On Aug. 20, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its unanimous (7-0) decision in Connor v. First Student, 2018 WL 3966434 (Cal. S. Ct. 2018), ruling in favor of a class of current and former bus drivers who sued their employer for violating one of California’s background check laws. It could have significant consequences for employers who do not provide employees and applicants with proper notice or obtain appropriate written authorization prior to consumer reporting agencies’ conducting background checks on the employers’ behalf. (It is important to note that employers have responsibilities under the applicable statutes, in addition to the notice and authorization requirements, when they discover adverse information within background check reports, though those requirements are not within the scope of this article.)

California Background Check Laws

Many employers retain the services of a third-party consumer reporting agency (CRA) to obtain consumer reports, such as background checks or credit reports as part of the hiring process. California has two state laws with which employers must, generally, comply when they do so. (Employers should also be aware of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) (15 U.S.C. §1681, et seq.), which has its own notice and authorization requirements when CRAs run “consumer reports,” including a requirement that the employee or applicant give written authorization for the report.)