Source: https://www.newyorkemploymentattorney-blog.com/category/criminal-history-discrimination/page/2/
Timestamp: 2019-03-19 04:19:16
Document Index: 751323662

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 750', '§ 8', '§ 296', '§ 1681', '§ 1681', '§ 1681', '§ 1681', '§ 8', '§ 750', '§ 752', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 10225', '§ 10225', '§ 10225', '§ 8', '§ 750', '§ 752', '§ 1681', '§ 8', '§ 8', '§ 752', '§ 8']

Criminal History Discrimination Category Archives — Page 2 of 2 — New York Employment Attorney Blog Published by New York Employment Lawyers — Phillips & Associates
Articles Posted in Criminal History Discrimination
Study Examines How “Ban the Box” Laws Might Affect Race Discrimination in Employment
Cities around the country are enacting “Ban the Box” (BTB) laws with the aim of helping people with criminal histories reenter the workforce without undue difficulty. The “box” in the law’s name refers to the check box on a typical job application asking if an applicant has any criminal history. Employers routinely dismiss any application with that box checked. While BTB laws most certainly have the best intentions, at least one study has identified a possible unintended side effect in relation to race discrimination. A “field experiment” conducted by researchers at Princeton University and the University of Michigan found a possible increase in racial bias after the enactment of BTB laws. This one study should not be interpreted as a refutation of BTB laws’ purpose or effectiveness. For one thing, they display a correlation without necessarily establishing causation. The study’s findings are still important to understanding the overall issue.
Most BTB laws, including the law in New York City, prohibit employers from advertising job openings in a way that excludes people with records of arrests or convictions. See N.Y. Admin. Code § 8-107(11-a)(a)(1). An employer may not inquire about criminal history until it has “extended a conditional offer of employment to the applicant.” Id. at § 8-107(11-a)(a)(2). If the employer takes an adverse action, such as withdrawing the conditional offer of employment, it must provide the applicant with written notice and give the applicant up to three days to respond. Id. at § 8-107(11-a)(b); N.Y. Corr. L. § 750 et seq. A violation of these provisions is deemed an “unlawful discriminatory practice” under New York City Law. See N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-107(9), (10); N.Y. Exec. L. § 296(16).
The study, entitled “Ban the Box, Criminal Records, and Statistical Discrimination: A Field Experiment,” was published by the University of Michigan’s Law and Economics Research Papers Series in June 2016. The abstract states that, while BTB laws might reduce immediate discrimination on the basis of criminal history, this “could risk encouraging statistical discrimination” if “employers may make assumptions about criminality based on the applicant’s race.”
Ridesharing Company Faces Multiple Class Actions Alleging Unlawful Background Check Practices
New York City law provides some of the most comprehensive protections against employment discrimination based on criminal history. No comparable protections exist under federal law, although the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., provides similar protections with regard to consumer credit information. Credit reports obtained by employers during the hiring process may include information regarding criminal history. A putative class action in federal court in New Jersey alleges that a major ridesharing company violated the FCRA by failing to disclose information found in drivers’ credit reports prior to taking adverse actions against the plaintiffs. Cuccinello, et al. v. Uber, Inc., et al., No. 2:15-cv-06604, am. Complaint (D.N.J., Dec. 7, 2015). The lawsuit also names the credit reporting agency (CRA) that issued the credit reports as a defendant.
The New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) does not allow employers to inquire about criminal history until they have extended a conditional offer of employment to a specific applicant. If an employer makes an adverse decision after this point, it must notify the applicant of the reasons for this determination and give the applicant an opportunity to respond. This is similar to provisions of the FCRA relating to the use of credit reports for employment purposes.
