In an era where workplace safety and company reputation are paramount, relying on fingerprinting alone for background checks is like trying to navigate a ship with a compass but no map. It might point you in a general direction, but you're bound to miss crucial details along the way.
As an employer, you can't afford to leave your hiring decisions to chance. Let's dive into why comprehensive background checks are not just an option, but a necessity in today's business landscape.
Why Fingerprinting Falls Short
Fingerprinting has been a staple in background checks for decades and it's easy to see why. It sounds high-tech, fool-proof, and straight out of a crime drama. But in the real world of employment screening, its effectiveness falls short of what many employers assume.
First off, criminal record gaps are a huge issue. Fingerprinting databases, like the FBI’s, are notoriously incomplete. In fact, the FBI database contains over 50% of arrest records, but an arrest alone doesn’t mean someone was convicted—or even charged.
This means that for many individuals an arrest is recorded, but there's no information on whether charges were filed or if the person was convicted. For employers, this incomplete picture can lead to misguided hiring decisions. That's a whole lot of useless information clogging up your background check.
Also, since fingerprinting databases vary by jurisdiction and are far from universal, certain criminal records can slip through the cracks entirely. A person could have been convicted in one state, but if that information isn’t properly digitized or entered into the national database, the fingerprint check won’t pick it up.
A study by the National Employment Law Project found that relying solely on FBI fingerprint checks could disadvantage up to 600,000 workers a year due to incomplete or inaccurate records. That’s a risky blind spot for any employer.
Another limitation? Timeliness. Fingerprinting databases are not updated in real-time. Recent arrests or convictions can take weeks or even months to be added to the system. So if you’re hiring someone and relying on fingerprinting, you could easily miss a recent criminal charge. That’s a recipe for disaster—especially for businesses like healthcare or education, where safety is paramount.
And let’s not forget, fingerprinting doesn’t tell the whole story. Sure, it can flag criminal records (when they’re available), but it says nothing about other important factors. Employment verification, education history, professional licenses—none of that comes up in a fingerprint check.
If you’re only using fingerprinting, you’re leaving massive gaps in the candidate's background that could cost your business down the road. Consider the risk of negligent hiring lawsuits.
In heavily regulated industries, the stakes are even higher. For instance, in healthcare, HIPAA violations can result in fines up to $50,000 per incident. A single bad hire with access to sensitive patient information could lead to substantial penalties and reputational damage. While this is an extreme case, it illustrates the potential financial impact of inadequate background checks.
These limitations make one thing clear. Fingerprinting alone just isn’t enough.
Obtaining The Full Picture