunately, some applicants may submit fraudulent documents or misrepresent their credentials to secure employment or gain privileges. If this information is not verified, the employer runs the risk of:
  • Legal and reputational damage: Hiring candidates with fake qualifications or licenses can lead to legal repercussions for the organisation and damage its reputation.
  • Operational risks: Candidates may not have the necessary skills or legal authorisation to perform specific roles, especially roles involving driving or specialised technical work.
  • Loss of trust: If fraud is uncovered post-employment, it can erode trust within the team and with clients. It is for this reason that thorough and effective pre-employment programmes need to be put in place and regularly reviewed.

 

Legal Considerations in Interpretation

Employers must comply with South African legislation, including:

  • The Employment Equity Act – promoting fair employment practices and prohibiting discrimination based on arbitrary grounds.
  • The Labour Relations Act – ensuring fair labour practices and procedures.
  • The Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) – safeguarding the privacy and data of candidates during the screening process.

It is unlawful to dismiss or discriminate against someone solely because of their historyunless it is a relevant, ongoing risk for the role. Employers must ensure that their screening policies are fair, consistent, and compliant with these laws.

Interpreting pre-employment screening results reasonably requires a balanced approach that considers context, time, and role-specific requirements. By carefully distinguishing between red flags and deal breakers, HR professionals can make sound hiring decisions that uphold fairness and legal compliance.

At iFacts, we support organisations and job seekers alike by providing diligent, compliant background screening services. Together, we can promote a fair and transparent employment process.

Contact us today to learn more about our screening solutions and how we can help you interpret your results fairly and legally.

Learn more at www.ifacts.co.za