United States: Pennsylvania Court Rules Background Screening Law Unconstitutional

On December 30, 2015, the Commonwealth Court in Pennsylvania unanimously found the Older Adults Protective Services Act's (the Act) lifetime prohibition on the ability of individuals with convictions to hold certain jobs in nursing homes and long-term care facilities to be unconstitutional on its face, under its interpretation of the Pennsylvania state constitution.1  Specifically, the court held that the lifetime ban provisions violate a convicted individual's due process rights because the individual is penalized for engaging in conduct that may have happened decades ago and is presumed unfit for the jobs at issue.  The court also concluded that the law's lifetime ban on the ability of convicted individuals to work for these types of employers is not "substantially related" to the purpose set out in the Act, which is to protect older persons from abuse, neglect and exploitation. 

Until any appeal period lapses or any appeal is decided, and while new legislation is considered, the court's decision creates substantial uncertainty for covered employers in Pennsylvania regarding disqualifying criminal record offenses.   

History of the Older Adults Protective Services Act

In 1987, the Pennsylvania General Assembly enacted the Act, which was amended in 1996 to add a requirement that all applicants seeking employment in a facility covered by the Act, as well as incumbent employees with less than two years of service, submit to a criminal background check.  The amendments established two categories of past criminal convictions: (1) those criminal convictions that disqualified an individual from obtaining or continuing employment regardless of the date of the conviction (category one), and (2) those criminal convictions that disqualified an individual where the conviction had occurred within the past 10 years (category two). 

Category one convictions included murder, rape and sexual assault.  A conviction of a category one offense imposed a lifetime ban on, or immediate discharge from, employment in an Act-covered facility.  Category two crimes included, among others, felony drug violations, aggravated assault, kidnapping, arson, robbery, and felony or misdemeanor theft offenses.  A conviction of a category two criminal offense imposed an employment ban for a period of 10 years.  The General Assembly immediately amended the amendment to remove the 10-year ban for the category two crimes, which resulted in a lifetime ban from employment with cover facilities for both category one and two crimes. 

The General Assembly also immediately amended the Act to require criminal background checks on those with less than one year of service with covered facilities as of July 1, 1998 (as opposed to two years in the original bill).  If the report disclosed a disqualifying conviction, the facility was required to terminate an employee who had less than one year of employment.  The facility was not required to terminate someone with more than one year of employment, but that individual was banned from being hired by another facility.

Previous Challenge to the Act

The Act's employment ban prompted its first constitutional challenge in Nixon v. Commonwealth.2  In that case, the court held that the criminal record history-based employment ban was unconstitutional as applied to the individuals at issue in Nixon.  Three individuals and a private employer who had been forced to terminate qualified individuals (including two of the three plaintiffs) challenged the law's constitutionality in a declaratory action.  All three individuals had been convicted of offenses (drug possession, larceny and armed robbery) between 20 to 30 years ago.  They had no further criminal history and, before the bans went into effect, had performed similar jobs without incident.  The court held that the facts "vividly illustrate constitutional infirmities present in [the Act] and the draconian impact of its enforcement.  They further demonstrate the arbitrary and irrational nature of the challenged provisions and establish that no rational relationship exists between the classification imposed upon Petitioners and a legitimate governmental purpose."  Thus, the criminal records prohibitions were unconstitutional as applied to the petitioning individuals and employer.  The court ordered that the employees were entitled to seek employment at a covered facility and that the employer was entitled to hire them.  The Supreme Court affirmed.  Nixon v. Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 576 Pa. 385, 405 (Pa. 2003).3 

The General Assembly did not amend the Act in response to the court's holding in Nixon.  In response to Nixon, however, the Pennsylvania Department of Aging instituted an "interim policy" providing that it would not sanction any covered facility that hired or continued to employ an individual who could document a minimum of five years aggregate employment, after conviction or release from incarceration, in care-dependent services.4

Court Now Finds the Act Unconstitutional On Its Face

In April 2015, five individuals and a non-profit social service provider (petitioners) filed a petition for review under the Commonwealth Court's original jurisdiction challenging the constitutionality of the Act's lifetime employment ban provisions.  One of the petitioners was a mental health and chemical dependency facility that, prior to enactment of the Act, had hired individuals with criminal convictions who had rehabilitated themselves.  That facility found these individuals to be valuable employees.  However, because of the Act, the employer had been forced to refuse to employ individuals with certain convictions.  The facility argued that the "employment ban [had] negatively impacted [its] ability to provide the best possible services to its clients." 

Relying on statistical data, the petition for review argued that "the lifetime employment ban is built on a faulty premise because the risk of recidivism declines over time and eventually 'loses any meaningful value in predicting future criminal conduct.'"  The petition cited to the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commissions' 2012 guidance on the use of conviction and arrest records for employment purposes, which notes that criminal history employment exclusions have a disparate racial impact and "recommend[s] that prospective employers assess employment eligibility by considering the nature of the crime, the time elapsed, and the nature and requirements of the particular job."  The petition challenged the constitutionality of the Act for the reasons found in Nixon and also argued a number of other reasons for the court to find the Act unconstitutional. 

