Class Action Claims Onin Staffing’s Background Check Process Violates Federal Law

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action claims Onin Staffing, LLC has overstepped federal law by taking adverse action against workers based on the contents of their consumer reports without first providing proper notice or a copy of the report.

According to the lawsuit, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) renders it unlawful for an employer to use a consumer report for employment purposes unless they’ve complied with the statute’s strict requirements, which include the mandate to provide notice of any adverse action to be taken against a worker, a copy of their consumer report, and a summary of their rights under the FCRA before any action is taken.

The lawsuit alleges the defendant, a multi-state industrial and clerical staffing agency, denied the plaintiff an employment opportunity based on the contents of his consumer report without complying with the FCRA’s requirements.

More specifically, the lawsuit says the plaintiff applied and was accepted for employment with the defendant in July 2020 and was assigned to a Dorman warehouse facility. A few months later, in October, the plaintiff was informed that he was not eligible for continued employment at the Dorman facility “because he had failed a background check,” according to the suit. Per the case, the defendant failed to provide pre-adverse action notice or a copy of the plaintiff’s consumer report before terminating the man’s employment.

The plaintiff claims Onin later obtained his consumer report to determine his eligibility for employment with a different client. Onin again, the suit alleges, took adverse action against the plaintiff by denying him the assignment without first providing pre-adverse action notice or a copy of his consumer report.

“Defendant’s failure to provide Plaintiff with pre-adverse action notice or a copy of his consumer report or summary of rights was a blatant violation of the requirements set forth by [the FCRA],” the complaint attests.

According to the suit, the plaintiff suffered harm in that he was deprived of an opportunity to contest or discuss the information in his consumer report and determine whether it was even accurate.

“Because Defendant failed to provide Plaintiff a copy of his consumer report, Plaintiff was deprived of the opportunity to discuss it with the decision maker, to put the report into context or otherwise plead his case for employment,” the suit states. “Plaintiff worried whether the information contained in his consumer report was accurate and how it would affect his prospects of employment elsewhere.”

The lawsuit argues that Onin “had no right to take adverse employment action” against the plaintiff without first providing notice of its intent to do so, a copy of his report and a summary of his FCRA rights.

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s newsletter here.