Michigan State Flag

Michigan Background Check Laws

Capital Lansing Population 9,928,300
Largest city Detroit
Area 96,716 sq mi
Criminal rate 46 crimes /10,000 people Time Zone UTC −5/−4 or −6/−5

Michigan State Flag

Michigan Drug Screen Compliance

Michigan Employment Screening laws

Employers that are either located in Michigan or hiring Michigan residents must abide by the Federal FCRA, and applicable Michigan state employment laws.

This page was created to provide a simple explanation of what an end-user of a background screening report (also known as consumer report) can use in order to be in compliance with Michigan state laws. This page also contains steps an end-user must take to stay in compliance with Michigan state laws.

Please keep in mind that the EEOC must always be taken into consideration when a hiring decision is to be made. The EEOC has provided guidance on how employers can use criminal records during the hiring process. This regulation was issued on April 25, 2012. The EEOC requires employers to individually review each applicant or employee that may be disqualified due to a criminal record. This also follows the regulations set forth by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Additionally, the EEOC wants to undertake an adverse action process similar to that of the FCRA. They want to add a pre-adverse action process of their own. Although employers already have an adverse action process that is specific to information contained in consumer reports, the EEOC's adverse action process may be different.

The information that is provided on this page does not discuss requirements under the EEOC nor does it explain how to use criminal records that fall under the regulation of the EEOC. It is suggested that compliance with the EEOC be discussed with legal counsel.

For more detailed information on Michigan state laws, please consult your legal counsel.

Background Check Law Ban the Box Law Court Fee Court Cases

Employment Background Check Laws In Michigan:

Michigan Compiled Laws §37.2205a

37.2205a Employer, employment agency, or labor organization; record of information regarding misdemeanor arrest, detention, or disposition; failure to recite or acknowledge information; “law enforcement agency” defined.
Sec. 205a.

(1) An employer, employment agency, or labor organization, other than a law enforcement agency of this state or a political subdivision of this state, shall not in connection with an application for employment or membership, or in connection with the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment or membership request, make, or maintain a record of information regarding a misdemeanor arrest, detention, or disposition where a conviction did not result. A person is not guilty of perjury or otherwise for giving a false statement by failing to recite or acknowledge information the person has a civil right to withhold by this section. This section does not apply to information relative to a felony charge before conviction or dismissal.

(2) As used in this section, “law enforcement agency” includes the state department of corrections.

Ninja's summary

When making a hiring decision, employers may not consider an arrest that did not result in a conviction.

The Michigan Department of Civil Rights has published a Pre-Employment Inquiry Guide which can be found at- http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdcr/Preemploymentguide62012_388403_7.pdf

Update: Feb 2018

Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA):

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is a set of federal guidelines that helps regulate hiring practices. The FCRA was created to ensure privacy, accuracy, and fairness of consumer information. The FCRA accomplishes this by having a set standard for collecting, disseminating, and using consumer information.

Employers obtaining consumer reports for background screening purposes must follow specific procedures. For example, employers must disclose to the candidate what the background screening is, what information it includes, and how they intend to use it. They must obtain the written consent of the candidate before obtaining a background screening. They may not misuse the information contained in the background screening. There are also strict procedures an employer must follow should they decide not to hire a potential candidate based on the information in the background screening.

The purpose of the FCRA is to help protect employers, employees, and potential job candidates.

Disclaimer

This material is time sensitive. Contact us for updates. This information is subject to frequent change through legislative and court action.

All materials in this page and accompanying information are for general educational purposes and not intended to provide legal, scientific or medical advice. Consult with an appropriate professional to address specific issues.

No additional “Ban the Box” state or local laws to consider. Please keep in mind that laws are always changing, and we recommend that you seek legal counsel for the most up-to-date legal information.


Update: Feb 2018

Disclaimer

This material is time sensitive. Contact us for updates. This information is subject to frequent change through legislative and court action.

All materials in this page and accompanying information are for general educational purposes and not intended to provide legal, scientific or medical advice. Consult with an appropriate professional to address specific issues.