The court agreed with the petitioners and found the unconstitutional on its face for two separate reasons.5  First, a lifetime employment ban for anyone convicted of an enumerated crime at any time, with a grandfather clause for employees with identical convictions employed for one year at a facility as of July 1, 1998 "does not bear a real and substantial relation to the stated goal of protecting older adults from 'abuse, neglect, exploitation and abandonment.'"  In other words, the court found no rational basis for assuming that convicted individuals with more than one year of service did not pose a threat to older adults, but then "treat all other employees and applicants [with convictions] as incapable of rehabilitation and forever a threat to older adults."

Second, the Act's irrebuttable presumption that any individual with a certain conviction would forever pose a risk to the elderly could not withstand constitutional scrutiny.  According to the court, the lifetime ban infringed on the affected individual's due process rights and reasonable alternatives existed to determine whether in fact an individual would pose a risk if allowed to work in a covered facility.  Moreover, the court found that the statutory irrebuttable presumption was "not universally true" given that the Act allowed convicted individuals working for more than one year as of July 1, 1998, to continue working.  This being the case, the court explained "it defies logic to suggest that every person who has at any time been convicted of any of the crimes listed in [the Act], including misdemeanor theft, presents a danger to those in an Act-covered facility." 

Implications for Employers

Employers covered by the Pennsylvania Older Adults Protective Services Act are presently without direct guidance on how to consider criminal background checks for their new employees.  Although the Pennsylvania Department of Aging instituted an interim policy after the Nixon decision which allowed (but did not require) covered employers to hire certain ex-offenders despite the law's lifetime bar, the exception provided by that interim policy was a narrow case-by-case consideration without overall guidance.  Further, in annual audits the Department often rejected employers' individualized considerations in hiring ex-offenders.  Thus employers who hired offenders with any old conviction on the list risked challenge from the Department.  As of the time of this writing, the Department of Aging had posted a brief notice on its website regarding Peake, noting that it is evaluating its policies in light of the decision.6  Covered employers should monitor the Department of Aging website for any new developments.  Until an amended law is passed providing more clarification or other action takes place (such as on an appeal), the lifetime bar in the Act is stricken but no new guidelines are established in its place.  Covered Pennsylvania employers will have to carefully assess situations concerning the hiring of employees based on general state law which requires that consideration of any criminal conviction be related to the job being performed.

In this regard, employers should continue to be mindful of the EEOC's criminal records guidance,7 Pennsylvania state law regarding criminal background check decisions,8 and Philadelphia's recently amended "ban the box" ordinance.9  In addition, employers making employment decisions based on criminal record reports obtained from third-party consumer reporting agencies must continue to abide by the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.10

Footnotes

1. Peake v. Commonwealth, No. 216 M.D. 2015 (Pa. Commw. Dec. 30, 2015).

2. 789 A.2d 376 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2001).

3. The Supreme Court affirmed on the alternative basis that the law was irrational because it distinguished between individuals who had been employed for at least a year at a covered facility when the requirements went into effect and those that had not, but had previously been employed without incident at covered facilities.  The Supreme Court did not explicitly reject the Commonwealth Court's analysis, however.

4. See http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/self_study_course/18031/unit_4__criminal_background_checks/616720 ("Nixon Decision").

5. The court also found the Act unconstitutional as applied to the petitioners for the same reasons as those in Nixon.

6. See http://www.aging.pa.gov/organization/advocacy-and-protection/Pages/Criminal-History-Background-Checks.aspx#.Vp4XS_krLIV.

7. See Jennifer Mora and Rod Fliegel, EEOC Settles Background Check Litigation with BMW, But Also Faces Steep Attorneys' Fees in Freeman Case, Littler Insight (Sept. 22, 2015).

8. See Jennifer Mora and William Simmons, The Old (Law) is New Again: Plaintiffs Increasingly Using Old Pennsylvania Law to Challenge Background Check Decisions, Littler Insight (Nov. 7, 2014).

9. See William Simmons and Thomas Benjamin Huggett, Beyond "Ban the Box" – Philadelphia Makes Sweeping Changes to Criminal Records Screening Ordinance, Littler Insight (Dec. 16, 2015).

10. See Jennifer Mora, Federal Courts Increase Scrutiny of Employer Compliance with the FCRA's Adverse Action Requirements, Littler Insight (Jan. 4, 2016); Rod Fliegel, Jennifer Mora, and William Simmons, The Swelling Tide of Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) Class Actions: Practical Risk-Mitigating Measures for Employers, Littler ASAP (Aug. 1, 2014).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
William Simmons
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions