New Jersey Bans The Box With Its "Opportunity to Compete Act"
Time 3 Minute Read

On August 11, 2014, New Jersey’s Governor Chris Christie signed into law the “Opportunity to Compete Act.”  Beginning on March 1, 2015, employers will be prohibited from publishing advertisements providing that the employer will not consider any applicant with an arrest or conviction record, and more importantly, employers will be prohibited from inquiring about applicants’ criminal records “during the initial employment application process,” orally or on job applications.  “Initial employment application process” is defined as the period beginning with the initial inquiry about prospective employment until the employer has conducted a first interview, determined the applicant is qualified, and selected the applicant as the employer’s first choice to fill the position.  If an applicant voluntarily discloses information regarding a criminal record, the employer may inquire about it.

After the “initial employment application process,” an employer may inquire into and consider the applicant’s criminal history, and may still refuse to hire an applicant based on a criminal record, unless the record has been expunged or erased through executive pardon. 

The law includes several important exceptions.  Employers may inquire about and consider criminal records during the initial employment application process (and post ads that discuss criminal records) if the position sought falls into certain enumerated categories (such as those in law enforcement), or positions where a criminal history background check is required by law, where an arrest or conviction could preclude the applicant from holding the position, or where a law would restrict the employer’s ability to engage in specified business activities based on the criminal records of its employees. 

The law preempts any other law or regulation adopted by a county or municipality regarding criminal histories in the employment context, except for ordinances adopted to regulate municipal operations.

Violators are subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $1,000 for the first violation, $5,000 for the second violation, and $10,000 for each subsequent violation collectible by the Commissioner of Labor and Workforce Development in a summary proceeding. 

New Jersey is following the lead of several other states – such as Illinois, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Rhode Island – that have passed “ban the box” legislation applying to private employers.  Several municipalities have passed similar legislation.  Unless exempted from coverage, New Jersey employers should be mindful of their job postings and remove from their application materials any inquiries into an applicant’s criminal history and refrain from making any such inquires, whether directly with the applicant or through a criminal background check, until after the “initial employment application process.”

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 4 Minute Read

“Ban-the-Box” legislation has seen steady growth throughout the country for more than two decades.  Currently, there is no federal legislation on the topic for private employers but a good number of states have limited their ability to inquire about or make decisions based on a prospective employee’s criminal background history.

Time 4 Minute Read

Earlier this year, Harris County, Texas, which encompasses a substantial majority of the City of Houston, became the sixth Texas city or county to embrace a “ban the box” policy when it adopted the Fair Chance Policy.

Time 2 Minute Read

On October 20, 2021, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) issued a press release to announce its plans to use unspecified technology to conduct online searches for statements in job advertisements that violate the Fair Chance Act (“FCA”). According to the DFEH, during a one-day review, it was able to locate over 500 job advertisements that violated the FCA because they stated that the employer would not consider job applicants with criminal records.

Time 4 Minute Read

Uber Technologies, Inc. has been sued in a class action lawsuit alleging the company’s use of criminal background checks discriminates against Black and Latinx drivers. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on April 8, challenges Uber’s “unlawful use of criminal history to discriminate against its drivers in New York City as well as its brazen noncompliance with human rights and fair credit laws.”

Named plaintiff Job Golightly, a Black resident of Bronx County, New York, drove for Uber from 2014 through August 2020. Golightly claims that his criminal history consists of a single 2013 misdemeanor speeding violation from Virginia. According to the lawsuit, until 2017 Uber had relied solely on background checks conducted by the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission (TLC). Plaintiffs allege that in mid-2017, in response to negative news coverage on assaults committed by drivers, Uber began using the credit reporting agency Checkr to conduct additional background checks on current and prospective drivers. As a result, in August 2020 Uber allegedly conducted a background check on Golightly that revealed his 2013 speeding violation. One day later, Golightly claims that Uber deactivated him from its platform, preventing him from driving for the company.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page