County: Court Fee:
Alcona $20.00
Alger $15.00
Allegan $0.00
Alpena $5.00
Antrim $0.00
Arenac $15.00
Baraga $15.00
Barry $10.00
Bay $0.00
Benzie $3.00
Berrien $10.00
Branch $20.00
Calhoun $0.00
Cass $20.00
Charlevoix $7.00
Cheboygan $0.00
Chippewa $5.00
Clare $16.00
Clinton $0.00
Crawford $5.00
Delta $30.00
Dickinson $20.00
Eaton $0.00
Emmet $10.00
Genesee $0.00
Gladwin $10.00
Gogebic $50.00
Grand Traverse $10.00
Gratiot $12.00
Hillsdale $20.00
Houghton $20.00
Huron $10.00
Ingham $0.00
Ionia $8.00
Iosco $20.00
Iron $25.00
Isabella $0.00
Jackson $0.00
Kalamazoo $0.00
Kalkaska $10.00
Kent $6.00
Keweenaw $20.00
Lake $5.00
Lapeer $0.00
Leelanau $0.00
Lenawee $0.00
Livingston $0.00
Luce $0.00
Mackinac $20.00
Macomb $0.00
Manistee $6.00
Marquette $15.00
Mason $0.00
Mecosta $10.00
Menominee $12.00
Midland $10.00
Missaukee $5.00
monona $0.00
Monroe $0.00
Montcalm $17.00
Montmorency $10.00
Muskegon $0.00
Newaygo $0.00
Oakland $0.00
Oceana $5.00
Ogemaw $5.00
Ontonagon $30.00
Osceola $10.00
Oscoda $20.00
Otsego $5.00
Ottawa $0.00
Presque Isle $5.00
Roscommon $5.00
Saginaw $0.00
Saint Clair $0.00
Saint Joseph $0.00
Sanilac $17.00
Schoolcraft $20.00
Shiawassee $10.00
Tuscola $10.00
Van Buren $7.00
Washtenaw $0.00
Wayne $0.00
Wexford $5.00
KEY COURT DECISIONS
Court Case Issue Outcome Employer Limitation/ Action

Smith v. LexisNexis Screening Solutions (2016)

What standard of care must a CRA apply when preparing consumer reports to stay compliant with the FCRA? The FCRA requires that a CRA must “follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates.” The Court does not clearly define this standard. However, they were clear in stating that the difficulty a CRA faces when presented with numerous discrepancies does not excuse them from not investigating those discrepancies.

The Court found in favor of Smith. LexisNexis Screening Solutions reported criminal history information for a David Oscar Smith when the applicant’s name was David Alan Smith. This resulted in a six week delay of David Alan Smith’s hire. The Court found that LexisNexis was negligent and did not meet the standard of care as required by the FCRA to ensure maximum possible accuracy. The Court found that LexisNexis should have performed further investigation on such a common name. The Court notes that “individuals with common names carry a higher risk that information belonging to others with the same name will be mistakenly attributed to them, and that a reasonable person would take steps to reduce that risk.”

The standard of care required by the FCRA that CRA’s must take to ensure that they have “reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates” in place is high. Although it is common for CRAs to receive numerous discrepancies when performing a background screening, the burden of investigating these discrepancies to ensure the information received belongs to the applicant does not excuse a CRA from doing so. CRA’s must investigate these discrepancies using the highest standard.

Hillson v. Kelly Services Inc

Plaintiff claims that Kelly Services did not use a disclosure consisting solely of the disclosure. It also included liability waiver language.

Settlement for $6.7M. Hillson was the lead plaintiff for this class action lawsuit.

Employers must ensure that their disclosure form consists solely of the disclosure as required by the FCRA.

Rocheleau v. Elder Living Construction

Plaintiff claims that Elder Living obtained the background report without first obtaining his permission or notifying him that adverse action may result. He further alleges that neither First Advantage nor Elder Living issued certain certifications mandated by statute. Finally, he contends that First Advantage failed to adhere to the required “strict procedures” in releasing his information.

Court found in favor of Elder Living Construction. Proper adverse action procedures were followed, and plaintiff is time-barred because this occurred more than two years from filing date.

This is a good example of the importance for employers and CRAs in following proper adverse action procedures. Not only did the defendants follow proper 613 procedures for notification, they also allowed the plaintiff the option to correct inaccuracies (which he opted not to do).

TO PAGETOP