Federal Trade Commission Issues Final Rule on Noncompetes
On April 23, 2024, by a 3 to 2 vote, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a final rule to “promote competition by banning noncompetes...
With Verified Credentials' mobile-first candidate experience, you meet candidates where it's most convenient. Learn how easy we make it.
Learn what social media screening is all about. See the conversation between two industry experts.
Learn the latest trends in employment background checks. This report uses real-life usage data to uncover how employers are screening across industries.
Verified Credentials is a leading background screening company. Since 1984, we’ve helped validate and secure relationships through the use of our comprehensive screening solutions. We offer a wide variety of background checks, verifications, and innovative screening tools.
Our accreditation confirms that our policies, processes, and employee training meet rigorous industry compliance standards.
On April 24, 2023, the City of Chicago published an amended ban-the-box ordinance that limits the use of conviction and arrest records by employers. Below is an overview of the changes effective immediately.
The legal uses of arrest records to make decisions as an employer have been redefined, and the City’s amendment to Sections 6-10-020 and 6-10-054 of the Municipal Code of Chicago contains the following changes:
“(1) an arrest not leading to a conviction; (2) a juvenile record; or (3) criminal history record information ordered, expunged, sealed, or impounded under Section 5.2 of the Criminal Identification Act.”
The amendment also contains new guidelines about when a potential employer or employer may use conviction records as a basis making certain employment-related decisions, including a requirement to perform an individualized assessment in certain situations.
Potential employers and employers can only consider conviction records in making employment-related decisions:
In making the determinations regarding a substantial relationship or unreasonable risk, the potential employer or employer must perform an individualized assessment and consider the following factors:
Potential employers and employers must also provide a pre-adverse action notice and adverse action notice to any person subject to an adverse employment decision based on the person’s criminal history.
A potential employer or employer who wishes to take adverse employment action, in whole or in part, based on a person’s criminal history must first send a pre-adverse action notice that:
The potential employer or employer must consider the person’s response to a pre-adverse action notice, if any. If the potential employer or employer wishes to continue with the adverse employment action, then it must send an adverse action notice that identifies the disqualifying convictions, explains why the conviction(s) disqualify the person from employment, and states that the person has the right to file a charge with the Chicago Commission on Human Relations.
These requirements are in addition to other state and federal requirements applicable to pre-adverse and adverse action notices.
Verified maintains a resource library containing sample documents for our clients to use, including sample adverse and pre-adverse notices. Sample forms and documents should not be construed as legal advice, guidance, or counsel. Organizations should consult their own attorney about their compliance responsibilities under the FCRA and applicable state and local law.
On April 23, 2024, by a 3 to 2 vote, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a final rule to “promote competition by banning noncompetes...
Los Angeles County has introduced a new Fair Chance Ordinance for employers, effective September 3, 2024. Previously, we tracked other Fair Chance...
Florida is set to implement new legislation that significantly expands the scope of background screening for healthcare workers. Currently, only...
2 min read
Transportation service giants Uber and Lyft have faced a fair share of attention related to their drivers. Buckley v. Uber claim both rideshare...
2 min read
We have previously written about Gilberg v. California Check Cashing Stores, LLC, a recent decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that dove...
3 min read
If you use a third-party agency to provide you with background reports (which are also referred to as “consumer reports”), you may want to...