Reference Checking in California
TD
15 Posts
Help! I've just learned that in CA, if an employer is going to do reference checks on a candidate, that we have seven days from the day the reference is called, to inform the candidate (in writing) not only that we've called the reference, but the nature of the conversation!!!
Is this true? If so, how detailed must we be in terms of relaying the information provided by the reference?
The fine, for those who are interested, for not complying with this is $10,000 per offense!!!
Is this true? If so, how detailed must we be in terms of relaying the information provided by the reference?
The fine, for those who are interested, for not complying with this is $10,000 per offense!!!
Comments
Governor Davis did sign two bills, AB 1068 and AB 2868, that clarify the responsibilities of employers who conduct background checks and/or reqeust ivestigative consumer reports from a consumer reporting agency. When the information collected is a matter of public record (records documenting an arrest,indicment, conviction, tax lien or outstanding judgment), the employer must provide the current or prospective employee with a copy of that public record within 72 hours after the information is received. Information gathered during reference checks does not hav to be provided to the applicant if in-house employees collect the information.
I hope this will not end up being terribly confusing, but here goes. Go to [url]www.leginfo.ca.gov[/url]. Select "Bill Information" and put in the Bill number you want - AB 1068. I printed off the Bill which is 9 pages long. On the 9th page, Sec. 8, It states, "Nothing in this chapter is intended to modify Section 1198.5 of the Labor Code or existing law concerning information obtained by an employer or employment agency without the use of services of an investigative consumer reporting agency for employment reference checks..." If you read Labor Code Section 1198.5, it talks about not having to share letters of reference. As best that I can ascertain, the attorneys and references that I am aware of interpret it as I initially told you. One firm we contract with also suggested [url]www.vanella.com[/url]. I haven't been able to access it. Another site, though not a law firm is [url]www.mccoyinvestigations.com[/url]. I just point this out because, as I indicated this appears to be the standard interpretation. But won't be the first time lawyers disagreed.