‘Disparate Impact’ Impacts Fortune 500 Company: Think Twice Before You Use Criminal History Informat

Dollar General is the latest employer to settle with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) over its use of criminal background information in the hiring process. The EEOC’s lawsuit argued that Dollar General’s hiring and screening procedures, even though facially neutral, had a disproportionately negative effect on African American applicants as compared to white applicants. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Dolgencorp, LLC, d/b/a Dollar General, 1:13-CV-04307 (N.D. Ill. June 11, 2013).

The consent decree memorializing the settlement requires Dollar General to pay $6 million to aggrieved applicants. It also prohibits the company from considering criminal history when hiring unless it engages a criminology consultant to reevaluate its practices. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure Dollar General’s consideration of criminal history in hiring is job-related and consistent with business necessity.

This outcome sends a strong message to employers that the EEOC has no plans to back down on its stance that background checks can be unlawful under a disparate impact theory. Even if a policy is not discriminatory on its face, it can still be unlawful under federal and state anti-discrimination laws if it has a disproportionate impact on a protected class. Employers that consider criminal histories while hiring should ensure there is a valid job-related reason and business need for doing so. In addition, while not specifically at issue in this case, employers must be aware of applicable state and local “ban the box” laws, which may restrict what employers can ask applicants about criminal histories. FULL ARTICLE

© 2020

InteliCrunch is a free service provided by a collective of people who monitor the background screening industry and how events affect not only the people in it, but even more importantly, the real human impact the industry has on today's society.*All third party logos and / or images used on this website are the sole property and / or registered trademarks of their respective companies or copyright holders. Use of these logos, images or likenesses does not, in any way, imply the endorsement of InteliCrunch by any of the businesses, brands or individuals represented, their parent companies, officers, employees, partners, or affiliates. Any such usage is for informational / news purposes only.  Any / all articles, announcements, releases or third-party-authored content is / are linked back to the original "source"  and author credit given  Furthermore, InteliCrunch is not responsible for, and does not warrant the safety of any third-party links or sites to which any viewer may be directed from InteliCrunch.  InteliCrunch has made reasonable efforts to ensure that any news or informational links on the site are from "known and reputable"  sources / websites.