BLOG

After applying for numerous positions, a job seeker filed lawsuits against potential employers. He claimed these businesses violated the FCRA.

A Lawsuit Based on Disclosure and Authorization Documents

According to a recent article published by JD Supra, a man named Cory Groshek applied for 562 jobs over a period of one and a half years. He filled out applications, authorized background checks and initiated class action lawsuits against Time Warner Cable, Inc. and Great Lakes Higher Education Corporation (henceforth referred to as "The Appellees").

These lawsuits stemmed from the Disclosure and Authorization forms Groshek was asked to review and sign. Such documents are used to obtain permission for an employer to run background checks on potential employees.

Later, Groshek initiated class action lawsuits based on alleged technical violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The FCRA states that a disclosure must be a "clear and conspicuous" document that is provided on a "standalone" form. Groshek claimed the disclosure documents he received did not fit this description. At Backgrounds Online, we've seen a sharp increase in lawsuits that suggest an employer did not meticulously follow FCRA regulations with their disclosure document.

Groshek admitted that he authorized background investigations for employment consideration purposes. He also agreed that he was not confused by the disclosures he received. His only claim was that the prospective employers had technical violations of the FCRA.

The Seventh Circuit Court Rejects This Case

When Groshek filed a class action lawsuit against The Appellees, his claim was reviewed by the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit. They rejected Groshek's standing and dismissed the lawsuits.

The reason for this dismissal was that Groshek did not establish an "injury-in-fact." Since he admitted that he understood the documents he received and agreed to the screenings, the employer was deemed to have committed no injury against him.

Instead, the court found that this was a case of a "statutory violation completely removed from any concrete harm or appreciable risk of harm." Since there was no harm or intention to cause harm, the court ruled that the plaintiff would not be allowed to proceed.

Another Reminder for Employers

It is unclear whether or not the candidate was specifically looking for potential FCRA violations. Regardless, this case serves as yet another reminder about the importance of adhering to federal laws that cover the screening process.

Every employer is responsible for following FCRA and relevant state laws. As we've stated before, we recommend fully documenting your hiring and screening policy to help ensure it is followed each time you hire new employees. When creating or updating this documentation, make sure it covers specific FCRA laws such as providing a standalone Disclosure.

Understanding and following all the laws that cover background screening can be tricky. Backgrounds Online is here to help. We offer FCRA-compliant documents, such as Disclosure and Authorization forms, that our customers can use during their screening process.

If you have questions about your screening policies or need assistance, please contact us. Our screening professionals are FCRA-certified and here to help Monday through Friday from 5am to 5pm PT.