California Amends Law Preventing Use of Juvenile Criminal History for Employment

Assembly Bill 1843 is an amendment to California Labor Code 432.7 that includes additional restrictions on employment-based inquiries into an applicant or employee’s juvenile criminal history. The new bill, effective January 1^st of next year, restricts employers from:

• Asking an applicant to disclose, either in writing or verbally, information concerning or related to an arrest, detention, processing, diversion, supervision, adjudication, or court disposition that occurred while the individual was subject to the process and jurisdiction of juvenile courts/ law.
• Seeking from any source whatsoever, or using, as a factor in determining any condition of employment (e.g., hiring, promotion, termination, decisions related to a training program, etc.), any record concerning or related to an arrest, detention, processing, diversion, supervision, adjudication, or court disposition that occurred while the individual was subject to the process and jurisdiction of juvenile courts/law.

It is important to note that previous sections of California Labor Code 432.7 allowed employers to look into certain convictions and use them in adverse action decisions if federal law required. The amendment will prevent employers from making decisions based on those preexisting portions of the labor code. This amendment may cause a conflict with preceding federal laws and/or other legal requirements that require specific screening standards for employment. We will keep an eye on this bill as it goes into effect and examine how this conflict will be handled.

You can read Assembly Bill 1843 in full here.

California Assembly Bill 1289: Mandatory Background Checks for TNC Drivers

Assembly Bill 1289, passed on September 28^th, has made background checks mandatory for drivers working for a Transportation Network Company (TNC) in California. This bill applies to both employees and independent contractors.

What is a TNC?

TNCs are organizations that connect paying passengers with drivers who provide transportation using their own non-commercial vehicles. All parties connect to the service via website and mobile apps. These are companies like Uber and Lyft.

Background check requirements for TNCs:

•         A multi-state and multi-jurisdiction criminal records locator or other similar commercial nationwide database with validation; and
•         A search of the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) National Sex Offender Public website

A TNC shall not contract with, employ, or retain a driver if he/she meets the following criteria:

•         Is currently registered on the USDOJ National Sex Offender public website
•         Has been convicted of a violent felony
•         Has been in violation of Section 11413, 11418, 11418.5 or 11419 of the Penal Code

A TNC shall not contract with, employ, or retain a driver if he/she has been convicted of any of the following offenses in the last seven years:

•         Misdemeanor assault or battery
•         Domestic violence offence
•         Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs
•         A felony violation of Section 18540 of the Elections Code

Assembly Bill 1289 goes into effect on January 1, 2017. We recommend that each Transportation Network Company review their background screening procedure to ensure compliance with the new bill as well as the Fair Credit Reporting Act and other local laws. Each violation of the new law will result in fines between one and five thousand dollars per incident.

To view Assembly Bill 1289 in full, click here. 

New California Law in Effect: Senate Bill 530

Attention: California Employers

Hundreds of new laws went into effect in California at the beginning of the year. One in particular, Senate Bill 530, has a profound effect on employers and their hiring practices.

The law states “No employer, whether a public agency or private individual or corporation, shall ask an applicant for employment to disclose, through any written form or verbally, information concerning an arrest or detention that did not result in conviction, or information concerning a referral to, and participation in, any pretrial or post-trial diversion program, or concerning a conviction that has been judicially dismissed or ordered sealed pursuant to law”.

Basically, if it did not result in a conviction, you (employers) cannot ask the applicant about it. This applies to diversion programs as well. A satisfactorily completed deferral program is not classified as a conviction. Upon completion of diversion programs, records are often expunged. If the conviction has been expunged, you cannot ask about it. Seeing a pattern? DO NOT ask or seek out information pertaining to charges that did not result in a conviction or have been sealed by the courts.

It also states that you cannot use another source to get information on dismissed criminal charges. As a consumer reporting agency, we focus on reporting convictions. Prior to this law coming into effect, we already refrained from including anything other than charges that resulted in a conviction. This new law is aimed at employers in California who are inquiring about charges that were dismissed and things of that nature.

The law seeks to protect ex-offenders from being discriminated against in the hiring process. If an employer breaks this law, the applicant can bring action against that person to recover actual damages or $200 (whichever is greater) as well as reasonable attorney’s fees. The intentional violation of this law will allow the applicant to treble actual damages or $500 (whichever is greater) plus reasonable attorney’s fees. This intentional violation is also a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $500.

As an employer, you are not privy to information regarding an applicant’s arrests that did not result in a conviction. The law is meant to give someone with a criminal record a second chance. Breaking this law can result in civil penalties. You, as an employer, are responsible for being aware of this new law. Intentionally ignoring the new law can result in misdemeanor criminal charges.

Here is the entire bill.

Richmond, CA Takes "Ban-the-Box" A Step Further

Richmond, California added Chapter 2.65 to the Municipal Code entitled “Ban the Box” on July 30, 2013. Unlike other cities, Richmond is requiring that no employer can make inquiries into past criminal convictions at any point during the hiring process. While it does not prevent employers from doing background checks, it does prevent them from using criminal records to exclude ex-cons from their list of prospective employees

Below is a map of all the states who have adopted “Ban the Box” in some way.



Unlike, Richmond, CA, the laws in other cities mainly ban the inclusion of the checkbox for past convictions on the job application exclusively. Employers are not restricted from asking potential employees about their criminal background during the interview process.  Richmond, a city inundated with high crime and high unemployment, has taken this law a step further. Employers must refrain from discriminating against people with criminal records.

There are some exclusions from the new ordinance, of course. Jobs with children, seniors, and other “sensitive” jobs are special cases that are not included in the ordinance.

Richmond City Councilwoman, Jovanka Beckles, believes that it levels the playing field for all races. Beckles was one of the six people who approved the ordinance in a 6-1 vote in favor of the law. Those who voted in favor of the law believe that it gives ex-convicts a fair chance to have a place in our workforce, instead of turning back to crime.

The lone councilman opposed to the ordinance, Tom Butt, told a local newspaper, “It will be a nightmare to enforce and will discourage business and investment in Richmond.”

You can read city ordinance 14-13 N.S. here.


Thoughts? Good? Bad? Will this become a trend in places with high crime and unemployment?