Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week: Background Check Edition

It's the first full week of January and I'm still working on getting back into the routine.  Being out of the office a couple days this week in trial has pushed things back, however.  With that being said, I did read through several articles this week that were quite good, namely on background checks.  In particular, the one on potential FCRA Background Check Class Actions was one of the more thought provoking reads and the one that I wanted to highlight up top.

As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week.


Beware of Potential FCRA Background Check Class Actions

Gregory Snell has a good note on the increased number of FCRA background check class actions that have arisen over the past year (the number of class actions more than tripled in 2014).  Snell does a good job pointing out the correct procedure that employers must follow to comply with the FCRA and using background checks in the hiring process.  As well, my favorite part was the inclusion at the end of the article on steps employers can take to be proactive about the situation and reduce potential exposure to FCRA background check claims.



Oftentimes, applicants are hesitant when background checks are brought up.  Even if the applicant has a clean record, background checks are a source of confusion, frustration, and stress.  This particular link is to the actual background check guide for job applicants.  I think the guide does a good job breaking down the process, what applicants can expect, and what applicants can do if they think the background check was discriminatory.



This publication is a nice tie in with Snell's article on background check class actions, listed above.  The EEOC and FTC put out a publication on what employers need to be aware of in regard to background checks.  Both the EEOC and FTC have guidance on what an employer can legally do before a background check and also once the background information is collected.  This is definitely worth a read for employers and those interested in the background check process.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more