Latest news with #backgroundcheck
Entrepreneur
5 days ago
- Business
- Entrepreneur
Navigating the Raise
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. You're reading Entrepreneur United Kingdom, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. Closing a £5m funding round in a down market is no small feat. For Charlotte Lucy Hall, co-founder of background checking platform Zinc, the process was defined not just by the financial climate, but by a set of overlapping personal and professional pressures that made the experience unique. "Deciding when to disclose my pregnancy during our first funding round was one of the toughest decisions of my life," she says. "My co-founder and I were also silently navigating a long, painful fertility journey. Balancing the intense emotional and physical exhaustion with the immense pressure to secure investment felt overwhelming at times." The backdrop was unforgiving. The economy had dipped, the tech bubble had burst, and high-profile bank collapses were unfolding mid-due diligence. "Very few firms were writing cheques, especially for first-time founders," Hall recalls. But investors ultimately bought into Zinc's mission to transform a frustrating process into something faster, more transparent, and more empowering. "Our candidate-centric solution is redefining how background checks are done across many industries with particular success in finance, healthcare and education sectors," Hall explains. "In today's competitive landscape, hiring delays can cost businesses both valuable time and top talent. We showed them that our technology gives HR and talent professionals back what matters most: their time." Zinc's traction played a key role in convincing investors to sign on. From early-stage start-ups like Marshmallow to fintech giants like Revolut and established names like Trainline, the company's client list reflected both adaptability and demand. "The Zinc solution isn't one-size-fits-all; it's tailored to each customer's unique structure and goals. But the consistent benefit for every client is easing the workload for HR teams and reducing stress for new hires during the background check process." The difficult market was only part of the challenge for Hall. She also had to navigate the delicate decision of when to tell investors she was pregnant. At the same time, she and her co-founder were dealing with a long and painful fertility journey. Balancing these personal struggles with the pressure to secure investment created a constant sense of overwhelm. Hall waited until her second trimester before sharing the news. "By then, we felt a bit more secure in the pregnancy. Thankfully, our investors were incredibly supportive - it was actually very reassuring and truly reconfirmed that we had chosen the right partner in AVP." Yet for all the concerns about external perceptions, she found the hardest part came from within. "Honestly, my own expectations were far harder to navigate than any investor scepticism," she reflects. "As founders, and especially as women, there's often this intense pressure to prove ourselves by carrying every burden simultaneously." The lesson, she says, is about pace - and permission. "Giving yourself permission to slow down when you need to, and trusting that progress doesn't always look like constant motion, is incredibly powerful. It's okay to take a breath and slow down." Hall is open about the additional challenges that came from not having a typical founder background. "No elite university affiliations or Big Tech names," she notes. "The absence of those credentials meant we faced an uphill battle for credibility, resulting in more rigorous vetting and outright rejections than we might have otherwise." Rather than attempting to compensate, Hall leaned in. "It pushed us to articulate our true differentiators: our unparalleled understanding of the problem we're solving, the clarity of our long-term vision, and our unwavering, mission-first ethos." That approach not only resonated - it helped redefine the conversation. "This wasn't about trying to fit a mould; it was about amplifying what made Zinc genuinely unique and compelling." Now, having made it through both the fundraise and early motherhood, Hall wants the ecosystem to evolve. "We need open, honest conversations - between founders, investors, and teams - about the reality of pregnancy and needing time to care for a new baby. These are natural life events that should be celebrated, not treated as taboo." Too often, she says, female founders are forced into an impossible choice. "Currently, women often can't win: judged for returning 'too soon' or for taking 'too long.' This shouldn't be a forced choice." Zinc's funding round may have concluded, but its broader significance has only just begun. It suggests that the next iteration of start-up culture - if it's going to be more inclusive - must reckon with the whole human behind the founder. And that itself could be a marker of progress. True flexibility, Hall says, must be more than a slogan. "We need a cultural shift that respects these decisions, encourages true flexibility, and provides concrete support, not just platitudes."
