FCRA Update: State Disclosures


A case that is currently pending in California federal court is calling into question whether the FCRA’s mandate of a “clear and conspicuous” written notice permits employers to include any additional language at all on a Disclosure and Authorization form. Stanford University is being sued for violating this section of the FCRA by including state disclosures, among other language, on their form.

Currently, standard practice—including on our own D&A form—is to incorporate state disclosures, the rationale being that this is the clearest and most conspicuous way to inform a job applicant of all of their rights at both the state and federal levels. However, a ruling in the Stanford University lawsuit indicates that the FCRA could be interpreted to disallow any language other than what is prescribed by the FCRA, meaning that state disclosures would need to be provided in a separate document.

Despite the ruling, this case is on hold pending the Supreme Court decision in Spokeo v. Robins, which is expected to clarify key parts of the FCRA as it relates to background screening.

For more information, please see this post via Workforce Compliance Insights.