San Francisco State Flag

San Francisco Background Check Laws

San Francisco State Flag

San Francisco Employment Screening laws

2022 Employee Background Checks and Drug Screening Trends White Paper

Employers that are either located in San Francisco or hiring San Francisco residents must abide by the Federal FCRA, and applicable San Francisco state employment laws.

This page was created to provide a simple explanation of what an end-user of a background screening report (also known as consumer report) can use in order to be in compliance with San Francisco state laws. This page also contains steps an end-user must take to stay in compliance with San Francisco state laws.

Please keep in mind that the EEOC must always be taken into consideration when a hiring decision is to be made. The EEOC has provided guidance on how employers can use criminal records during the hiring process. This regulation was issued on April 25, 2012. The EEOC requires employers to individually review each applicant or employee that may be disqualified due to a criminal record. This also follows the regulations set forth by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Additionally, the EEOC wants to undertake an adverse action process similar to that of the FCRA. They want to add a pre-adverse action process of their own. Although employers already have an adverse action process that is specific to information contained in consumer reports, the EEOC's adverse action process may be different.

The information that is provided on this page does not discuss requirements under the EEOC nor does it explain how to use criminal records that fall under the regulation of the EEOC. It is suggested that compliance with the EEOC be discussed with legal counsel.

For more detailed information on San Francisco state laws, please consult your legal counsel.

Employment Background Check Laws In San Francisco:

CA Civil Code (Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act) 1786.18 (a) (7) and (b) Obligations of Investigative Consumer

Info Cubic Ninja's summary

Arrests, indictments, misdemeanor complaints, and convictions of crimes older than 7 years cannot be reported in California. Any full pardon that has been granted or any arrest that did not lead to a conviction cannot be reported. However, any pending criminal charges can be reported.

Except as authorized under subdivision (b), no investigative consumer reporting agency shall make or furnish any investigative consumer report containing any of the following items of information (7) Records of arrest, indictment, information, misdemeanor complaint, or conviction of a crime that, from the date of disposition, release, or parole, antedate the report by more than seven years. These items of information shall no longer be reported if at any time it is learned that, in the case of a conviction, a full pardon has been granted or, in the case of an arrest, indictment, information, or misdemeanor complaint, a conviction did not result; except that record of arrest, indictment, information, or misdemeanor complaints may be reported pending pronouncement of judgment on the particular subject matter of those records.
(b) The provisions of subdivision (a) are not applicable in either of the following circumstances: (1) If the investigative consumer report is to be used in the underwriting of life insurance involving, or that may reasonably be expected to involve, an amount of two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) or more. (2) If the investigative consumer report is to be used by an employer who is explicitly required by a governmental regulatory agency to check for records that are prohibited by subdivision (a) when the employer is reviewing a consumer’s qualification for employment. (c) Except as otherwise provided in Section 1786.28, an investigative consumer reporting agency shall not furnish an investigative consumer report that includes information that is a matter of public record and that relates to an arrest, indictment, conviction, civil judicial action, tax lien, or outstanding judgment, unless the agency has verified the accuracy of the information during the 30-day period ending on the date on which the report is furnished. (d) An investigative consumer reporting agency shall not prepare or furnish an investigative consumer report on a consumer that contains information that is adverse to the interest of the consumer and that is obtained through a personal interview with a neighbor, friend, or associate of the consumer or with another person with whom the consumer is acquainted or who has knowledge of the item of information, unless either (1) the investigative consumer reporting agency has followed reasonable procedures to obtain confirmation of the information, from an additional source that has independent and direct knowledge of the information, or (2) the person interviewed is the best possible source of the information.

CA Labor Code 432.7.

Info Cubic Ninja's summary

In California, employers – public or private – cannot make employment decisions about a job applicant, or ask a job applicant about: (1) criminal charges that did not result in a conviction; (2) pretrial or post-trial diversion programs; or (3) dismissed or sealed convictions. However, employers are permitted to ask applicants about criminal charges that are still pending.

(a) 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, including, but not limited to, Sections 1203.4, 1203.4a, 1203.45, and 1210.1 of the Penal Code, nor shall any employer seek from any source whatsoever, or utilize, as a factor in determining any condition of employment including hiring, promotion, termination, or any apprenticeship training program or any other training program leading to employment, any record of arrest or detention that did not result in conviction, or any record regarding 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, including, but not limited to, Sections 1203.4, 1203.4a, 1203.45, and 1210.1 of the Penal Code. As used in this section, a conviction shall include a plea, verdict, or finding of guilt regardless of whether sentence is imposed by the court. Nothing in this section shall prevent an employer from asking an employee or applicant for employment about an arrest for which the employee or applicant is out on bail or on his or her own recognizance pending trial.

