in Newswire Published on April 10, 2023

DHL Supply Chain Background Check Disproportionately Harms Black, Hispanic Applicants, Class Action Claims

Pickett et al. v. Exel Inc. et al.

Filed: March 16, 2023 ◆§ 1:23-cv-01655

A class action claims that DHL Supply Chain’s alleged policy of denying employment to job applicants with non-job-related convictions disproportionately harms Black and Hispanic individuals.

Defendant(s)

Exel Inc. DHL Supply Chain

Law(s)

Civil Rights Act of 1964

State(s)

Illinois

Categories

Discrimination

A proposed class action claims that DHL Supply Chain’s alleged policy and practice of denying employment to job applicants with non-job-related convictions disproportionately harms Black and Hispanic individuals.

Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.

According to the 22-page case, the contract logistics provider has perpetuated “gross racial disparities” in the criminal justice system by barring formerly incarcerated individuals from employment without performing an individualized analysis of the applicant or evaluating the nature of the offense and its relation to the job sought.

“Because Black and Hispanic individuals are subjected to arrest and conviction at disproportionally higher rates than white people, particularly certain felony and drug-related offenses, DHL Supply Chain’s policy and practice of denying applicants employment based on their criminal history has an unjustified and unlawful disparate impact,” the suit summarizes.

One plaintiff says DHL Supply Chain hired him in February 2016 as a temporary worker at its warehouse in University Park, Illinois, where he worked as a forklift driver. After successfully performing his role for over eight months without incident, the plaintiff applied for and was denied the opportunity to become a permanent employee after a background check reported an 18-year-old felony conviction from 1998 and a three-year-old probation violation for failing to report from 2013, the complaint claims.

Similarly, the other plaintiff says he was offered a position at DHL Supply Chain’s Fort Worth, Texas warehouse in October 2017 that was revoked after a background check showed that he had two misdemeanor convictions from 2011 and 2013.

Per the case, there is no evidence that DHL Supply Chain had a “justifiable business reason” for denying the plaintiffs’ employment.

“For example, having a conviction is not an accurate proxy for determining whether an applicant would be able to perform the duties of the job,” the suit contends. “Upon information and belief, no reliable studies or empirical data suggest that applicants with criminal records are more likely to engage in terminable offenses.”

Moreover, DHL Supply Chain would have found significant evidence of the plaintiffs’ rehabilitation and good conduct had it considered any individual assessment factors before taking adverse action against them based on their criminal histories, the complaint asserts.

The filing alleges that the company has no process or policy to determine whether applicants convicted of crimes have made positive changes in their lives after their convictions and denies applicants the chance to provide proof of rehabilitation, such as successful participation in drug treatment programs, educational achievements or relevant employment.

According to the lawsuit, DHL Supply Company’s policy has a disparate impact on Black and Hispanic individuals and amounts to unlawful discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The suit adds that the company could have adopted less discriminatory screening practices that would have better served a “legitimate business purpose,” including the following alternatives:

“(1) [C]onsidering all applicants with a record of conviction for a crime that by its nature does not pose a legitimate threat to the public safety or risk of workplace misconduct; and (2) giving each individual with a conviction a meaningful opportunity to demonstrate that he or she does not present a current threat, including providing evidence of rehabilitation, an explanation of events leading to the conviction, or information regarding other mitigating factors.”

The lawsuit looks to represent the following class:

“All individuals who applied for a non-exempt position with DHL Supply Chain from January 1, 2016, up to, and including, December 31, 2021, and (i) who are Black or African American or Hispanic, solely or in combination with other races; (ii) who received a conditional offer of employment from DHL Supply Chain; (iii) who were identified as having a background report showing a criminal history; and (iv) whose conditional offer of employment with DHL Supply Chain was rescinded by DHL Supply Chain due, at least in part, to information contained in the background report or failure to fully disclose criminal history.”

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

Case Spotlight

Hair Relaxer Lawsuits

Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.

Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits