Pre-employment Screening Of Doctors

Posted on by blogger

Verification Of Professional Degrees

Among other things, doctors as a profession and Healthcare as an industry share a common need a good reputation. For doctors their good name is as important as their medical skills and abilities. For hospitals, an excellent reputation is as desirable as modern equipment and the best facilities.

A good name, like good will, is got by many actions and lost by one.. Lord Jeffery

When the good name is brought into disrepute it is the hardest of tasks to remedy. That is precisely the predicament in which Delhi hospitals find themselves.

Over the last few months there has been a spate of reports in various media about unscrupulous people practicing medicine and masquerading as doctors. They have been carrying on their wicked work without the education, training or qualifications to do so. These quacks have even infiltrated the sanctums of private hospitals and are no more confined to the narrow lanes and backstreets of crowded slums and unauthorized colonies.

Reports reveal that the problem is rather large and widespread. Large enough to be alarming. The, now dissolved, Medical Council of India had estimated that the number of quacks operating in the Delhi region would be about 40,000! Now compare that number with 45,000 (DMC database), which is the number of genuine registered doctors.

The erstwhile Medical Council of India (MCI) and the Delhi Medical Council (DMC) have been working hard to get a grip on the problem and clean out the Augean stables. As a result of their efforts some 25 fake doctors were discovered working in respected private hospitals. These quacks have been suspended – with police cases filed against them – and are now enmeshed in the judicial process.

The lesson to be taken from these findings is that hospitals should wake up quickly to the vital necessity of verifying the educational and medical qualifications and antecedents of the medical staff they hire. They cannot afford being tarnished by the bad reputation that comes with hiring quacks and other unqualified medical personnel.

Background Screening and authentication of education qualifications should be rigorously carried out along with checks of professional degrees and references. These checks are especially crucial in an industry such as healthcare where the price of wrong hiring could be the loss of a life.
In a recent AuthBridge study, Background Screening Trends: October 08 July 09 it was found that 69% of discrepant cases relating to education were due to fake/forged documents. The bigger picture is even more disquieting. They show that 30% of all the cases we handled were discrepant – for a variety of reasons. Of these the majority pertained to false and fake qualifications. While these statistics do not directly relate to the medical profession, it is a pointer to what could be the magnitude of the problem facing it.

While hospitals of all hues and sizes need to be alive to the seriousness of the problem, it is also important for the various medical governing bodies to conduct checks of their own. They too have to retain their good name and integrity of their associations. The reconstituted Medical Council of India has to work, now and in its future avatar, to safeguard its international reputation too.

The following quotation is rather apt in the light of the problem. A good name is better than precious ointment (Ecclesiastes 7:1).

Read More: http://www.authbridge.com/resource-center/industry-updates.html

The Perks Of Hiring A Professional Employer Organization In New Orleans

Posted on by blogger

A professional employer organization is basically just a type of payroll service company that attends to the needs of understaffed and overburdened companies. But it is distinct to other categories within the industry so consumers have to be vigilant when it comes to orienting themselves to the differences. A PEO firm that actually takes on employee management tasks aside from payroll computation such as recruitment, risk/safety management, training and development as well as compensation distribution. As such, it comes off as an employer on record and of record as far as tax and insurance goes.

The services a professional employer organization New Orleans provides is also known as co-employment. And clients avail of their assistance because they relieve the company of having to worry about the obligations as well as consequences of controlling a significant number of manpower. Now, one may find PEOs willing to shoulder tax and insurance expenses in behalf of a big company when they are merely employed by it. But the fact of the matter is PEOs are usually able to acquire insurance coverage at lower costs. This is because they negotiate on their behalf but affect the employees of the conglomerates they serve. It is sneaky, yes. But it can be considered legal because as earlier said, their services are a form of co-employment. The same goes for taxation.

But essentially, companies dont just hire payroll service firms like these to escape the staggering expenses of employing people. They do so because these entities do a pretty good job when it comes to preparing and filing payroll, administering benefits and reducing liabilities as well as mistakes. Of course, given their valuable role in the business, professional employer organization New Orleans typically charge3% to 15% of the total payroll they handle, which could amount to thousands, even millions of dollars, depending on the size of their client company. But of course, their market is generally composed only of small and medium enterprises since these are the only ones who are open to the idea of co-employment.

There are currently 700 PEOs in the United States, operating in all 50 states and covering about 2 to 3 million workers. And they are also present in countries such as Sweden and Germany. If you have about 50 employees and are looking to save on benefits and taxation costs, you should start scouting quotes from PEOs in your area so you could determine whether or not it is the best solution you could pursue. It would be smart to ask for feedback from other companies who are also availing of the service so you do not make any rookie mistakes when it comes to hiring a professional employer organization in New Orleans or in any other city for that matter. And naturally, you should also run a background check on all your potential candidates so you could confirm whether or not their experience and claims are valid. If you are having second thoughts, take advantage of trial agreements these entities provide so you could have an actual basis for making your final decision.

