The EEOC
has recently been pursuing cases against companies for allegedly discriminating
in its use of background checks. In the recent case of EEOC v.
Freeman, 2015 BL 288334, D. Md., No. 8:09-cv-02573, 9/4/15, the EEOC
pushed its position too far. The Court in Freeman summarized the facts of the case as follows:
Freeman,
as a regular part of its hiring process, conducted criminal background checks
on all applicants who were offered a position, and conducted credit background
checks on applicants who were offered financially sensitive positions. EEOC
v. Freeman, 961 F. Supp. 2d 783 , 787 (D. Md. 2013). Importantly, applicants were
not turned away for any negative information. Rather, Freeman limited
in scope the type of negative information that would disqualify an applicant.
For example, as to the criminal background check, Freeman generally did not
consider arrests, but only convictions that had occurred within the past seven
years. Id. at 788 . Furthermore, Freeman did not
consider all convictions, but only those for certain crimes. Id . Similarly, with regard to credit
checks, only certain negative items would exclude an applicant from being
hired. Id. at 789 .
Freeman rejected a
job applicant for a position based on information on her credit report and the
applicant then filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. The EEOC took the position that Freeman’s use
of background checks had a disparate impact on Arica-American, Hispanic, and
male applicants. In support of this claim, the EEOC relied on statistical evidence
from an “expert.” The court found that
the expert’s statistical analysis was “inexplicably shoddy,” and dismissed the
case for lack of any evidence of disparate treatment. Freemen then moved for attorneys fees against
the EEOC. The Court found that the EEOC
statistics were “divorced from any reference to” the allegations against
Freeman and therefore required the EEOC to pay Freeman’s attorneys fees for
defending the case. Freeman was awarded
nearly a million dollars in fees.
The EEOC has had
issues with its statistical analysis before.
In EEOC v. Kaplan Higher Education Corp., 748 F.3d 749, (6th Cir. 2014), the Sixth Circuit upheld the
exclusion of EEOC expert statistics as well.
But, the EEOC has
also had success in pursuing litigation based on background checks. The EEOC recently settled a case against BMW
for $1.6 million and is continuing to litigate against Dollar General. Employers should contact their employment
counsel to review their credit and criminal background check policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment