HOUSE BILL REPORT

ESSB 5312

This analysis was prepared by non-partisan legislative staff for the use of legislative members in their deliberations. This analysis is not a part of the legislation nor does it constitute a statement of legislative intent.

As Reported by House Committee On:

Labor & Workplace Standards

Title: An act relating to prohibiting certain employers from including any question on an application about an applicant's criminal record, inquiring either orally or in writing about an applicant's criminal records, or obtaining information from a criminal background check, until after the employer initially determines that the applicant is otherwise qualified.

Brief Description: Prohibiting certain employers from including any question on an application about an applicant's criminal record, inquiring either orally or in writing about an applicant's criminal records, or obtaining information from a criminal background check, until after the employer initially determines that the applicant is otherwise qualified.

Sponsors: Senate Committee on Commerce, Labor & Sports (originally sponsored by Senators Baumgartner, Saldaña, Walsh, Billig, Angel, Hasegawa, Keiser, Chase, Zeiger, Rolfes, Ranker, Fain, Frockt, Conway, Wellman, Darneille, Pedersen and Miloscia).

Brief History:

Committee Activity:

Labor & Workplace Standards: 3/21/17, 3/28/17 [DPA].

Brief Summary of Engrossed Substitute Bill

(As Amended by Committee)

  • Prohibits an employer from, among other things, including any question on an application or inquiring into an applicant's criminal background until after the employer initially determines that the applicant is otherwise qualified for the position.

  • Exempts certain employers from the prohibition.

  • Authorizes the Attorney General to enforce the provisions and impose penalties.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LABOR & WORKPLACE STANDARDS

Majority Report: Do pass as amended. Signed by 4 members: Representatives Sells, Chair; Gregerson, Vice Chair; Doglio and Frame.

Minority Report: Do not pass. Signed by 3 members: Representatives Manweller, Ranking Minority Member; McCabe, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Pike.

Staff: Trudes Tango (786-7384).

Background:

Under the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the Human Rights Commission has issued, in rule, a preemployment inquiry guide that provides examples of fair and unfair inquiries of job applicants.

Inquiries concerning arrests will generally be considered fair if the inquiry is limited to arrests within the last 10 years and includes whether charges are pending, have been dismissed, or led to conviction of a crime involving behavior that would adversely affect job performance. Inquiries about convictions will generally be considered fair and justified by business necessity if the inquiry is limited to crimes that reasonably relate to the job duties and that have occurred within the last 10 years.

Exempt from the rule are law enforcement agencies, state agencies, school districts, businesses, and other organizations that have a direct responsibility for the supervision of children, persons with disabilities, and vulnerable adults.

At least 24 states have adopted laws that limit an employer's ability to inquire into a job applicant's criminal history during the application stage. There are several local jurisdictions that have adopted similar policies. For example, Seattle's ordinance, which went into effect in 2013, limits criminal history questions on job applications and criminal background checks until after an employer conducts an initial screening to eliminate unqualified applicants.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Summary of Amended Bill:

An employer may not:

The prohibitions do not apply to:

The act may not be construed or interpreted to:

The Office of the Attorney General (AG) is responsible for enforcement. The AG may: investigate violations on its own initiative or in response to a complaint; pursue administrative sanctions or file a lawsuit for penalties, costs, and attorneys' fees; and adopt rules to implement the act.

In exercising its enforcement powers, the AG must use the following stepped enforcement approach:

"Criminal record" includes any record about a citation or arrest for criminal conduct. It includes records relating to probable cause to arrest and records of juvenile cases filed with any court, regardless of whether the case resulted in a finding of guilt.

The act is known as the Washington Fair Chance Act.

Amended Bill Compared to Engrossed Substitute Bill:

The amended bill removes the preemption provision.

–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Available.

Effective Date of Amended Bill: The bill takes effect 90 days after adjournment of the session in which the bill is passed.

Staff Summary of Public Testimony:

(In support) A broad coalition that includes business and labor groups and community groups were involved in this bill. This bill works in tandem with the Certificate of Restoration of Opportunity (CROP) bill the Legislature passed recently and would give people a chance to explain their circumstances. Without this bill, CROP does not make sense. The preemption provision is an issue; this bill should set a floor rather than a ceiling on what employers can do. Discriminating against applicants without doing any further inquiry does not serve the employer or the applicant. An employer's hiring decision should be based on an applicant's skills. After the initial screening, employers can still conduct background checks and refuse to hire the person.

(Opposed) Small businesses should be exempt; they do not have the resources and staffing to go through applications and conduct multiple interviews. Not allowing an employer to ask the question would result in the employer having to bring in applicants for interviews even when the employer would not be able to hire that person. A bill on background checks exempts local jurisdictions from paying for those background checks because of the expense, which shows that there are expenses involved in screening.

(Other) The bill should include an exemption for employers in the securities industries. This would be a good bill without the preemption clause.

Persons Testifying: (In support) Tara Simmons, Civil Survival and Statewide Reentry Council; Bob Cooper, Washington Fair Chance Coalition; and Sandra Distelhorst, League of Women Voters.

(Opposed) Patrick Conner, National Federation of Independent Business.

(Other) Bill Stauffacher, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association; and Eric Gonzalez, Washington State Labor Council and American Federation of Labor–Congress of Industrial Organizations.

Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: None.