Seyfarth Synopsis: Recent California legislation, including laws banning questions about salary history and criminal convictions, has bought new interview jitters for employers. These new laws, along with the Fair Employment and Housing Act’s prohibitions against questions going to an applicant’s protected status, confirms the point that there is such a thing as a “bad interview question.” In this ever-changing
Continue Reading Five Interview Question Don’ts for California Employers in 2019
Happy Veterans Day! Celebrate the Benefits of Hiring California Veterans
Seyfarth Synopsis: Countless California employers have found that veterans make outstanding employees. As we approach the Veterans Day holiday, read on for a list of the benefits of hiring veterans, as well as helpful resources for veterans seeking employment. We further discuss some state and federal job protections for employees who are in the military.
Why Hire a Vet?
There
Continue Reading Happy Veterans Day! Celebrate the Benefits of Hiring California Veterans
California Passes State-Wide Ban-the-Box Law
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Legislature has just created yet another protected class of individuals entitled to sue employers under the Fair Employment and Housing Act. The new class of potential plaintiffs are applicants denied employment because of their conviction history, where the employer is unable to justify relying on that conviction history to deny employment.
We’ve reported on two January
Continue Reading California Passes State-Wide Ban-the-Box Law
New Regulations Limit California Employers’ Consideration of Criminal History
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Fair Employment and Housing Council (“FEHC”) has approved new regulations, effective July 1, 2017, to limit employers’ use of criminal history when making employment decisions.
New Regulation Highlights
Updating our prior post, the FEHC has finalized new regulations on employer consideration of criminal history, largely adopting the guidance set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Continue Reading New Regulations Limit California Employers’ Consideration of Criminal History
Here’s an Update: Opportunity (to Work) Knocks in San Jose
Seyfarth Synopsis: On March 13, 2017, San Jose’s new “Opportunity to Work Ordinance” takes effect, requiring covered employers to offer additional hours to part-time employees before hiring new or temporary employees. As the law’s effective date looms, the City has issued guidance clarifying portions of the ordinance and has released the notice form that employers must post.
An earlier
Continue Reading Here’s an Update: Opportunity (to Work) Knocks in San Jose
Handling Applicant Criminal Records to Avoid Disability Discrimination Claims
With the 2016 hiring season well under way, California employers are well advised to reconsider their use of criminal records in making hiring decisions. Although employers are probably aware of “ban the box” and other legislative initiatives, they may not be as familiar with the liability exposure they may create by when using blanket policies to reject applicants because of
Continue Reading Handling Applicant Criminal Records to Avoid Disability Discrimination Claims
Unpaid Internships: Stocking Stuffer for Employers, or a Proverbial Fruitcake?
It’s been said the best things in life are free. In California, where running a business is very expensive, an unpaid internship program might seem a perfect gift. Employers of all sizes and in virtually all industries use internships to train and identify the next generation of superstar employees. Interns frequently bring new ideas to challenging business problems and provide
Continue Reading Unpaid Internships: Stocking Stuffer for Employers, or a Proverbial Fruitcake?
Megan’s Law: How California Limits its Use for Employment Purposes
Since New Jersey led the way in 1994, many states have enacted so-called Megan’s Laws, which establish public online registries of individuals who have been convicted of a sex-based offense. California’s version of Megan’s Law is codified as California Penal Code § 290.46.
Section 290.46 requires all convicted sex offenders to register with the state’s sex-offender Registry. California then publishes
Continue Reading Megan’s Law: How California Limits its Use for Employment Purposes
Checking Out Applicants (Part 3): DIY Background Checks
By Pam Devata and Dana Howells
Previously in this three-part series, we discussed employer obligations concerning background checks furnished by investigative consumer reporting agencies. In this third and final segment, we highlight the requirements for California employers who do their own background checks without utilizing the services of a consumer reporting agency.
Public Records Searches and Disclosure Obligations. In the Internet age, many types of public records are instantly searchable. Employers who do their own public records searches (either on-line or using old fashioned techniques) must beware of a little-known California law. Civil Code Section 1786.53(a) provides broadly that any person who uses personal background information—even information that is a matter of public record—for employment purposes must provide that information to the consumer within 7 days. “Public records” are defined as records documenting an arrest, indictment, conviction, civil judicial action, tax lien or judgment.
Here’s the most peculiar twist: the obligation to provide the public records exists regardless of whether the employer obtained actual copies of public records or simply obtained a verbal summary of the contents.
- For example, an in-house researcher may give a verbal report that an applicant has convictions instead of obtaining hard copies of the court records. Does the employer have any disclosure obligations?
Continue Reading Checking Out Applicants (Part 3): DIY Background Checks
Checking Out Applicants (Part 2): Using Consumer Reporting Agencies for Background Checks
By Pam Devata and Dana Howells
Both federal and California law impose additional requirements on the users of “background checks” over and above the requirements for “consumer credit reports.” California’s most significant peculiarity is that it regulates not only background checks done by a consumer reporting agency, but also background checks done by employers in-house. In this second part of a three-part series, we focus on California background checks done by an investigative consumer reporting agency.
Employers who use agencies to conduct background checks need a disclosure and authorization under both state and federal law. However, California’s imposes additional burdens on employers.
Disclosure Requirements.
Federal Law: The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (the FCRA) imposes requirements on users of “investigative consumer reports.” Investigative consumer reports are defined by federal law as containing information obtained through personal interviews of neighbors, friends, and other associates about character, general reputation, personal characteristics and mode of living.
California’s definition is broader.
California Law: The California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act’s (“ICRRA’s”) more expansive definition of “investigative consumer report” includes all third party collection of information about character obtained through “any means,” not just personal interviews with acquaintances. This broad definition would include reference checks performed by a third party. An employee could argue that any type of background check—other than a pure credit check—is covered by the ICRRA. In several recent lawsuits, courts have found the ICRRA unconstitutionally vague because criminal background checks concern both credit-worthiness and character. Therefore, it is unclear whether ICRRA or the less severe California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act is the governing law.
Under California’s ICRRA, employers seeking authorization to procure an investigative consumer report must disclose:
Continue Reading Checking Out Applicants (Part 2): Using Consumer Reporting Agencies for Background Checks