Careless employing is a case made by a harmed gathering against a manager in light of the hypothesis that the executive knew or ought to have thought about the representative’s experience which, if known, demonstrates a hazardous or dishonest character. Pre-employment personal verifications, representative medication testing, and job physical exams are a percentage of the ways careless contracting cases can be maintained a strategic distance from.
Suppose you’re one of those employers who believes checking references on candidates for employment is too risky, because you might be sued for invasion of privacy.
Law enforcement is a job field more associated with public contact than other jobs. That interaction is usually of a very personal nature and may often grant the officer access to people’s homes. This is referred to as a “passkey” job, and the courts have found that the employer has a higher duty of care to conduct a thorough background investigation of its employees in these situations.
Every employer carries around a considerable burden when they hire. That burden is the duty to exercise reasonable care for the safety of others. The legal description of the duty of care is called “due diligence.” The employer’s duty to exercise due diligence means the employer must consider if a potential new employee represents a risk to others in view of the nature of the job.
Negligent hiring litigation is a growing problem, and it’s going to eventually catch-up to employers that do not perform background checks!
No employer is immune from a lawsuit resulting from negligent hiring practices.