May 23, 2012

Fair Credit Reporting Act Requirements Triggered by Use of Internet and Social Media Screening Services

There has been considerable debate regarding whether employers are bound to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) when using reports compiled by third parties of public information available on social networking sites. A May 2011 letter issued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regarding Social Intelligence Corporation (Social Intelligence), a social media background screening service, has confirmed that employers must comply with the requirements of FCRA when using public information furnished by Internet and social media background screening services like Social Intelligence.

In a previous alert, we discussed the implications of using third-party reports about applicants based on social media content and warned that the use of such reports will likely trigger the requirements of FCRA. As discussed in our earlier alert, applicants’ posts to social media reveal “personal characteristics” and “modes of living” which constitute “consumer reports” under FCRA if compiled on employers’ behalf by third parties. In the May 2011 letter, the FTC has taken the same position. Accordingly, Social Intelligence was determined by the FTC to be a “consumer reporting agency,” thus triggering the requirements of FCRA for all employers using reports provided by the company in their employment decisions.

Employers should be advised that using consumer reports furnished by third parties, even those comprised of publicly available information obtained from social networking sites, will require the employer to comply with FCRA by (1) notifying the applicant or employee that they will be requesting a consumer report for employment purposes, (2) obtaining the applicant’s written authorization to obtain a consumer report, (3) providing a summary of consumer rights to the applicant, and (4) complying with adverse action procedures in the event that an adverse action (e.g., denial of employment) is taken as a result of the report.

© 2012 Poyner Spruill LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Associate

Danielle’s practice is focused in the areas of Litigation and Employment Law. She represents employers in a wide range of employment and labor issues. She also assists with commercial and general litigation matters.

Prior Legal Experience

Danielle was a summer clerk at Poyner Spruill for two years before joining the firm. She also worked as a summer intern to the Honorable Donald L. Graham of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Most recently, she worked at Emory Law School's Juvenile Defender Clinic, providing legal...

919-783-2982

About the Author

Partner

David practices in the area of employment litigation.  He regularly advises and defends clients in race, age, disability and sex discrimination and harassment cases; reviews handbooks and termination issues; and provides compliance advice on matters of employment law.

Representative Experience

McNeil v. Scotland County - Obtained summary judgment for employer where plaintiff alleged race discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act as well as violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Successfully...

919-783-2854

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.