The FCRA requires an employer to get a applicant’s written authorization to obtain a credit report, and to provide the applicant with “a clear and conspicuous disclosure,” in writing, stating that the information contained in the credit report may affect the employer’s hiring decisions. 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(b)(2)(A). Before a CRA may issue a report to an employer, the employer must certify that it has followed these requirements. Id. at § 1681b(b)(1)(A). If the employer bases an adverse action or decision on information contained in the applicant’s credit report, it must provide the applicant with a copy of the report and a notice of their rights under the FCRA. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681b(b)(3)(A), 1681g(c).
New York Laws Imposing Employment-Related Consequences for Criminal Convictions
Discrimination in hiring on the basis of a criminal record, including not only convictions but also arrests and charges, is a serious problem for millions of people in this country. Many cities and states have enacted laws protecting workers with criminal convictions from many forms of discrimination. Recent amendments to the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) offer some of the strongest protections in the country. The law includes an exception, however, for situations when other local, state, or federal laws specifically disqualify people with criminal records from certain types of employment. New York State has more than 1,000 such laws.
The NYCHRL generally prohibits employment discrimination based on criminal conviction history, using procedures established by state law. N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(10), N.Y. Corr. L. § 750 et seq. Under the New York State Corrections Law, an employer cannot refuse to hire someone or take other adverse employment actions against them based solely on criminal history, except in two situations: if a “direct connection” exists between the criminal history and the specific job in question, or if the employer reasonably believes that employing the person would pose an “an unreasonable risk” to certain people, the general public, or private property. N.Y. Corr. L. § 752.
An employer that denies someone a job on one or more of the grounds stated in the Corrections Law must provide written notice to that person. The NYCHRL also prohibits employers from advertising job openings as only being open to people without criminal records. N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(11-a).
Federal Agency Expands Protections Against Criminal History Discrimination
Criminal background checks have become increasingly common in the hiring process in recent years. Many employers refuse to consider an applicant with a criminal history, even when it has little to no relation to the job in question. This creates a vast population of people who are essentially unemployable, which is bad not only for those people but for everyone. A growing body of law at the city, state, and federal levels places limits on how employers may use criminal history in hiring decisions. Still, there is much progress to be made. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which deals with federal housing discrimination law, recently issued new guidelines regarding the use of arrest records by landlords. While these guidelines do not directly affect employment, they are an important step forward on the larger issue.
When discussing how criminal history plays a role in employment discrimination, it is important to understand the difference between an arrest, a charge, and a conviction. An arrest record does not, by itself, indicate that a person committed a crime, nor should it necessarily serve as evidence of criminal activity. Similarly, a charge without a conviction should not imply criminal activity. A conviction means that either a person pleaded guilty to a criminal charge or was convicted after a trial, at which the state had to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A person may still be able to prove actual innocence, even after a conviction. Employers and others often fail to make a meaningful distinction between an arrest, a charge, and a conviction, so the law attempts to make the difference clear.
Cities across the country, including New York, have enacted laws restricting employers’ ability to inquire about criminal history during the initial stages of the job application process. These laws are commonly known as “Ban the Box” (BTB) laws, in reference to the check box on a typical job application that asks whether an applicant has ever been arrested, charged with, or convicted of a crime. New York City’s Fair Chance Act, which took effect in October 2015, prohibits employers from asking about criminal history until they have extended a conditional offer of employment. At that point, they must notify an applicant if they make an adverse decision based on the applicant’s criminal history, and they must give the applicant an opportunity to respond.
State Supreme Court Strikes Down Law that Categorically Bans People with Criminal Convictions from Employment
Criminal history is a major impediment to finding a job for many people in New York City and around the country. This is often true even when the nature of an individual job applicant’s criminal history has little to no relation to the job in question. Some state laws also specifically target people with criminal records, often in very broad terms. In late 2015, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that one such law, which excludes people with criminal convictions from a particular job market entirely, was unconstitutional. Peake, et al. v. Comm. of Pennsylvania, et al., No. 216 M.D. 2015, slip op. (Pa. Sup. Ct., Dec. 30, 2015).
Many local governments, including New York City, have adopted laws restricting employers’ ability to inquire about criminal history in the initial stages of the hiring process. See, e.g. N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(10). These laws are often known as “Ban the Box” (BTB) laws, in reference to the check box found on many employment applications asking whether an applicant has a criminal record. BTB laws are an important step in enabling people with criminal history to find employment, but the issue addressed in Peake is different. It involves the categorical exclusion of people with criminal histories from employment in a particular field.
Pennsylvania’s Older Adults Protective Services Act (OAPSA) is intended to protect “older adults,” defined as people age 60 or older, “who lack the capacity to protect themselves.” 35 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 10225.102, 10225.103. It prohibits nursing homes, and other facilities that provide care to older adults, from hiring any applicant who has been convicted of a wide variety of offenses, ranging from homicide to various fraud- and drug-related offenses. Id. at § 10225.503. The law gives no discretion to nursing home administrators and actually provides for administrative and criminal penalties for facility administrators who violate these provisions. Id. at § 10225.505.
New York City’s “Ban the Box” Law Could Put Employers in an Unusual Position
Cities and states around the country have enacted “Ban the Box” (BTB) laws, which prohibit employers from asking about criminal history during the initial stage of the job application process. New York City’s Fair Chance Act (FCA), which took effect in October 2015, amends the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) to protect job applicants who might have had a hard time finding a job because of a criminal record. Some critics have claimed that the law might come into conflict with an employer’s legal duty to protect its employees under statutes and the common law. Balancing the interests promoted by BTB laws with those represented by laws regarding, for example, sexual harassment may be a matter for New York courts to consider in the near future.
BTB laws prevent employers from excluding applicants with criminal records right away because they had to check a box on an application form that asked whether they had a criminal record. Under the FCA, employers cannot advertise that a job is only available to applicants without criminal records, and they cannot inquire about criminal history during the initial phase of the application process. An employer can ask about criminal history once they have extended a conditional offer to an applicant, but the FCA establishes strict procedural requirements.
Once an employer has made a conditional offer of employment, the FCA allows it to consider criminal history, but only to the extent permitted by Article 23-A of the New York Corrections Law. N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-107(10), N.Y. Corr. L. § 750 et seq. An employer may only take adverse action, such as revoking the conditional employment offer, if the individual’s criminal history is directly related to the job at issue, and employing the individual “would involve an unreasonable risk to property or to the safety or welfare of specific individuals or the general public.” N.Y. Corr. L. § 752.
Posted in: Criminal History Discrimination and Sexual Harassment
Criminal history can be a major impediment for job applicants. Laws in New York City and elsewhere offer some protection for job seekers whose criminal history is not directly relevant to a job or its specific duties. Incorrect information is also a serious concern, especially considering the sheer volume of information available to consumer reporting agencies (CRAs) and other services. A putative class action is alleging violations of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., because of a hiring decision allegedly based on inaccurate criminal history in a background check. Feldstein v. Amazon.com LLC, et al., No. 3:15-cv-07322, complaint (D.N.J., Oct. 5, 2015).The New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8-101 et seq., protects employees and job applicants from various forms of employment discrimination. This includes a ban on discrimination based on an arrest or criminal record, unless a “direct relationship” exists between an applicant’s criminal history and the specific job, or the applicant would pose an “unreasonable risk” to specific individuals, specific property, or the public. N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-107(10), (11); N.Y. Corr. L. § 752. Employers in New York City are also barred from advertising jobs as being open only to people without criminal history, or inquiring about criminal history during the initial phases of the hiring process. N.Y.C. Admin. Code §§ 8-107(11-a).
Sexual Harassment (240)
Hostile Work Environment (101)
Pregnancy Discrimination (94)
Caregiver Discrimination (13)
New York City Takes on Hairstyle Discrimination, Noting Its Close Relationship to Race Discrimination in Employment
Complaint Alleges Discrimination by New York City Museum Based on Pregnancy, Caregiver Status, Other Factors
New York Court Considers Aider and Abettor Liability in Criminal History Discrimination Claim