$1.8 Million Settlement Reached in Criminal Background Check Case
3 min read
Written By
Kelly Uebel
Published
Nov 05, 2020

In early September, a $1.8 million settlement was announced in a case over a nationwide retailer’s criminal background check policies.
We blogged about this case back in September 2019 which involved numerous allegations under several areas of law:
(i) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the New York City Human Rights Law (which incorporates Article 23-A of the NY state Correction Law and the NYC Fair Chance Act);
(ii) the NYC Fair Chance Act and
(iii) the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
In particular, the lawsuit claimed the employer’s criminal history policies and practices had a disparate impact on black and Latino job applicants and employees with no tie to being job-related or consistent with business necessity (racial and/or national origin discrimination). Additionally, the employer allegedly asked applicants in NYC to authorize a background check prior to extending a conditional offer. Finally, the employer allegedly failed to follow the FCRA adverse action process.
As part of the monetary settlement, the employer also agreed to reform its criminal background check policies.
In early September, a $1.8 million settlement was announced in a case over a nationwide retailer’s criminal background check policies.
We blogged about this case back in September 2019 which involved numerous allegations under several areas of law:
(i) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the New York City Human Rights Law (which incorporates Article 23-A of the NY state Correction Law and the NYC Fair Chance Act);
(ii) the NYC Fair Chance Act and
(iii) the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
In particular, the lawsuit claimed the employer’s criminal history policies and practices had a disparate impact on black and Latino job applicants and employees with no tie to being job-related or consistent with business necessity (racial and/or national origin discrimination). Additionally, the employer allegedly asked applicants in NYC to authorize a background check prior to extending a conditional offer. Finally, the employer allegedly failed to follow the FCRA adverse action process.
As part of the monetary settlement, the employer also agreed to reform its criminal background check policies.
In early September, a $1.8 million settlement was announced in a case over a nationwide retailer’s criminal background check policies.
We blogged about this case back in September 2019 which involved numerous allegations under several areas of law:
(i) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the New York City Human Rights Law (which incorporates Article 23-A of the NY state Correction Law and the NYC Fair Chance Act);
(ii) the NYC Fair Chance Act and
(iii) the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
In particular, the lawsuit claimed the employer’s criminal history policies and practices had a disparate impact on black and Latino job applicants and employees with no tie to being job-related or consistent with business necessity (racial and/or national origin discrimination). Additionally, the employer allegedly asked applicants in NYC to authorize a background check prior to extending a conditional offer. Finally, the employer allegedly failed to follow the FCRA adverse action process.
As part of the monetary settlement, the employer also agreed to reform its criminal background check policies.
You might also like

The New Renter Mindset: What Applicants Expect from Tenant Screening Today
Uncover key expectations renters bring into the screening process today and what those expectations mean for Property Operations teams.

Why Healthcare Background Screening Needs to Change: A Conversation with Verisys and Asurint
Verisys and Asurint leaders walk through what's actually working in healthcare background screening, what's being missed, and where traditional approaches are starting to fall short.

Virginia’s Clean Slate Act Takes Effect July 1, 2026
Beginning July 1, 2026, Virginia's Clean Slate Act will significantly expand record sealing. What does this mean for consumer reporting agencies providing background checks?