Minnesota Bans the Box

By Michael Klazema on 7/26/2013

The Minnesota Governor signed legislation commonly known as “Ban the Box” this past May.  The bill becomes effective January 1, 2014.

Banning the box refers to the elimination of an inquiry into a person’s criminal history on a job application. This bill extends the limitations currently imposed on the public sector to include private employers.  Private employers will be prohibited from inquiring into or considering, or requiring disclosure of, the criminal record or criminal history of an applicant for employment until the applicant has been selected for an interview, or before a conditional offer of employment is made to the applicant.

Monetary remedies are established for violations of the law. The Commissioner of Human Rights may impose the following:

  1. For violations that occur before January 1, 2015, the penalties are as follows:
    1. A written warning is issued for the first violation that includes a notice the penalties for subsequent violations;
    2. If the first violation is not remedied within 30 days of the issuance of the warning, a fine of up to $500 may be imposed; and
    3. Subsequent violations are subject to a fine of up to $500 per violation, not to exceed $500 in a calendar year.
  2. For violations that occur after December 31, 2014, the penalties are as follows:
    1. For employers that employ ten or fewer persons at a site in the state, the penalty is up to $100 for each violation, not to exceed $100 in a calendar month;
    2. For employers that employ eleven to 20 persons at a site in the state, the penalty is up to $500 for each violation, not to exceed $500 in a calendar month;
    3. For employers that employ more than 20 persons at one or more sites in the state, the penalty is up to $500 for each violation, not to exceed $2,000 in a calendar month;

The remedies listed above are exclusive and private employers are not additionally liable for non-compliance with the law.

The bill does not exempt an employer from conducting a criminal history background investigation or consider criminal history record when there is a legal requirement to do so. It outlines other exemptions particular to certain types of employment such as law enforcement and fire protection agencies.


A copy of the bill is available at: SF523&version=2&session=ls88&session_year=2013&session_number=0&format=pdf


Industry News

Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • March 22 Countrywide, states and local municipalities have committed to ban the box legislation, seeking to equalize opportunities in the job market for those with criminal histories.
  • March 22

    Thinking about becoming a firefighter? Here are some of the background check requirements you might face.

  • March 20

    Four Department of Commerce employees are out after their background checks resulted in security clearance denials. All four had worked high-ranking positions for months despite incomplete background checks.

  • March 15 As more states legalize the recreational use of cannabis, they contend with the emergence of new industries surrounding marijuana cultivation and production. 
  • March 14 In most cases, it is easy to determine where an issue might show up on a pre-employment background check. Citations for traffic violations or reckless driving charges will appear on a motor vehicle record check. Verdicts in a civil court case will show on a civil court background check. And criminal convictions—from petty theft to violent felonies—show up on criminal background checks.
  • March 13 How many years back do employment background checks go? This question can have multiple different answers depending on the situation.
  • March 13 A new bill in Florida would require landlords of apartment complexes to present tenants with verifications of employee background checks to give them peace of mind the people working in and around their homes are trustworthy.
  • March 08 Police officers working with the University of Texas at Arlington recently arrested a man who had avoided police capture on a warrant out of Oregon for nearly two decades. The man, whose real name is Daniel Charles Ray Hanson, spent those 17 years using a variety of fake names and identification documents to move around the country, often engaging with educational institutions under false pretenses. Police say Hanson regularly went by at least three different aliases. He sports a rap sheet that stretches back to an arson conviction in 1995. 
  • March 07

    The Future of EEOC Guidance in Texas Is Up in the Air

    The EEOC issued guidance in 2012 warning employers about the dangers of enforcing categorical policies to bar candidates with criminal histories. That guidance is not enforceable in Texas thanks to a recent court ruling.

  • March 05 Vermont is the latest state to restrict employers’ access to and use of social media accounts of employees and applicants.