can a nonconviction be held against me?

[manaus]

What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?FL
I was recently hired as a wine rep. for a large distribution company. A week later I received a call stating that the company can't hire me because something came up on my background check. When I called the manager that hired me to ask what the problem was he said the company made the decision to not hire me because a DUI showed up. The thing is this is not the case. Three years back I was charged with a DUI but all the charges were dropped before we even went to trial, for lack of evidence.

First of all the application for employment asks only if you were ever convicted of a misdemeanor or felony. Which I was not, but I let them know about the dropped charges just to be on the save side. Secondly, the day I was hired I let HR know I was charged with a DUI but all charges were dropped. HR said it was ok and to give them a copy of the court disposition showing the dropped charges, which I got signed and sealed from the court house.

My question is: The manager said the only reason the company cannot hire me is the DUI coming up on my background check. Can they hold that against me and not hire me for something I never did and was not convicted of? This is very important because after Human Resources said that the court disposition would be alright I declined another offer from another company and now I'm out of two jobs.

 

[cbg]

If you were in almost any other state I'd say no, they can't do this, but FL gives most of the rights on this topic to the employer. Unless the line of work you are in requires a licence, permit or certificate (in which case only certain types of convictions can be held against you) the employer can term you for pretty much anything they find on the background check. I'm not saying it's fair; I'm not saying it makes sense; I'm telling you what the law says.

You are free to contact the Department of Workplace Innovation (or whatever you guys are calling your DOL these days) in case there's some local statute or change to the law that I haven't seen. You are also free to show all your related paperwork to them and see if they'll change their minds.

 

[starchamber]

background check

Did the potential employer provide you with a copy of the consumer report (background check) and give you a list of your rights under the FCRA and how to dispute the information with the provider? If not you should file a complaint with the Federal Trade Comission.
Also, do you know the name of the company that provided the background report? Reason for asking is that I am preparing to bring a class action against several providers of consumer reports (background checks). Particularly First Advantage Corporation and it's subsidiary PRSI and Axicom.

 

[cbg]

Starchamber, you are aware, are you not, that not all employers use a third party to run checks and that if they do not, they are NOT subject to FCRA?

 

[starchamber]

Yes, FCRA only applies when 3rd party is used

Yes, I am aware that the FCRA only applies when the background check is procurred by a 3rd party. When asking if the company was known who provided the background report it would have been more precise to first ask if another company had been used.

As many companies do indeed use a 3rd party to procur background reports but fail to follow FCRA procedures then this would give many people in this very situation a avenue for recourse that they probably didn't know about.

 

[cbg]

It's generally best to ask first rather than to assume. Otherwise you may tend to give someone the impression that they have a case and then have it turn out that they don't, which is much harder on them than if they know from the beginning that a case is questionable.

 

[starchamber]

It would appear we both assumed

It would appear that we both assumed...
I that a 3rd party was used and you that the company contacted the court or law enforcement agencies directly!

 

[cbg]

Perhaps but at least there was a basis for my assumption.

Contrary to what many people evidently believe, most employers really do try to follow the law. So when the poster did not mention signing any authorization forms, that supports my assumption. Yours, on the other hand, assumes not just that a third party was used, but that the employer did so without authorization.

 

[starchamber]

No assumption of authorization made

Actually authorization was never in dispute in any of the posts.
What is at issue is that Manus had provided the HR Rep a copy of the court record and been advised that it would be fine, but then informed that they could not be hired due to the background check. It is quite obvious that the employer did not receive this information from the court directly and used a third party.

As there is a discrepency from the court records and the background check then Manaus should determine the source of the background check. This is the spirit behind the FCRA. To allow consumers to 1) Be aware of any negative information and 2) To have the opportunity to dispute and correct any inaccurate information.

 

[perseus1206]

Employer Drug Screening

Pennsylvania,

Recently I quite my previous employer(Dec. 1) and accepted a position with another company to start this Monday. The company who hired me start on Monday requires me to take a drug screening test, which I did on Nov. 30(Tue). I found out early that Friday morning from te Doctor that he cannot pass my test because he found small traces of a sleeping agent or muscle relaxer drug in my urinary test. Stunned by his findings I asked him if there was some kind of error and that I hae never even taking any prescribed medicine related to what he found. So I had to fax him over a list of my prescribed drugs and what I taken over-the-counter. That day I called my the HR of my new position and explained to her what happened and that I wanted to take another drug test. She said that she will talk to her Manager and find out what their policy is. Anyway, that day Friday I had schedule a doctors appointment and told him what happened and he mentioned that I take a drug screening test in his office for reconciliation differences. I found out the results today and they tested negative for the prescribed medication. I know that human error can happen but the drug screening results from the 1st one told me that the are always 100% correct. Now I am known as a druggie father (which I am not and have never touched a illegal drug). What remification's can I take with my new employer and in the meantime can I receive unemployement? Thank you very much for your assisstance.
G

 

[SuzieWahoozie]

You'll get better results if you start a new thread and not hijack an old one. In any case, your prospective employer has chosen not to hire you because you failed a drug test. Perfectly legal. If a split specimen was done, you can ask the testing facility to retest your specimen at your expense, but the employer is unde no obligation to accept those findings.

And no...you cannot collect unemployment. You quit your job, you were not fired. Failure to be hired by someone else is not grounds for unemployment.

Next time, don't quit your old job until you know for sure that the new job is "in the bag".