Workers' Comp and the hiring conundrum

As employers have found in the last few years, hiring has become both easier and more difficult. On the one hand, a larger labor pool has made it easier to tap quality employees. At the same time, it's far more difficult. Out of near desperation to land a job, some applicants have gone to great lengths to present themselves in the best possible light, even though the facts may not support what's on their resume. Here are several suggestions for helping to make sure that the right applicants get the job, particularly when it comes to Worker's Compensation issues.

• Expanded reference checking. The difficult part is making sure employee selection meets employer expectations. This may not be easy, particularly for smaller businesses, since applicant vetting is often limited to calling applicant- provided references and perhaps a drug test, if it's required.

  Yet, even the basic step of contacting references can be made more effective by asking them if they know others who may have knowledge of the applicant. By extending the reach, it's quite possible to obtain additional information that can be helpful in evaluating prospective employees.

• The Integrity Test is one of the more effective tools for identifying job applicants who may be prime candidates for Workers' Comp claims. Although these tests have been around for three decades, employers often cross them off the list because of the belief that the cost will be too high. Yet, a study by Cornell hospitality professors Michael Sturman and David Sherwyn of 27,000 employees of a US-based hotel chain points out the value of using an Integrity Test. Using one developed by American Tescor, the hotel hired 6,100 of 29,000 applicants. They then used the data from the test and compared the Workers' Comp claims of the new hires with that of existing employees who did not take the test. The researchers concluded that the cost savings of screening the workers was considerable.

  Based on the number being tested, the cost of testing appears to be $8 to $14 per applicant. The study also indicated that there was a notable reduction in Workers' Comp claims among the new hires, which suggests that an Integrity Test can be a valuable tool for screening job applicants. Because of the nature of the test, it can be administered before a job offer.

• Avoiding "medical baggage." Every job applicant, who has been given a job offer, should take a pre-employment physical before being approved for hire. Many job applicants have been out of work for extended periods, frequently years. When they land a job, whether requiring physical labor or sedentary positions, which can lead to back and neck pain and repetitive injuries, they are out of condition and can be prime candidates for Workers' Comp claims.

  Job applicants can be carrying "medical baggage" that may not be found on a job application but may be revealed with a thorough physical examination.

• A thorough background check by a private investigation firm is essential, particularly if the job involves employees either driving their own or company vehicles. If they have a record of past traffic violations and DUIs, this can spell trouble. A background check can also reveal if a candidate, who has been extended a conditional job offer, has misrepresented their Workers' Compensation history or medical condition. This can uncover a history of false claims or demonstrate that the applicant is a safety risk based on medical opinion.

• In the same way, every applicant must pass a drug screen. This is not just a matter of identifying illegal drug use, but the test may indicate that an applicant is taking one or more prescriptions for a previous job-related injury and that information may not be indicated on a job application. Employers need to comply with state and federal laws when undertaking drug screening.

The goal is to obtain as much accurate information as possible regarding an applicant so the picture is complete and reliable. While it takes more time and means additional costs, the expense pales to that of hiring a "mistake."