Philosophy Of Pre-employment Document Verification – trust, But Verify

Posted on by blogger

Document verification is the process of ensuring that documents presented by prospective employees are genuine and that the holder is the rightful owner. It is an integral part of the pre-employment screening process. Back Checks philosophy for safe hiring is to Trust, But Verify. Unsavory candidates will often conceal their past criminal or employment histories, which can lead companies to make poor hiring decisions.

Why documents verification is so much important in a current scenario? Because hiring new employees is a costly as well as time consuming process in such fast pace business and corporate environment. As the recession in past five years have taken all the opportunities far away from the job seeking applicants, the inflation in document forgery and exaggeration has increased.

Every day we hear about companies employing staff who turn out NOT to be whom they say they are. A comprehensive research shows that around 1 in 5 job applicants falsify their resume or documents to some degree. Estimates show that the cost of a bad hire and replacement is around 150% of the salary. Percentage of forged academic documents has increased over the years creating a huge gap of trust between employers and the candidates.

Document Verification Is Effective

Documentation serves as a basis for pinpointing areas where employees are performing well and those that need improvement, communicating specific feedback to employees, reaching more accurate decisions, and defending actions if litigation or other challenges arise. There is an expectation by employees, other management, hearing officers, investigators, judges, and juries that the employer will have documentation in place to support employment decisions.

Primary source documents verification of the educational documents is very necessary as it will let you know that the documents are forged or not. It inquires about the dates of degree started and completion, attendance during the educational period, performance and character etc.

Checking criminal records is also important as part of the process of document verification. You’ll need to protect your business from liability by doing criminal background checks on applicants who will be your prospective employees in future to avoid employee fraud/theft.

It is important that pre-employment document verification processes are integrated within every employers wider pre-employment screening strategy. The fastest, reliable and yet economical source for document verification is independent background check companies. As they are well conversant with all the procedures regarding background screening procedures and they have all the strong links to make sure the investigation is true, targeted and accurate.

Due to security concerns and the high cost of recruiting, many companies are using pre-employment screeners to background prospective hires which minimize the huge risks of business/customer loss. In addition to checking for previous criminal activity, these firms also verify your educational and employment information. The majority of these screening companies use your job application, not your resume, to check your credentials.

Unfair Dismissal from employment

Posted on by blogger

Many employees are facing different types of problems from the employers which is not related to them or not for their mistake. Sometimes they will get fired from job for reasons that do not apply for them. Have you been forced to leave the job for petty reasons? You may have a cause of action against the employer for unfair dismissal if it is not the case.

The exact definition of unfair dismissal is when an employer action is the termination of the employment contract is contrary to the Employment Rights Act 1996. For example, if you were fired without reasonable cause or dismissal if your employer has not followed the correct procedure or even if you were fired for cause automatically unfair, such as maternity leave.

There are some that are automatically unfair dismissals and if you feel any of these situations, it is most likely a case of legal action. If your employer has completed its work in trying to exercise a legal right such as maternity leave, minimum wage, time off for public service as a juror or parental leave, must verify their claim arose and then continue with the action the right way. If you feel you have been discriminated against on grounds of sex, race, sexual orientation or disability, do not be intimidated by the job. Unfair dismissal is taken very seriously by a court and must be taken seriously by the employer as well.

A claim for unfair dismissal must be removed within three months after the last day of employment in order to solve the problem quickly and more accurately. The case must be brought before an employment tribunal and the prosecution side can come with or without legal representation. If you feel that you have a case to sue for unfair dismissal, you may want to contact your local council to local citizens before acting. There are procedures to follow when a claim which must be observed.

First, you should try to solve the problem with your employer, can be a simple case of misunderstanding. You can contact the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS), who are working to resolve disputes without going to trial. They can talk to an expert to help mediate the situation and possibly resolve it. Other than these there are few legal agencies that can help to solve such issues legally in short period.

If this problem persists, you can take legal action. Most employees must have worked at least one year for the employer before they can make a claim if it is a breach of your legal rights. To make your claim, you must complete an ET-1 form. You can contact a lawyer for the job before making the final decision to proceed as they will be able to ensure that any actions you take are correct. Online forms will be sent directly to the right person and then forwarded to the employer who has 28 days to give reply. If you have no time to do all these things then it is better to seek the help of professional lawyers.

