diversity in the workplace increases, it has become increasingly important to know the background of your employees. With the world now being a global village, companies are hiring expatriates and non-residents more and more.
Selecting the right employee depends on how rigorous any onboarding and vetting process is. In a bid to ensure the right employee has been hired, several companies now perform extensive background screening procedures. One procedure that particularly stands out in the global community is the Global Terror Watch List check.
A Global Terror Watch List is highly recommended for any organization that hires employees globally. It helps Human Resource departments understand whether any new employees are politically exposed (affiliated with any political families or entities), have any adverse mentions or are on any Interpol or Terror Watch Lists (suspected/convicted for terrorism). Understanding whether some employees are politically exposed is vital when it comes to recruitment.
For instance, a situation where a company hires an employee who is politically exposed or connected and has to terminate their employment. In case of a lawsuit against the company, the employee might use their family’s political connections to influence the case. Sometimes a politically exposed employee might also be a resource to the organization in case they decide to use their family’s political connections to advance the organization’s agenda.
Why Prevention is Better than Cure
Negligently hiring without confirming if your new employee has had a money laundering case could portray a negative picture of your organization and could also jeopardize your organization’s financial position in the event a laundering incident happens. Imagine a situation where your bank of choice is on prime time news for hiring a money launderer because the unsuspecting HR made an uninformed hiring decision.
As the saying goes, “Prevention is better than cure”. Wouldn’t you agree it is more prudent to screen before hiring and avoid turnover costs, and reputational damage?