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
What a background check might reveal about your online date
What a background check might reveal about your online date Summer flings. Rooftop drinks. Last-minute getaways. There's something about this season that makes romance feel a little more spontaneous, and a lot more exciting. Whether you're swiping poolside or lining up coffee dates, summer is prime season for online dating. But while the vibes might be casual, how you handle your safety doesn't have to be. A little curiosity can go a long way when it comes to vetting someone new. And in the era of catfishing, ghosting, and mismatched intentions, running a quick background check might be one of the smartest moves you can make before you get swept off your feet. PeopleFinders dives deeper. Why Even Consider a Background Check? Let's be real: Not everyone is who they claim to be online. Maybe they're vague about their job. Maybe their stories don't quite add up. Or maybe you're just getting a gut feeling that something's off. These days, it's less about being suspicious and more about staying empowered, especially when meeting someone new. A study from Stanford found that around 7% of messages on dating apps were less than honest, with most deceptions aimed at making the person seem more appealing. With dating scams and fake profiles on the rise, doing a little digging isn't overreacting—it's a safety measure. Think of it like checking restaurant reviews before a first date. You're not assuming the worst; you're just being smart about your time and who you spend it with. What a Phone Lookup Might Actually Reveal If you're picturing a formal investigation, don't worry. It's a lot simpler (and more discreet) than that. All you need is a name, address, phone number, or email to start uncovering key details about that person you met online. A quick check can confirm their real name, age, and residence—all things people can easily fudge on dating apps. It might also show if they've been married before, have criminal records, or have used aliases in the past. In some cases, it could even give you insight into past addresses or public employment records. Only have their number? A quick reverse phone lookup can tell you who that number is really linked to. It's a low-effort way to see if what they've told you lines up with the facts. What It Won't Tell You (And Why That's Okay) Of course, a background check isn't a crystal ball. It won't reveal emotional availability, relationship intentions, or whether you'll actually click in person. Those things still require old-fashioned chemistry and some in-person time together. But when it comes to ruling out major red flags or just confirming the basics, having a little extra context can give you the confidence to move forward or gracefully step back. Discreet, Quick, and Totally Normal Here's the good news: Running a background check is a lot more common than you might think. With how much of our lives takes place online these days, you can look someone up in minutes, privately and without alerting them. Whether it's your first match of the summer or someone you've been chatting with for weeks, it's a simple step that keeps you in control. Summer's Short, But Smart Choices Last There's nothing wrong with falling a little fast when the nights are warm and the conversation flows. But before you invest your time and energy into someone new, make sure their story checks out. You don't need to give up on summer romance—far from it. You just need to go into it with open eyes and a little extra online dating savvy. A quick background check won't ruin the magic. In fact, it might just help you feel a little more secure and open to the possibilities ahead. After all, the best kind of summer love? The kind that's real. This story was produced by PeopleFinders and reviewed and distributed by Stacker. Solve the daily Crossword
Fox News
6 days ago
- Fox News
What school background checks might miss, according to former FBI agent
Former FBI agent Bill Daly discusses how the Devil's Den murder suspect moved through school systems, and what the case reveals about background check gaps in education.