Abbey Santander Group Demonstrates Appeal Stages And Court Structure In Employment Disputes

Posted on by blogger

The appeal stages and court structure in employment disputes in the UK is demonstrated by the high-profile Chagger v Abbey National plc & Hopkins (2006) legal case, where the Employment Tribunal found race discrimination and made the record breaking 2.8 million compensation award. Abbey National Santander Abbey (the UK high street bank soon to be re-branded as Santander share, and being part of the Banco Santander Group) ended Balbinder Chagger’s employment in 2006, giving redundancy as the reason. However, Mr Chagger believed the real reason behind his dismissal was race discrimination. Mr Chagger (of Indian origin) was employed as a Trading Risk Controller. He earned around 100,000 a year and reported into Nigel Hopkins, his manager.

If an employee has suffered unfairness and/or discrimination in employment then he could decide to appeal. The first point of appeal may be to the employer, in the form of a formal grievance. The employee lodges the formal grievance with the employer. The employer is responsible for hearing the grievance and deciding its outcome. The employer is, thus, given the opportunity to deal with the employment dispute and to close it satisfactorily. However, Mr Chagger’s issues were simply dismissed out of hand by the Banco Santander Group company.

If the parties cannot resolve their employment dispute between themselves, then either party may appeal to an Employment Tribunal for an independent resolution of the dispute. Employment Tribunals will hear disputes concerning unfair dismissal, redundancy payments and discrimination. Mr Chagger eventually appealed to the Employment Tribunal by starting legal proceedings against both Santander Abbey National and Mr Hopkins on the grounds of race discrimination and unfair dismissal. The Employment Tribunal heard the case and concluded that Mr Chagger had been both dismissed unfairly and discriminated against on the grounds of race in respect of his dismissal, by both Mr Hopkins and Santander Abbey National. The Employment Tribunal took the rare step of ordering Abbey Santander to reinstate Mr Chagger in order to remedy the wrong of race discrimination it had committed. Santander Abbey National, however, refused to comply with the Employment Tribunal’s reinstatement order. Following Santander Abbey National’s failure to comply, the Employment Tribunal subsequently ordered Abbey Santander to pay Mr Chagger the record breaking 2.8 million compensation for his loss on the basis that he had not been reinstated.

The employee/employer that is dissatisfied with the Employment Tribunal’s decisions may appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The EAT will consider appeals against decisions made by Employment Tribunals. The grounds of appeal must be points of law (i.e., the appeal must be about errors in the legal reasoning of the Employment Tribunal’s decision). The EAT will not reconsider issues of fact. Santander Abbey National and Mr Hopkins appealed to the EAT against the Employment Tribunal’s decision of race discrimination and against the award of 2.8 million compensation. The EAT heard Abbey Santander’s appeals. It decided to uphold the original Employment Tribunal’s finding that Mr Hopkins and Santander Abbey National had discriminated against Mr Chagger on the grounds of race in respect of his dismissal. However, it accepted Abbey Santander’s appeal on the record breaking 2.8 million compensation award and remitted the compensation matter to the original Employment Tribunal for reconsideration on the basis of the likelihood of Mr Chagger leaving Santander Abbey National’s employment in any case.

The party that is dissatisfied with the EAT’s decisions may appeal to the Court of Appeal, being the second highest court in the land. The Court of Appeal will consider appeals against decisions made by the EAT. Once again, the grounds of the appeal must be points of law (i.e., the appeal must be about errors in the legal reasoning of the EAT’s decision). The Court of Appeal will not reconsider issues of fact either. The Santander Abbey National case was appealed to the Court of Appeal; the Court of Appeal’s website showed the case was heard this month, on 7 and 8 July 2009. The Court of Appeal’s records concerning the hearing were not available at the time of writing this article. According to 11KBW set of chambers, the hearing was limited to the issue of compensation only (i.e., not to the matter of race discrimination also). That would suggest that the wrong of race discrimination committed by Santander Abbey National and Mr Hopkins seems to have been finalised by the EAT, which upheld the original Employment Tribunal’s finding that Mr Hopkins and Abbey Santander had discriminated against Mr Chagger on the grounds of race in his dismissal.

The party that is dissatisfied with the Court of Appeal’s decisions may appeal to the House of Lords, being the highest court in the land. Any appeal to the House of Lords requires the Court of Appeal’s approval and the Court of Appeal must also certify a question of general public importance that the House of Lords needs to decide upon. Again, appeals to the House of Lords must be about points of law and not about issues of fact. The House of Lords is the final stage of appeal for most legal cases in the UK. However, rare cases may be permitted for appeal to the European Court of Justice, which has jurisdiction on matters of European Community law.