Air Canada Improper Background Check Procedures FCRA Class Action

Companies are permitted to obtain consumer reports or background checks on employees or job applicants unless they follow the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The complaint for this class action alleges that Air Canada did not do so. The complaint claims that Air Canada did not provide subjects of the reports with proper disclosure, obtain proper authorization, or give them a pre-adverse-action notice.

Two classes have been proposed for this action.

• The Improper Disclosure and Authorization Class is all employees and prospective employees of Air Canada in the US who were the subject of a consumer report obtained by Air Canada, between August 31, 2013 and final judgment in this case, who did not receive a clear, conspicuous, separate disclosure form and did not authorize the procurement of the report in writing.
• The Adverse Action Class is all employees and job applicants of Air Canada in the US against whom adverse employment action was taken, based in whole or in part on information in a consumer report obtained between August 31, 2013 and final judgment in this case, who were not provided the proper pre-adverse notice required by the FCRA.

Plaintiff Mary Dukes applied for a position with Air Canada in Florida in April 2018. The complaint says that she was offered the position, subject to the satisfactory completion of a background check. Although the company eventually obtained the report, the complaint claims that it never gave Dukes proper notice or received proper authorization, as required under the FCRA.

While the company did give her a disclosure, the complaint says it was not the stand-alone disclosure required under the law. Instead, it says, the paper contained all kinds of extraneous information and agreements, such as “an impermissible release of liability” for Air Canada, its representatives, and any other entities in connection with the report, and an agreement to allow Air Canada’s customer to view copies of the report.

The complaint claims that Dukes was not aware that the form violated her rights, and that had she known that, she would not have authorized the company to dig into her private information.

Also, the company revoked its offer of employment based on the contents of the report. When companies take adverse action based in whole or in part on the contents of the report, the FCRA requires that the subject be given prior notice and a summary of their rights under the FCRA. The complaint claims that the company did not do so.

Article Type: Lawsuit
Topic: Consumer
Tags: FCRA, Failure to Provide Pre-Adverse Action Notification, Failure to provide proper notice and/or obtain proper authorization