Richmond, California Takes Ban-the-Box a Step Further

By Michael Klazema on 8/23/2013

Richmond’s City Council voted on July 30, 2013 in favor of a “ban-the-box” ordinance.  Ordinance 14-13 amends Article II of the Municipal Code of the City of Richmond by adding Chapter 2.65.

Ordinance 14-13 applies to any employer who is a City financial assistance recipient, lessee, or a contractor or subcontractor, and who employs the equivalent of ten or more full-time employees in their total workforce. These employers will be required to remove any question about prior criminal convictions from all of their employment application forms.  This very restrictive ordinance goes a step further and prohibits employers from inquiring into an applicant’s conviction history. This ban on an employer’s ability to inquire into an applicant’s criminal history is one of the most restrictive ban-the-box ordinances we have seen.

There are only two exceptions to the prohibition against inquiring into an applicant’s conviction history. The exceptions are if a criminal background investigation is required by state or federal law, or if the position is considered “Sensitive.” A Sensitive position is one designated by the Richmond Police Department to be of such sensitivity that an exemption is warranted. In this case, the background screening can only be conducted after the employer has determined the applicant is otherwise qualified and has made a conditional offer of employment.  Employers are then limited to consider only “substantially job-related convictions.” This means the conviction record must be substantially related to the duties and qualifications of the position before the employer can consider it when making an employment decision. An individualized assessment must also be conducted to consider the time elapsed since the offense, any evidence of rehabilitation, or other mitigating circumstances.

Compliance with the ordinance will be required for an award of any contract or lease with the City of Richmond, and the City will make random reviews to assess compliance. If the City Manager believes an employer may not be in compliance, the following administrative procedure must be followed:

1.    The City will deliver a written “Notice of Noncompliance” to the employer. The notice will state the noncompliance and the specific action required to correct the violation. It will also state a time period in which to make the necessary correction. The correction period will not be more than 30 days after receipt of the notice.

2.    If the employer disagrees with the notice, it has the burden of proving compliance and submit evidence and argument to the City no more than 30 days after receipt of the notice.

3.    If the City Manager agrees that compliance has occurred it will deliver a written “Notice of Correction of Noncompliance.”

4.    If the City Manager does not agree that compliance has occurred, it will deliver a written “Notice of Failure to Correct Noncompliance.”

5.    Upon receipt of a Notice of Failure to Correct Noncompliance, the employer may request a hearing before the City Manager. The hearing will be held between 20 and 30 days. In the meeting, the employer may present evidence and argument to prove compliance. The City will issue its final determination within ten days of the hearing.

6.    The request for a hearing must be made within ten working days after receipt of the notice. If the employer does not timely request a hearing, the determination of failure to correct noncompliance will be final.

If a final determination of noncompliance is made, the employer is subject to the remedies provided in the ordinance. Noncompliance may result in the suspension or termination of the contract in whole or in part, and civil penalties. The civil penalties may be assessed up to $1,000 or 1% of the total contract, whichever is greater, for each instance of noncompliance. The employer’s history of violation will be a factor in the City’s decision to award future contracts. It may also form the basis for denying contract awards.


Richmond’s Ordinance 13-14 becomes effective August 29, 2013. The text of the ordinance is available on the City’s website:

Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • June 20 Repeat background checks are becoming more common, with companies in India leading the charge. What does this trend look like, and how can employers embrace it now to stay ahead of the curve?
  • June 19

    Every federal job involves a background check of some kind. These background checks and how they are evaluated vary based on job, department, and security clearance level.

  • June 18

  • June 14 Ban the box laws aim to improve opportunities for employment. Could they have the opposite effect instead?
  • June 13 Jacobs Petroleum Products is a regional petroleum company that operates throughout Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, and Maryland. Apart from their employees carrying much responsibility and have frequent contact with customers, the company’s hiring also tends to be segmented since individual store managers are responsible for hiring talent for their own stores. In this employment landscape, Jacobs Petroleum Products needed a reliable and effective way to screen its new hires for criminal infractions and other red flags.
  • June 12

    The University of Wisconsin System may tweak its hiring and reference check processes. The potential changes come after one of UW’s assistant deans was accused of sexual harassment.

  • June 07 Stories of abuse by coaches in youth sports leagues continue to crop up around the country, but rules and guidelines remain patchy and enforcement is often lacking. The struggle to implement an effective system continues nationwide.
  • June 07 Financial background checks, usually referred to as credit history checks, can be an effective way to find out if a candidate is fit to handle accounts, financial data, and other assets at your business.
  • June 06 The Society for Human Resource Management and the Charles Koch Institute recently commissioned a survey to find out how willing employers were to hire people with criminal records. The study indicates that managers, HR professionals, and employees themselves are becoming more comfortable with the idea of hiring and working with ex-offenders.
  • June 04 Are fingerprint background checks the gold standard for employee screening, or are they overhyped? We look at some of the myths and misconceptions surrounding these checks.