Plaintiff Natalie Operstein was a professor of linguistics at California State University, Fullerton, and plaintiff Craig Ross is her husband. In 2014, the university hired a law firm to investigate multiple accusations Operstein raised to her superiors about three of Operstein’s colleagues. Defendant Colleen Regan, then a partner at the law firm, led
In the weeks and months since it changed its name from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing to the California Civil Rights Department (“CRD”), the agency has been busy. Most recently, the CRD released proposed modifications to the regulations under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) related to the use and consideration of criminal history information in employment decisions—a process that is already
Many employers undertake routine background checks as part of their hiring process. To be effective, of course, the process has to be completed in a timely manner. Yet, a recent court decision, All of Us or None v. Hamrick, 64 Cal. App. 5th 751 (2021), made that process appreciably more difficult by prohibiting searches of criminal court records with the use of a
A recent ResumeBuilder survey found that 32% of Americans admit to lying on their resume. In the current highly active labor market, with 65% of employees searching for a new job according to the PwC US Pulse Survey, employers should carefully review incoming resumes.
Interestingly, the ResumeBuilder survey found: 1) resume lies are most frequent among higher earners and 2) the most common lies
The California Court of Appeal has ruled that date of birth and/or a driver’s license number cannot be used to identify individuals in an electronic search of the criminal index of court records. All of Us or None v. Hamrick. This ruling complicates and further restricts how and even whether (from a practical standpoint) employers can conduct lawful background checks on job applicants and
We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2019 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:
Gilberg v. California Check Cashing Stores, LLC, 913 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 2019)
While applying for employment with CheckSmart Financial, LLC, Desiree Gilberg signed a “Disclosure Regarding Background Investigation,” which resulted in Gilberg’s filing a putative class action against CheckSmart, claiming it had violated the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) and the California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (“ICRAA”). The district court
Known as “Ban-the-Box” legislation in reference to the box applicants are asked to check if they have any prior criminal convictions, the new law prohibits employers from inquiring about or considering a job applicant’s conviction history prior to an offer of employment. Specifically, the new law amends California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) by making it unlawful for employers in California with five or
On Saturday, October 14, 2017, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 1008 into law, which is set to take effect on January 1, 2018. Known as the “Ban the Box” legislation, in reference to the box applicants are asked to check if they have any prior criminal convictions, the new law prohibits employers with five or more employees from inquiring about or considering a
Santillan v. USA Waste of Cal., 853 F.3d 1035 (9th Cir. 2017)
Gilberto Santillan, a 53-year-old garbage truck driver in Manhattan Beach, was employed for 32 years before his employment was terminated by a new route manager (Steve Kobzoff) after Santillan had four accidents in a 12-month period. Santillan disputed that he had four accidents and testified that he was one of five older