Background Checks? That is the Question

22 June 2015 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog

Has your company decided yet whether it will conduct criminal background or credit checks? If you are already using that tool as part of your job screening process, are you keeping up with legal developments in every city, county or state where you do business to verify whether “ban the box” laws are being considered? Is your company a government contractor? If so, are you aware that 100 members of the U.S. Congress support legislation to apply “ban the box” to government contractors?

The background check landscape continues to evolve and change. There is intense scrutiny at the state and local level, as well as in Congress, at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Federal Trade Commission, which enforces the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and the very strict notice and documentation requirements in that law. As we have written before, staying on top of the legal requirements and restrictions, and the variations among them, can be daunting. For example, the District of Columbia and two neighboring Maryland counties implemented criminal background check legislation in the last six months. While the laws share many similarities, each identifies the number of employees required to be a covered “employer” differently: 11 or more in D.C.; 15 or more in one Maryland county; and 25 or more in the other. The D.C. law also requires that a company have a “legitimate reason” to rescind a job offer and mandates that the company consider six specific factors in order to make that determination. Confusing enough?

Once you decide to utilize background checks, the FCRA imposes very strict requirements, including about how to disclose to an employee or job applicant that the employer will obtain a consumer report, and how to obtain the person’s consent to perform the background check. The rigid FCRA requirements have become fertile ground for litigation, including class actions seeking statutory penalties of $1,000 per violation of the disclosure and consent provisions of the statute.

How do you navigate these treacherous waters? If you decide to incorporate criminal background or credit checks in your job application process, we recommend several steps to help minimize your risk.

  1. Consider deleting any question about criminal convictions from your job application. While “ban the box” prohibitions are not universal, deleting the question at the initial stage of the application process may be the easiest course of action. You will admittedly be giving up receiving certain information you are used to reviewing, but again it may be easiest in light of continuing changes to these laws. You can ask later in the process, in accordance with applicable laws.
  2. Check and double-check your FCRA disclosure and consent forms. Eliminate extraneous language from disclosure documents, such as to combine the disclosure with a release. That would be an automatic violation of the statute.
  3. Develop clear guidance about how to use the results of a background check and whether to withdraw a job offer based on those results. Key issues include how to evaluate the particular duties and responsibilities for the job you are hiring for, and how, if at all, the specific criminal conviction or credit report information relates to those duties and responsibilities. Document the decision and thought process about why the background check information was important to the decision.
  4. Perform due diligence about your background check vendor. For example, recent class action filings alleged that vendor background checks included information that is prohibited by the FCRA, including criminal activity that was more than seven years old, and that the hiring employer relied on it.
  5. Give the applicant a reasonable period of time to review and challenge the background check results before you withdraw the offer. Provide pre-adverse action letters.

Background checks can be used effectively to screen for information that you, as a responsible employer, will want to know about a job candidate. If you elect to take advantage of the benefits they provide, be aware of and take steps to avoid the potential problems and hot spots that go with the territory.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services

Insights

Do You Know What IMMEX Stands For?
16 July 2019
Dashboard Insights
Does The U.S. Need STRONGER Patents?
16 July 2019
PTAB Trial Insights
California Establishes Fund to Combat Wildfire Threats
15 July 2019
Renewable Energy Outlook
There’s No Place Like Home – But Is That a Reasonable Accommodation?
15 July 2019
Labor & Employment Law Perspectives
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
2019 NDI Executive Exchange
14-15 November 2019
Chicago, IL
MAGI’s Clinical Research Conference
29 October 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Association for Corporate Counsel Annual Meeting 2019
27-30 October 2019
Phoenix, AZ