Source: https://infocubic.com/background_check_law/Pennsylvania
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 15:09:21+00:00

Document:
Employers that are either located in Pennsylvania or hiring Pennsylvania residents must abide by the Federal FCRA, and applicable Pennsylvania state employment laws.
This page was created to provide a simple explanation of what an end-user of a background screening report (also known as consumer report) can use in order to be in compliance with Pennsylvania state laws. This page also contains steps an end-user must take to stay in compliance with Pennsylvania state laws.
For more detailed information on Pennsylvania state laws, please consult your legal counsel.
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes §18-9125: Use of records for employment.
only in accordance with this section.
position for which he has applied.
whole or in part on criminal history record information.
Employers making a hiring decision may only consider felony and/or misdemeanor convictions if they substantially relate to the suitability of employment. If an adverse decision is made due to a past conviction, the employer must notify the applicant.
Philadelphia Codes §9-3500 to §9-3509: Fair Criminal Screening Standards.
Employers that are located within the City of Philadelphia must adhere to certain regulations regarding the use of criminal history for purposes of making employment decisions. Most notably, employers may not make a hiring decision based on arrests or charges that did not result in a conviction. Additionally, employers may not inquire into an applicant’s criminal history during the initial stage of the employment process. Questions regarding criminal history may not be on the employment application form. Inquiries into criminal history can only be made after the candidate has been offered a conditional offer for employment.
Philadelphia Code §9-1100: The Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance, Prohibitions Against Unlawful Discrimination.
Employers are prohibited from obtaining and using credit history information in order to make decisions regarding the following: hiring, promoting, discharge, tenure, discipline, or conditions of employment. Exceptions exist under §9-1130.
If an applicant’s credit history information is obtained using an exception listed in §9-1130, and an adverse decision was made against the applicant due to the credit information, the employer must inform the applicant of the particular piece of information that was used in their decision and allow the applicant an opportunity to explain the circumstances regarding the information at issue.
Employers may not inquire into an applicant’s criminal history during the initial stage of the employment process. Questions regarding criminal history may not be on the employment application form. Inquiries into criminal history can only be made after the candidate has been offered a conditional offer for employment.
The Court found in favor of Genesis Healthcare. Ramos had applied for a position with Gensis Healthcare and received a conditional offer of employment pending a background screening. The background screening revealed criminal history that did not comply with Genesis’ hiring standards. The adverse action process was followed, and Ramos was allowed to dispute inaccurate information and was eligible for hire pending the outcome of the reinvestigation. Genesis presented undisputed evidence that they took into consideration Ramos’ information about her criminal record. Genesis ultimately made the final decision after Ramos had the opportunity to explain any negative findings and dispute any inaccuracies.
Plaintiff alleges that Edge Information Management does not comply with the FCRA’s requirement of following reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy. Lopez was denied employment at AutoZone due to inaccuracies on his background screening report prepared by Edge. Edge disclaimed all the information was not accurate, but took no steps to verify other identifiers beyond name.
Case Pending. Lopes is the lead plaintiff for this class action lawsuit.
Employers must follow proper adverse action procedures, and CRAs must follow strict procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy.
Certified Class Action. Abel is the lead plaintiff in this class action lawsuit.
Plaintiff claims that Johnson & Johnson did not hire him because of inaccuracies within his background screening report. Summary offenses were inaccurately labeled misdemeanors. Furthermore, Johnson & Johnson did not obtain the plaintiff’s consent before using the background screening in their employment decision.
Certified Class Action. Noye is the lead plaintiff in this class action lawsuit. Johnson & Johnson moved to compel arbitration, but the Court denied this motion.
Employers using Staffing agencies must still ensure that they comply with the disclosure/authorization and adverse action procedures as required by the FCRA. Although the Staffing agency may have their own procedures complying with the FCRA, this does not preclude the employer from adhering to this standard themselves.
Plaintiff claims that Penn National Gaming violates consumer privacy laws by failing to make proper disclosures when it pulls the credit reports of employees and applicants. Plaintiff claims Penn National Gaming violated the FCRA by pulling credit reports of employees and prospective employees without first providing a clear notice in writing so the individuals can give consent and remedy any issues they may have with their report.
Plaintiffs claim that they completed forms disclosing prior drug-related convictions and authorizing SEPTA to conduct background checks, but that the forms did not comply with the FCRA’s stand-alone disclosure requirement. Plaintiffs allege that the forms contained extraneous language, including language inquiring about their educational history, employment history, probation or parole status, and job suitability.
Dismissed. Court held that Plaintiffs did not suffer any concrete injury in fact.
Employers must ensure they follow strict procedures complying with the FCRA’s requirements for disclosure and authorization.
When does the adverse action process need to take place? Employer sent out adverse action while the report was still in progress, and did not send out adverse action once the final report was completed. Plaintiff brought suit against the employer for not following correct adverse action procedures.
The adverse action process should be initiated once the employer has received the completed screening report. If the adverse action process was initiated while the report was still in a progress, a SECOND adverse action process must be followed upon completion of the report in its entirety (for example, this would mean at least four notification letters sent).

References: §18
 §9
 §9
 §9
 §9
 §9