[qgvqsehi] Should have known

An employee does something bad and the employer is held legally responsible for the damages caused.  So far, nothing new.  The employer also suffers damages in reputation in the court of public opinion.  Also nothing new.

If the employer knew (or could have known) via a background check that the employee was prone to causing that kind of harm, is the employer liable for more than just the actual damages?  Perhaps "gross negligence" in the employment selection process?

If so, this creates a problem: a risk averse potential employer has even more incentive to avoid hiring someone with a bad background, creating a de facto blacklist that no one is willing to employ.  By statutorially setting the amount of damages for such "gross negligence", society can enforce the blacklist as strong as it wants.

The most prominent such blacklist is the sex offender registry: is the employer liable for gross negligence for hiring someone on it? There is almost certainly political support for such a regulation.