CA Civil Code (Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act) 1785.20.5. – Disclosure – Copy of Report

Info Cubic Ninja's summary

Before employers run a credit report on a job applicant, they must: (1) inform the applicant that a credit report could affect the employer’s decision, (2) reveal the maker of the credit report, and (3) allow the applicant to receive a free copy of the report. If the applicant decides to receive a credit report, a copy of the report must be sent to the applicant and the employer at the same time.

Prior to requesting a consumer credit report for employment purposes, the user of the report shall provide written notice to the person involved. The notice shall inform the person that a report will be used and the source of the report, and shall contain a box that the person may check off to receive a copy of the credit report. If the consumer indicates that he or she wishes to receive a copy of the report, the user shall request that a copy be provided to the person when the user requests its copy from the credit reporting agency. The report to the user and to the subject person shall be provided contemporaneously and at no charge to the subject person.

1786.11.

Info Cubic Ninja's summary

Under California law, consumer reporting agencies must save the reports they make for at least two years.

Every investigative consumer reporting agency that provides an investigative consumer report to a person other than the consumer shall make a copy of that report available, upon request and proper identification, to the consumer for at least two years after the date that the report is provided to the other person.

Cal. Labor Code 222.5

Info Cubic Ninja's summary

an employer cannot require an applicant to pay the costs associated with an employment drug screening

No person shall withhold or deduct from the compensation of any employee, or require any prospective employee or applicant for employment to pay, any fee for, or cost of, any pre-employment medical or physical examination taken as a condition of employment, nor shall any person withhold or deduct from the compensation of any employee, or require any employee to pay any fee for, or costs of, medical or physical examinations required by any law or regulation of federal, state or local governments or agencies thereof.

1024.5. Chapter 3.6. Employer use of consumer credit reports

Info Cubic Ninja's summary

Employers in California can only use credit reports to make employment decisions if the position in question is: (1) a managerial position (2) a position in the State Department of Justice (3) a law enforcement position (4) required by law to include a credit report (5) one in which the applicant will work regularly with individuals’ sensitive personal information (6) one in which the applicant will have fiduciary responsibilities on behalf of the employer or business; (7) one in which the applicant will have access to trade secrets and other valuable business information; or (8) one in which the applicant will have access to cash of $10,000 or more.

(a) An employer or prospective employer shall not use a consumer credit report for employment purposes unless the position of the person for whom the report is sought is any of the following: (1) A managerial position. (2) A position in the state Department of Justice. (3) That of a sworn peace officer or other law enforcement position. (4) A position for which the information contained in the report as required by law to be disclosed or obtained. (5) A position that involves regular access, for any purpose other than the routine solicitation and processing of credit card applications in a retail establishment, to all of the following types of information of any one person: (A) Bank or credit card account information. (B) Social security number. (C) Date of birth. (6) A position in which the person is, or would be, any of the following: (A) A named signatory on the bank or credit card account of the employer. (B) Authorized to transfer money on behalf of the employer. (C) Authorized to enter into financial contracts on behalf of the employer. (7) A position that involves access to confidential or proprietary information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, process or trade secret that (i) derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to, and not being readily ascertainable by proper means by, other persons who may obtain economic value from the disclosure or use of the information, and (ii) is the subject of an effort that is reasonable under the circumstances to maintain secrecy of the information. (8) A position that involves regular access to cash totaling $10,000 or more of the employer, a customer, or client, during the workday […].

Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA):

Disclaimer

This material is time sensitive. Contact us for updates. This information is subject to frequent change through legislative and court action.

All materials in this page and accompanying information are for general educational purposes and not intended to provide legal, scientific or medical advice. Consult with an appropriate professional to address specific issues.

Los Angeles Ban of box

Effective January 22, 2017 Los Angeles join the long list of cities (Including San Francisco) that have enacted their own version of Ban-the-Box. In general, an employer [located or doing business within Los Angeles and has 10 or more employees] cannot inquire into the applicant’s criminal history until after a conditional offer of employment has been made. The ordinance defines a conditional offer of employment as: “an Employer’s offer of Employment to an Applicant conditioned only on an assessment of the applicant’s Criminal History, if any, and the duties and responsibilities of the employment position. In the real world, a conditional offer may be “conditioned” on many factors beyond criminal history.

The “Los Angeles Fair Chance Initiative for Hiring” extends far beyond traditional ban the box laws that simply regulate the timing of the criminal history question. Impacted employers should review the law’s requirements closely and modify practices accordingly.

