• LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google+

Big Pepsi settlement shows background check peril

by on
in Employment Background Check,Hiring,Human Resources

Pepsi Beverages will pay $3.1 million to resolve EEOC charges that it discriminated against minorities when it refused to hire applicants with arrest records.

The EEOC alleged that Pepsi’s practice of using previous arrests to rule out applicants—even those never convicted of a crime—constituted disparate impact discrimination against minorities. The EEOC claims the practice affected 300 black applicants. Pepsi has agreed to change its policies.

The EEOC has long held that criminal background checks should be limited to only those positions where such information is “job-related and of business necessity.” In those cases, the EEOC believes only convictions should count against the applicant, not arrests.

A 2010 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management found that 73% of major employers always check applicants’ criminal records. Only 19% do so because of security or safety concerns related to a specific job.

Like what you've read? ...Republish it and share great business tips!

Attention: Readers, Publishers, Editors, Bloggers, Media, Webmasters and more...

We believe great content should be read and passed around. After all, knowledge IS power. And good business can become great with the right information at their fingertips. If you'd like to share any of the insightful articles on BusinessManagementDaily.com, you may republish or syndicate it without charge.

The only thing we ask is that you keep the article exactly as it was written and formatted. You also need to include an attribution statement and link to the article.

" This information is proudly provided by Business Management Daily.com: http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/29858/big-pepsi-settlement-shows-background-check-peril "

{ 1 comments… read them below or add one }

Nick Fishman March 27, 2012 at 8:57 am

I beg to differ the point that this ruling does anything to dissuade employers from conducing criminal background checks. What this case proves is that employers shouldn’t make bright-line hiring decisions, especially when it comes to alleged behavior that didn’t result in a conviction. Had they found actual convictions that were job-related, they surely would have been within their rights to not hire these individuals.

Reply

Leave a Comment