September 18, 2021

Volume XI, Number 261

Advertisement

September 17, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 16, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 15, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

New York City Issues Guidance on Fair Chance Act Amendments Effective July 29, 2021

The New York City Council amended New York City’s Fair Chance Act (FCA) to significantly expand the scope of protections for applicants and employees with criminal charges or arrests. The amendments are effective on July 29, 2021.

Below is a summary of the existing law highlighting the changes set forth by the amendments, which were refined by guidance recently issued by the New York City Commission on Human Rights.

Existing Requirements

The New York City FCA initially took effect on October 27, 2015. It generally prohibits employers from making inquiries about an applicant’s criminal conviction record until after a conditional offer of employment. It further requires employers who wish to withdraw a conditional offer of employment to balance numerous factors (FCA Factors) as part of the Fair Chance Process, which analyzes the job-relatedness of the applicant’s conviction. For details, see our articles, New York City Enacts Ban-the-Box Legislation and New York City Human Rights Commission Fair Chance Act Fact Sheet Offers Compliance Guidance.

Amendments

Pursuant to the amendments, which are effective shortly:

  • Employers can only request and review criminal history information after favorably evaluating the candidate’s non-criminal information. Further, employers utilizing background checks should have the consumer reporting agency bifurcate reports so that reports containing criminal history information are only obtained and evaluated after all non-criminal information has been evaluated. If the consumer reporting agency cannot bifurcate the reports, the employer must establish an internal system to segregate criminal history information and to ensure that it is reviewed and considered only after all non-criminal information. Because driving abstracts often cannot be bifurcated to separate criminal and non-criminal information, employers must treat driving records as criminal history information and, therefore, only request and review criminal history information after favorably evaluating the candidate’s non-criminal information.

  • Consumer reporting agencies conducting background checks must also ensure they do not aid or abet employment discrimination based on criminal history by, for example, advising an employer to approve or deny an applicant based on a list of conviction histories that the employer wishes to exclude. Doing so would circumvent the Fair Chance Process.

  • Temporary help firms, i.e., agencies that place individuals in job assignments for clients, are required to follow the Fair Chance Process when considering whether to withdraw a conditional offer of employment.

  • Independent contractors are covered under the FCA and have the same right to the Fair Chance Process as employee and applicants.

  • Employers cannot discriminate against a current employee who is convicted during employment or against applicants and current employees with pending arrests. For convictions and pending arrests during employment, employers must consider a series of factors with the newly defined and slightly different Fair Chance Factors applicable to the extended covered criminal records. These include, among other things, the policy of New York City to overcome stigma toward and unnecessary exclusion from employment of persons with criminal justice involvement, whether the person was under 25 years old at the time of the occurrence, the seriousness of the offense, and the legitimate interest of the employer in protecting property and the safety and welfare of specific individuals to the general public. This differs slightly from arrests or convictions preceding employment, which require employers to consider the Article 23-A factors. Article 23-A factors include, among other things, the age of the person at the time of the occurrence, the seriousness of the offense, the specific duties and responsibilities related to the license or employment sought or held by the person, and the time elapsed since the occurrence.

  • Employers who wish to disqualify an applicant after an individualized analysis must continue to utilize a Fair Chance Act Notice (which has been slightly revised). Employers must allow applicants/employees at least five business days (originally three business days) to respond to the Fair Chance Act Notice. An employer may place an employee on unpaid leave while the employer undertakes the Fair Chance Process, but must allow the employee to use accrued paid leave if available.

For more information on these amendments to the FCA, see our article, New York City Council Amends New York City Fair Chance Act.

Jackson Lewis P.C. © 2021National Law Review, Volume XI, Number 203
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Susan M. Corcoran, Jackson Lewis, fair credit reporting lawyer, Labor Policy Attorney
Principal

Susan M. Corcoran is a Principal in the White Plains, New York, office of Jackson Lewis, P.C. Ms. Corcoran is a seasoned employment counselor and litigator and is often thought of as the “go to” person on national workplace law issues for her clients.

She is one of the leaders of the firm’s Background Check Resource Group, and serves as a resource on fair credit reporting act issues, as well as “ban the box” strategies. She taught a graduate employment law class for many years at Manhattanville College and frequently speaks...

914-872-6871
Richard Greenberg, Jackson Lewis, workplace grievances lawyer, arbitrations litigation attorney
Principal

Richard Greenberg is a Principal in the New York City, New York, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He advises both unionized and union-free clients on a full-range of labor and employee relations matters.

With respect to traditional labor matters, Mr. Greenberg represents clients in collective bargaining negotiations, labor disputes, grievances and arbitrations, proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board, and in state and federal court. Mr. Greenberg also advises clients on the legal aspects of remaining union-free....

212-545-4080
Daniel J. Jacobs, Jackson Lewis law firm, Labor Employment Attorney
Shareholder

Daniel J. Jacobs is a Shareholder in the New York City, New York, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He assists both unionized and union-free clients with a full-range of labor and employee relations matters.
With respect to traditional labor matters, Mr. Jacobs represents clients in collective bargaining negotiations, contingency planning, labor disputes, grievances and arbitrations, proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board, and in state and federal court.
Mr. Jacobs also has experience assisting clients in numerous industries with the...

212-545-4000
Associate

Laura Victorelli is an associate in the New York City, New York office of Jackson Lewis P.C. She represents management in employment litigation and advises clients on various aspects of the employer-employee relationship.

Laura’s interest in labor and employment started early, when she attended “Bring Your Child to Work Day” with her mother, a human resources executive. From that day on, Laura developed a passion for workplace relations and its impact on the business world. She pursued this interest in law and business...

212-545-4003
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement