Blog

 
     

California Limits Credit Reports

By Michael Klazema on 10/14/2011

Like most bills restricting the use of credit reports in employment decisions, AB 22 includes categorical exemptions, allowing employers to obtain credit reports in situations including the following:

  1. A managerial position.
  2. A position in the state Department of Justice.
  3. That of a sworn peace officer or other law enforcement position.
  4. A position for which the information contained in the report is required by law.
  5. A position that involves regular access, for any purpose other than the routine solicitation and processing of credit card applications in a retail establishment, to all of the following types of information of any one person:
    1. Bank or credit card account information.  
    2. Social security number.  
    3. Date of birth.  
  6. position in which the person is, or would be, any of the following:
    1. A named signatory on the bank or credit card account of the employer.
    2. Authorized to transfer money on behalf of the employer.
    3. Authorized to enter into financial contracts on behalf of the employer.  
  7. A position that involves access to confidential or proprietary information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, process or trade secret that (i) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who may obtain economic value from the disclosure or use of the information, and (ii) is the subject of an effort that is reasonable under the circumstances to maintain secrecy of the information.
  8. A position that involves regular access to cash totaling ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or more of the employer, a customer, or client, during the workda.

Before requesting a credit report in any of these situations, the employer must provide the applicant or employee a notice that:

  1. says that the employer will use the report;
  2. identifies the source of the report;
  3. identifies the specific basis listed above that allows the credit report; and
  4. allows the applicant or employee to request a free copy of the report from the employer by checking a box.

If the employee checks the box, the employer must request a copy for the applicant or employee at the same time as the employer requests the report. The employer may not charge the applicant or employee for the copy.

The law does not apply to any position with a financial institution subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

Clients should immediately plan on how to change their background screening notices to applicants and employees. backgroundchecks.com’s recommendation is that, before the end of 2011 clients should:

  1. compile a list of all positions for which they request credit reports in California;
  2. determine whether any of the listed reasons permit it to obtain the credit report for each position;
  3. for positions without a permitted reason, stop ordering credit reports;
  4. for positions with a permitted reason, create modified disclosure and authorization forms to specify the reason and the other required components of the notice.

For the purpose of identifying the source of the credit report, backgroundchecks.com believes that the best approach when buying credit reports from a credit bureau through a reseller (like backgroundchecks.com) is to state that you are obtaining the report from the credit bureau through the reseller. (For example, “We will obtain the credit report from TransUnion through backgroundchecks.com.”)

For more information on how this update may affect your screening program and how backgroundchecks.com can help, please contact customer service.


Tag Cloud
Categories
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.