That's for copies indeed. I lately was in the understanding that regular backup jobs behaved the same with health checks, but it turns out that was the extreme ReFS slowdown as of lately that 'hung' the jobs for too long, confusing me. But indeed, this is for copies, and that's what we've asked before and 'was put in a request'. Howeve I've never heard from it before. Currently, due to the health checks, and probably because of the slow ReFS, when a copy job triggers the health check, chances are big that the copy job just doesn't make it in time. I'd rather have the copy be done first, and then the health check, regardless of how quick a health check can or should be. I think it's better to have the data copied as soon as possible. The chances of data actually being corrupted is pretty small anyway, and missing a copy in the chain is not cool.
Maybe it's nice to have a choice, some people might want the check BEFORE the copy, some might want it AFTER the copy. Or, as I've read somewhere is being worked on, Veeam should make the health checks as a job, so we can schedule them to run after a certain job.