May 24, 2012

New Connecticut Law Limits Employer Access to Employee Credit Data

Adding to the growing number of states limiting employers’ use of credit reports, including HawaiiWashingtonOregonIllinois, and Maryland), Connecticut recently passed Public Act No. 11-223 restricting employer use of credit reports and credit history for employees or job applicants.  The Connecticut law goes into effect October 1, 2011, and prohibits employers from requiring an employee or job applicant to consent to a request for a credit report “as a condition of employment.”  This includes reports that contain information about credit score, credit account balances, payment history, savings or checking account balances or savings or checking account numbers.

The law has four exceptions.  Paraphrasing from the law, employers may request credit data if:

  1. The employer is a financial institution;
  2. A report is required by law;
  3. The employer reasonably believes that the employee has engaged in specific activity that constitutes a violation of the law related to employment; or
  4. Either (a) a report is substantially related to the job or (b) the employer requests the credit report for a bona fide purpose that is “substantially job-related” and discloses this purpose in writing to the employee or applicant.

Regarding the last exception, the law broadly defines “substantially related to the job” to mean that the information contained in the credit report is related to the following: a managerial position that involves setting direction and control of the business; a position that involves access to customers, employees or the employer’s personal or financial information (other than retail transaction information); involves a fiduciary responsibility to the employer; provides an expense account or corporate debit or credit card; provides access to confidential or proprietary business information; or involves access to the employer’s nonfinancial assets valued at $2,005 or more, including but not limited to, museum and library collections and to prescription drugs and other pharmaceuticals.

Job applicants and employees may lodge complaints alleging violations of the law with the Connecticut Labor Department.  Employers will be liable to the Labor Department for a civil penalty of $300 for each improper request for a credit check.  The Connecticut Attorney General can bring civil actions to recover penalties brought by the Labor Department. 

As a result of these new restrictions, Connecticut employers should review hiring policies, and other policies that require employee credit information, and prepare to comply with the law by October 1, 2011.

© 2012 McDermott Will & Emery

About the Author

Partner

Heather Egan Sussman is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm’s Boston office.  She brings a practical, business-sense approach to solving workplace issues that helps clients efficiently and effectively manage every kind of HR and privacy-related risk.  Heather is Co-Chair of the Firm’s Global Data Privacy Affinity Group and a Certified Information Privacy Professional.

617-535-4177

About the Author

Partner

Stephen D. Erf is a partner in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm’s Chicago office.  Stephen focuses his practice on civil rights and labor/employment counseling and litigation, restrictive covenants, wage and hour, union organizing, collective bargaining, employment discrimination, wrongful discharge and public accommodations.  He has worked with clients in a wide range of industries, including health care, education, construction, manufacturing, service, food, social service, chemical and transportation.  Stephen has been...

312-984-7637

Contributors

Associate

 

Sabrina E. Dunlap is an associate in the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery LLP and is based in the Firm’s Boston office.  She focuses her practice on data privacy.  Sabrina is a Certified Information Privacy Professional.

617-535-4014

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.