EEOC & FCRA

Top 5 Background Screening Trends for 2020
Top 5 Background Screening Trends for 2020

Topics like medical marijuana, Ban the Box, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) are sure to grab a lot of headlines in 2020, but are they really the HR trends to which you need to pay attention? Not according to the data. We surveyed hundreds of HR professionals, recruiters, and generalists who use screening following the SHRM Annual Conference about what trends you’re watching in 2020. Here’s what’s on your radars.

Adverse Action: An Employer’s Guide
Adverse Action: An Employer’s Guide

Adverse action is a requirement of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, or FCRA. The FCRA governs how the information for consumer reports is collected and the steps employers must take if they make an adverse decision based on information gathered by a third party background screening company. These companies are known as Consumer Reporting Agencies (CRAs).

FCRA Compliance: What You Need to Know
FCRA Compliance: What You Need to Know

“FCRA” is the abbreviation for the “Fair Credit Reporting Act”. This federal law was enacted in 1970 and was originally designed to help consumers resolve inaccuracies in their credit reports. In 1996, the scope of the FCRA was expanded to include other reports about consumers, including background reports prepared for employment screening purposes. FCRA Compliance is mandatory for any employer using a third party to conduct background checks.

Courts Shut Down Professional Plaintiff
Courts Shut Down Professional Plaintiff

Businesses have always had to worry about frivolous lawsuits. Con-artists “slip” and fall, others find a bug in their food. Sometimes the hot coffee is just too hot. All of these kinds of things have cost companies money over the years, but now some of those who are out to make a quick buck are evolving.

How Just v. Target Differs from other FCRA Complaints
How Just v. Target Differs from other FCRA Complaints

I have written countless articles about FCRA lawsuits over the last few years, and it seems they almost always end with the big-name company paying out millions to make the case go away. So I was intrigued by the judge’s decision to dismiss a recent case against Target, saying he did not believe the company “willfully” did anything to break the law. I reached out to our friend and expert Mary Poquette to try to figure out why this case ended so differently.

The Supreme Court Makes Long-Awaited Decision in Spokeo FCRA Case
The Supreme Court Makes Long-Awaited Decision in Spokeo FCRA Case

  Hoping it would stem an ever-rising tide of class action litigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), employers and their background screening partners have been waiting for the U.S Supreme Court to rule in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. The question presented to the Court was whether actual damages must occur in order for a legal complaint to have “standing” to sue, meaning there is a basis for the plaintiff to challenge the conduct in court.

Privacy Shield Framework Released
Privacy Shield Framework Released

If you are anxious for more details about the new EU-US Privacy Shield agreement, you are in luck. The entire framework can now be found here. This plan guarantees that private information from EU citizens will receive the same protections in the US as it would if the data was being used within the European Union. If a company does not agree to comply, they cannot export electronic information to the US.

FCRA Cases and the Justice Antonin Scalia Void
FCRA Cases and the Justice Antonin Scalia Void

Employers and their background screening partners were optimistic a Supreme Court ruling in Spokeo v. Robins would establish an actual injury requirement for FCRA-based class action cases to advance through the courts. The Spokeo ruling was expected to settle the controversy created by divided lower court decisions on whether “no-injury” cases have legal standing based upon statutory violation alone or if specific injury must occur.

The Impact of the Safe Harbor Ruling on Your Screening Program
The Impact of the Safe Harbor Ruling on Your Screening Program

A bit of background … Effective in 2000, the Safe Harbor Framework was established jointly by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the European Union (EU). One of its purposes was to facilitate trade between European countries and the U.S. by streamlining data flows between countries. Safe Harbor allowed U.S. companies to self-certify compliance with the privacy principles of the European Union Data Protection Directive and, as a result, legally transfer private consumer data between European Union countries and the U.S.  According to its critics, however, the Safe Harbor Framework allowed private data to flow from European Union countries to the U.S. without adequate protections being in place. 

Blog Topics

Stay up-to-date on Employment Laws & Regulations with EBI's Screening News Network!