Forbes
27-07-2025
- Politics
- Forbes
Federal Court Strikes Down California's Ammo Background Check Law
In a major victory for the Second Amendment, on Thursday, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals struck down a first-of-its-kind law that required a background check before every purchase of ammunition in California. 'By subjecting Californians to background checks for all ammunition purchases,' Judge Sandra Ikuta wrote for the majority in Rhode v. Bonta, 'California's ammunition background check regime infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.' PETALUMA, CA - APRIL 02: Rounds of .223 rifle ammuntion sits on the counter at Sportsmans Arms on ... More April 2, 2013 in Petaluma, California. (Photo Illustration by) California's regime dates back to 2016, when California voters approved Proposition 63 by a margin of almost 2:1. Under the proposition, residents would pass an initial background check and then receive a four-year permit to purchase ammunition. However, California lawmakers amended the law to only allow ammunition purchases in-person and after a background check each time. By requiring face-to-face transactions, California also banned both online sales and prohibited Californians from buying ammunition out-of-state. Prior to California's regime taking effect in July 2019, multiple plaintiffs, including Olympic gold medalist Kim Rhode and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, sued the state in 2018. To determine if California's law was constitutional under the Second Amendment, the Ninth Circuit relied on a two-step test set by the Supreme Court in its 2022 landmark ruling, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. Under that decision's framework, 'when the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.' If so, the government must then show that 'the regulation is consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.' In the California case, the Ninth Circuit determined that the Second Amendment protects 'operable' arms, and 'because arms are inoperable without ammunition, the right to keep and bear arms necessarily encompasses the right to have ammunition.' As a result, the court concluded that 'California's ammunition background check meaningfully constrains the right to keep operable arms.' To survive the second step of the Bruen test, California attempted to compare its background check system to a wide range of historical analogues, including loyalty oaths and disarmament provisions from the American Revolution and Reconstruction. But the Ninth Circuit was left unconvinced. 'None of the historical analogues proffered by California is within the relevant time frame, or is relevantly similar to California's ammunition background check regime,' Ikuta found, and so, 'California's ammunition background check regime does not survive scrutiny under the two-step Bruen analysis.' In a sharply worded dissent, Judge Jay Bybee blasted the majority's analysis as 'twice-flawed.' Noting that 'the vast majority of its checks cost one dollar and impose less than one minute of delay,' Judge Bybee asserted that California's background check system is 'not the kind of heavy-handed regulation that meaningfully constrains the right to keep and bear arms.' Notably, the California Department of Justice in 2024 received 191 reports of ammunition purchases from 'armed and prohibited individuals' who were denied by background check. In dueling statements, the California Rifle & Pistol Association praised Thursday's ruling against the state's background check law as a 'massive victory for gun owners in California,' while Gov. Gavin Newsom called the decision a 'slap in the face.'
Yahoo
26-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Newsom Responds to U.S. Court Blocking Ammo Background Check Law: ‘A Slap in the Face'
Newsom Responds to U.S. Court Blocking Ammo Background Check Law: 'A Slap in the Face' originally appeared on L.A. Mag. A state law meant to tackle rampant gun violence in California has been reversed following a decision made by the Appeals Court yesterday, which ruled the law a violation of the Second Newsom issued a statement following the new ruling, saying: 'Strong gun laws save lives — and [yesterday's] decision is a slap in the face to the progress California has made in recent years to keep its communities safer from gun violence. Californians voted to require background checks on ammunition and their voices should matter.'The former law, although passed by voters in 2016, has been in limbo for about seven years through state and federal courts. The fight to appear on the state ballot began in 2015, after the mass shooting in San Bernardino, which killed 14 people at a holiday party. Newsom headed the ballot initiative, in his then role as lieutenant governor, saying it was an answer to minimizing gun violence in California. Newsom secured the votes, mandating a background check for all ammunition purchases, similar to the background check needed to purchase a handgun. This would flag any attempted consumer with a criminal record, any prior restraining order or dangerous mental in January 2024, a district court ruled the law unconstitutional — after previous halting and reinstating — forcing the state of California to appeal. The Ninth Circuit panel struck down the law yesterday, in a 2-1 decision. 'By subjecting Californians to background checks for all ammunition purchases, California's ammunition background check regime infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms,' Judge Sandra S. Ikuta wrote in a statement for the two-judge majority decision, obtained by The New York background checks do receive overwhelming bipartisan support, typically ranging from 85 to 90 percent, according to the press announcement from Newsom's office. The report even cited a 2023 poll from Fox News, whom Newsom is actively suing for defamation, showing 87 percent of Americans supporting criminal background checks for anyone purchasing a firearm. The voters approved the law in 2016 with a 63 to 36 percent margin. This story was originally reported by L.A. Mag on Jul 25, 2025, where it first appeared. Solve the daily Crossword
