The California Civil Rights Department (CRD) has announced a settlement agreement with a property management company and owner. This settlement resolved complaints that an Inglewood apartment complex refused to consider potential tenants with criminal histories. 

According to the agreement, the company and owner must update their screening policies to comply with state regulations. They must also provide personnel with training on fair housing regulations and pay $10,000 in monetary compensation. The CRD’s investigation began after receiving a complaint that the respondents had a blanket ban on renting to individuals with a criminal background. 

The Complaint

According to the complaint, this ban adversely affected black renters. Other than the criminal background, the individual who filed the complaint claimed to qualify as a renter. However, they alleged that the company chose not to rent to them due to a criminal background check. They further argued that the respondents failed to consider court documents. Reviewing this information would have indicated that he never received a conviction, proving the screening report inaccurate.

Under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), housing providers cannot enforce a blanket ban on potential renters with criminal histories. These regulations require housing providers to base application decisions on a direct link between a given conviction and a specific non-discriminatory interest or purpose. The FEHA includes examples such as the safety of other residents, employees, or the property.

What to Consider

Housing providers should consider the nature or severity of the crime when determining its connection to interest or purpose. They should also note the time elapsed since the applicant’s criminal conduct. It is also crucial to only consider accurate and permissible criminal records. These do not include arrests that did not lead to a conviction, sealed, dismissed, or expunged convictions, and most adjudications or matters processed in the juvenile justice system.

The FEHA protects California residents from employment and housing discrimination, among other concerns. The CRD enforces the FEHA. According to the settlement, the CRD required the company and owner to:

• Continue to comply with federal and state housing regulations;
• Train all relevant staff regarding fair housing laws with a focus on how criminal history information can have a disparate impact on certain populations;
• Update their tenant screening policies to comply with state regulations;
• Display a CRD Fair Housing Fact Sheet in specified areas of the facilities and
• Pay $10,000 made payable to the complainant.

This settlement illustrates the importance of accurate and thorough criminal record checks. It also emphasizes how employers and landlords must comply with FEHA regulations. Working with a trustworthy background check provider can help companies and owners avoid violating these regulations.

JDP makes background checks easy and reliable. Speak with a compliance expert today.

Source

The California Civil Rights Council recently issued new regulations that modify California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). The FEHA regulates when and how employers may perform background checks on job applicants. With the new regulations already in effect, employers should review their hiring policies for immediate compliance.

What is FEHA?

The FEHA provides Californians protection for housing and employment. It protects job applicants and employees from discrimination based on race, national origin, ancestry, marital status, color, religion, or age if over 40. It also prevents bias based on sexual orientation, sex, disability, medical condition, or creed, and family and medical care leave denial. 

The Act also bans employers from conducting a criminal background check unless they have made a conditional offer of employment. After running a background check, an employer may decide against hiring an applicant based on the background screening results. However, they must conduct an individualized background check before taking adverse action.

During this assessment, the employer must consider the following:

• The nature and gravity of the offense or conduct;
• The time that has passed since the offense or conduct and/or completion of the sentence and
• The nature of the job held or sought.

An employer may still decide that an applicant’s criminal history disqualifies them from the job after the assessment. As such, the employer must give the applicant the required notice. The employer must also provide the applicant enough time to respond.

New Protections

The new regulations have added protections to the FEHA; employers must comply with the latest and previous rules. One added law prohibits employers from stating in job descriptions that they will not consider anyone with a criminal background. However, the new additions include a few exceptions to the regulation.

For example, jobs required by law to perform a criminal background check are exempt from these protections. Criminal justice agencies and others that require screening also benefit from the exemptions. Another regulation bans employers from trying to find an applicant’s criminal history via an internet search. It also prevents employers from considering an applicant’s criminal history even when the applicant voluntarily provides the information.

When performing the individualized assessment, applicants may provide evidence of rehabilitation or mitigating circumstances. Employers must consider this information when applicants present it. As such, employers cannot refuse any evidence or mitigating circumstances provided by the applicant. Employers must also give applicants a minimum of five days to respond to an adverse notice and an additional five days if the applicants request more time.

The new regulations will benefit many California residents and employers by expanding the labor pool. Employers should review their hiring policies to ensure they comply with FEHA regulations. One way to ensure compliance is by partnering with a trustworthy background check company.

Keep your business compliant with new laws and regulations with JDP’s reliable background checks. Contact a sales rep today.

Source

The California Supreme Court recently announced a ruling concerning the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and how it affects businesses. This ruling specified how businesses performing employment-related activities for others must comply with FEHA. For example, FEHA will hold the company screening job applicants liable for discrimination, not the company that received the screened employees.

How It Started

This decision expands those accountable for complying with anti-discrimination laws in California. The Supreme Court referred to the state’s definition of employer changed to include an employer’s agent. As such, employees can sue third-party businesses for independently engaging in discriminatory behavior. 

This case began when employees filed a class action against third-party medical providers. According to the plaintiffs, the job screening involved inappropriate medical questions. At first, a California federal judge dismissed the case, explaining that the law did not consider third-party agents an employer.

However, the San Francisco-based Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals asked the California Supreme Court to review the case. The Ninth Circuit requested the Supreme Court to determine whether FEHA applies to third parties, determining whether employers’ agents should maintain direct liability for discrimination.

The Decision

The Supreme Court announced that FEHA protects workers throughout the hiring process; it does not matter if they outsource any step to a third party. As such, exempting businesses from liability would counter FEHA’s purpose. Justice Martin Jenkins wrote, “This interpretation extends FEHA liability to the entity that is in the best position to implement industry-wide policies that will avoid FEHA violations,” emphasizing the decision.

Furthermore, the state’s Attorney General’s office filed an amicus brief last year, which supports the plaintiffs today. Had lawmakers intended to exempt businesses from liability, they would have included the intention in the law. Such an exception could have happened any time over the last six decades, but because it did not, the law decisively holds third parties liable. As such, FEHA can hold businesses with at least five employees responsible for acts of discrimination when working on behalf of another employer.

This case reminds employers to choose their third-party agents carefully. They should also monitor the agents to ensure compliance with laws like FEHA. This decision makes employers and their third-party agents more vulnerable to lawsuits during the hiring process. As such, employers should consider working with an experienced and trustworthy background check company. The right partner will ensure compliance, reducing legal disputes while providing accurate and compliant reports.

Keep your business compliant with new laws and regulations with JDP’s reliable background checks. Speak with a sales representative today.

Source