The ordinance adopts a similar process as did New York City requiring a “Fair Chance Process” wherein the employer must assess the criminal record history to the job in question. However, Los Angeles desires to out-do New York City as it requires employers to go through this process twice. The first round is after the employer receives the criminal record information. The employer is to consider the criminal record in conjunction with the factors announced by the EEOC when determining of relevance of a criminal record to a job. We assume that these are the eight factors listed in the 2012 EEOC Guidance, but the ordinance does not spell this out. This requires a written assessment of that analysis. At the first stage it is likely that an employer would not have all the information necessary to do such a complete analysis of the 8 factors. Also provided in the ordinance is that the city may in the future add additional or replacement criteria upon which the employer must make its written assessment. There is no form for the assessment provided at this time. Functionally, the first assessment is at the pre-adverse action stage of the FCRA process [include written assessment with Pre-Adverse Action Notice], but these requirements exist whether or not the employer is using a CRA or other third party to obtain criminal record information.

See The State Rules Register Alerts of January 10th and February 8th, 2017 for extensive descriptions.

Regarding San Francisco

Effective August, 2014 for the city and county of San Francisco: Per ordinance an Employer may not require applicants or potential applicants for employment or employees to disclose, and shall not inquire into, the person’s conviction history or an unresolved arrest until either after the first live interview with the person (via telephone, video-conferencing, use of other technology, or in person) or after a conditional offer of employment. Restrictions are also placed on landlords of Affordable Housing.


Disclaimer

This material is time sensitive. Contact us for updates. This information is subject to frequent change through legislative and court action.

All materials in this page and accompanying information are for general educational purposes and not intended to provide legal, scientific or medical advice. Consult with an appropriate professional to address specific issues.

Court Fee

County: Court Fee:
Alameda
Alpine $15.00
Amador
Butte
Calaveras
Colusa $5.00
Contra Costa
Del Norte $15.00
El Dorado
Fresno
Glenn $15.00
Humboldt
Imperial $15.00
Inyo $15.00
Kern
Kings
Lake
Lassen $15.00
Los Angeles $5.00
Madera
Marin
Mariposa $15.00
Mendocino $15.00
Merced
Modoc $15.00
Mono $15.00
Monterey
Napa
Nevada
Orange
Placer
Plumas $15.00
Riverside
Sacramento
San Benito
San Bernardino
San Diego
San Francisco
San Joaquin
San Luis Obispo $4.00
San Mateo
Santa Barbara
Santa Clara
Santa Cruz
Shasta
Sierra
Siskiyou
Solano
Sonoma
Stanislaus
Sutter
Tehama
Trinity
Tulare
Tuolumne
Ventura
Yolo
Yuba

Court Cases

KEY COURT DECISIONS
Court Case Issue Outcome Employer Limitation/ Action

Robert Berrellez v. Pontoon Solutions, Inc. et al., No. 2:15-cv-01898

Plaintiff alleged that the defendants procured a consumer report about the plaintiff without providing an FCRA-compliant disclosure and without informing the plaintiff of his right to receive a summary of his rights under the statute.

Judge granted summary judgment for defendants

Court concluded that Berrellez had not proven he had Article III standing because he could not show a link between the defendants’ conduct and any harm he suffered. Specifically, she found that because Berrellez’s claims were based entirely on a disclosure and authorization form that he never signed and upon which no defendant took action, any legal failures in that release were unrelated to his alleged injuries. Also found that the claims were barred by the FCRA’s 2 year statute of limitations.

BROWN ET AL. V. LOWE’S COMPANIES, INC., ET AL., CASE NO. 5:13-CV-00079-RLV-DSC

At the time they applied for a job, Lowe’s obtained a background check about them. Lowe’s asked the Plaintiffs to sign a disclosure and authorization form that contained a liability waiver. The Plaintiffs alleged that this standard form violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(b)(2) because it contained additional language other than a disclosure under this law. Lowe’s denied that it violated the law and that including the liability waiver violated the law. Also had issues regarding not performing adverse action.

Settlement in Nov. 2016

$2.2 million. $60 in cash to each of the more 37,600 class members and $752,540 in attorneys fees

PetCo

Violation of disclosure and authorization obligations by hinding mentions of credit checks in fine print on job applications

Pending

Petco has hit back claiming Spokeo nixes the claims. Update: Nov. 2017 – Court declined to dismiss the class action based on Spokeo (yet).

HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT
San Francisco BACKGROUND CHECKS?

TO PAGETOP