Cross border recruitment checks inadequate in many UK businesses, according to HireRight

Posted · Add Comment

A third of UK organisations do not have an adequate screening process in place to check the claims of international job candidates

• 2 out of 5 not confident their business adequately background screens job candidates from other countries.
• More than half of CVs contained errors, according to HireRight’s latest Candidate Health Check research.
• Level of ‘lies’ on applications falls thanks to improvement in job market.

More than one third (39 per cent) of UK organisations do not have an adequate screening process in place to check the claims of international job candidates, according to research conducted by HireRight, Ltd., a leading global candidate due diligence company.

The correct measures have not been established despite more than three-quarters (76 per cent) of people involved in recruiting from abroad, admitting that it is more difficult to effectively background screen potential employees from other countries.

In addition, more than one quarter (27 per cent) anticipate that their business will hire even more overseas talent in the next two years.

The research is based on questioning 200 people involved in UK HR and recruitment1.

Steve Girdler, managing director of EMEA, HireRight, comments: “The recent change in law allowing Bulgarians and Romanians the same rights to work in the UK as other EU nations, has shed light on the increasingly international makeup of this country’s workforce.

“But with greater choice of talent comes greater complexities. To help ensure organisations employ a qualified candidate who does not pose a risk to the business through fraudulent, dishonest or inappropriate behaviour, organisations must have a robust screening process which treats national and international candidates with the same level of rigour.

“Clearly this is not currently the case in many organisations.”

HireRight’s latest Candidate Health Check3 reveals that more than half (54 per cent) of job applications checked in the last quarter of 2013 contained an inaccuracy. With the UK employment market improving2 that figure represents a nine per cent decrease compared to the previous quarter.

Throughout 2013, employment history (33 per cent) and educational achievements (32 per cent) were the areas where candidates were most likely to include inaccurate information.

Steve Girdler, adds: “It’s interesting to see that as UK recruitment picks up, people are being more truthful (or at least careful) in their applications.

“But let’s not fool ourselves. More than half of the applications we receive still contain inaccuracies, showing it is vital to check that people – wherever they have lived or worked – are exactly who they claim to be, will be able to fulfil their job responsibilities and won’t pose a known risk to the business.”

 

Notes:

1 Between October and December 2013, two-hundred (200) UK decision makers / HR professionals / security professionals were asked their views on cross border recruitment.

2 Office for National Statistics, Labour Market Statistics, December 2013.

3 HireRight’s quarterly Candidate Health Check research is based on the analysis of data from EMEA candidate due diligence programmes, with this quarter’s findings based on 27,000 checks of over 8,000 applications from 1,800 organisations between October to December 2013.

HireRight

HireRight is here to help guide you through the biggest screening challenges so you can focus on what’s important to you; attracting top talent. HireRight provides employment background screening services to organisations of any size, in every industry, and nearly anywhere.

More Posts

Follow Me:
TwitterFacebook


The HireRight Blog is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Any statutes or laws cited in this article should be read in their entirety. If you or your customers have questions concerning compliance and obligations under United States or International laws or regulations, we suggest that you address these directly with your legal department or outside counsel.

Comments are closed.