Think One Background Check is Enough? The Legal Risks of Failing to Recheck Employees

When it comes to safeguarding an organization's reputation and safety, recurring background checks are a crucial yet often overlooked component. For organizations, failing to conduct regular background checks on employees and volunteers isn't just a matter of oversight—it's a missed opportunity to prevent significant legal and financial consequences.

Understand the Legal Risks

Organizations that fail to implement recurring background checks expose themselves to potential lawsuits, claims of negligence, and liability issues. If a predatory employee harms someone under your care, your organization could be held legally accountable. Courts often rule that the employer should have known about the risk (see below), especially if a simple, routine check could have flagged a problem. Without this proactive measure, your organization may face "negligent hiring" or "negligent retention" claims. These claims suggest the employer is failing to act in the best interest of their community by not re-evaluating the risk an individual might pose over time.

A Costly Oversight

Negligent hiring and retention lawsuits can cost organizations millions in damages, not to mention the devastating impact on their reputation. In one recent case, a nonprofit organization was sued for failing to discover an employee’s criminal record that had occurred after the initial hiring. The court found that by not conducting recurring background checks, the organization had put its community at risk and was liable for substantial damages. These cases are becoming more frequent, and no organization, regardless of size or mission, is immune.

Reputation Repair

The financial penalties are just the beginning. The damage to an organization’s reputation can be irreversible. A single incident involving a staff member with a past that should have been flagged can result in lost trust, decreased donations, dwindling enrollment, and even the complete shutdown of operations. The expense of establishing a recurring background check policy is minimal compared to the potential losses an organization could incur by neglecting this crucial step.

How Often Should Background Checks Be Conducted?

While most organizations conduct background checks at the time of hiring, fewer consider the necessity of recurring checks. Best practices suggest conducting these checks annually. A recurring check policy should be clearly outlined in your organization’s HR guidelines and communicated to all staff and volunteers. This not only sets expectations but also shows a proactive stance on safety and risk management.

Staying Compliant

Laws around background checks vary from state to state and are constantly evolving. Some jurisdictions are even mandating recurring checks, especially for positions involving children. Staying updated with these regulations is not only a legal necessity but a moral one. Ensuring your organization is compliant with these evolving laws protects you from legal action and demonstrates your commitment to safety.

Proactive Action to Protect Your Organization 

Organizations must view background checks not as a one-time task but as an ongoing commitment to safety. Here are some steps you can take to protect your organization:

1. Develop a Clear Policy: Outline how often checks will be conducted and who is subject to them.

2. Communicate with Employees and Volunteers: Ensure everyone understands the importance of recurring checks as part of the organization’s commitment to safety.  

3. Stay Up-to-Date with Laws: Regularly review state and local laws to ensure your policies are compliant.

4. Partner with a Trusted Provider: Use a reliable background check provider to ensure thorough and compliant screenings.

Book a Consultation with Griff Group Consulting.

Below are real life examples of Sexual Abuse Lawsuits from the law firm Taylor and Ring.
·  $102M verdict for two students who were sexually abused and groomed by their band teacher Samuel Neipp, a former music teacher at Dartmouth Middle School.

·  $100M settlement for multiple plaintiffs in the Santa Monica PAL/Eric Uller abuse case where the City of Santa Monica covered up the abuse.

·  $25.3M verdict for a 13-year-old boy who was abused almost daily by a supervisor at the Westerly School in Long Beach, California. Despite suspicions of abuse by one former employee, and incidents involving other teachers, none of this behavior is ever reported to the police. Stephen W. v. Westerly School of Long Beach

·  $25M verdict against Santa Barbara Unified School District for John Doe #2, who testified that the abuse began when he was 14 years old in 2008, and continued until 2011.

·  $14M settlement for two adult women sexually abused by their middle school teacher recovered the largest “per victim” settlement in the nation: $7 million each.

·  $10.8M verdict for a boy who had been sexually abused by a teacher off school premises. The school district previously received an anonymous letter warning that the teacher was acting improperly with boys.

·  $10M settlement in a sexual abuse case brought on behalf of a minor with special needs who was sexually abused by her bus driver. Jane Doe v. Lucia Mar Unified School District, et al.

·  $7.9M settlement for a woman who was sexually abused by a teacher at Grover Cleveland Charter High School during her time as a student. (Source: Taylor and Ring 2024 https://bit.ly/3MDEWNE)