Posts

Showing posts with the label applicant

Puerto Rico Limits Use of Credit Reports in Employment Decisions

Image
Effectively immediately:  An  Act to Protect Employee’s Credit Information  prohibits employers from refusing to hire, dismissing, or otherwise discriminating against an employee or applicant because of information contained in his or her credit report. Additionally, employers are prohibited from verifying or obtaining credit history information of an employee or applicant, unless it relates to the hiring of the following positions:  a managerial position, a position for which a credit report is required by law, a position that requires access to financial or personal information of other persons, a position that requires access to trade secrets, or a position that requires a fiduciary responsibility to the employer. Employers in Puerto Rico should review their hiring procedures and make any necessary revisions based on the new law.  If a credit report is allowed, based on one of the positions listed above, the employer should get written consent from the...

In a Rare Employer Win – California Court Sides against Applicant in FCRA Dispute

Image
While employers generally get nervous (and with good reason) regarding FCRA class action lawsuits, there is now a decision, and out of California, no less, in their favor.  In Culberson v. Walt Disney Parks and Resorts, the California Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the employer in a class action lawsuit alleging willful violations of both the standalone and adverse action provisions of the FCRA.  Disney, the employer, had a standalone disclosure form that included a description of the report’s scope, a statement that Disney may share the information with affiliated companies, an explanation of the applicant’s rights, an explanation that a third party would produce the report, and the third party’s contact information.  The court held that the FCRA does not make clear what information may be included and at the time the disclosures were at issue (2011 and 2013), there was no guidance as to what to include or not, as there is today.  As such, ...