Can anyone tell me if any of my rights were violated in any way regarding background checks, the process, and if I have cause to sue. I live in PA. I took a seasonal job at a department store as a cashier. They often keep people after the holidays. Apparently they liked me and asked me to stay and continue working, and even offered me a new position at the courtesy desk and in the cash office, which I accepted.
When I filled out the initial application I did not disclose that I had a record - I left it blank, but was not asked anything of it (I would have provided the info if asked!) I was however asked if I was a US citizen or not, being I forgot to check that box, so I checked it. Later, during the filing out of paper work upon being hired, there were forms I did sign. There was one form about the background check, which I did not get a copy of, and which I'm sure said something like... "Would you submit to a drug screen and or background check" I checked the yes box (I have nothing to hide).
The week of Dec 25, I was told I'd be getting my new schedule from a different manager now. By Dec 30, which was the last day of my work week, and which turned out to be my last day, I still did not receive my new schedule for the following week. I had asked the HR manager who previously did my schedule on Dec 29 and again on Dec 30 when I will be getting my schedule, and from which manager now exactly, all I was told was that I'd get a call from the other HR manager.
A day goes by, and on the second and third day I tried to get in touch with her with no luck. 5 days go by now and I finally get a call. I was told that they did a background check and that what came up prevents me from working the new position, or my previous position either any longer.
I was never asked, told, signed, or consented to a background check. I was not given any forms at all, before or after either. I did not get the report itself, or the pre-adverse action disclosure, or an adverse action notice, NOTHING. Just a call. Had I known they were going to perform a check, I might have declined if I so chose, even if that meant I would have still lost my job because I declined. At least it would have been my decision, and they wouldn't be privy to my business like they are now. I wonder if I would still have a job if I was able to decline, and or if I was told that in order to work the new posistion a background check would be performed.
Any information you can give me about this situation would be greatly appreciated, and what steps I can take if I do have a case, and if it would be worth it or not to pursue.

You just stated that you agreed to the background check in your second paragraph, so they did it, is the way I understand your post.
"I checked the yes box as Ihave nothing to hide". So why are you stating you did not agree to it.

I don't understand why you think your rights have been violated and especially why you think you have ANY sort of case to sue.

Even if you did not sign the agreement to a background check the employer has the right to do one. Your agreement is not required. As noted you did say you agreed in any case.

Had you disclosed whatever it was they found initially, it might not have been so bad, but by leaving it blank (especially after not disclosing your citizenship) it looks like you were trying to hide something and that raises flags. Its possible they were desperate for seasonal workers so cut corners. But now they were going back and found things that bothered them.

But no, you have no grounds for any suit whatsoever.

I never did say that I thought my rights were violated, I only asked if anyone thought they were, and steps I could take if they were. This IS the point of my question. Yes I did check a box stating that I would "submit" to one, but don't they still have to ask? Doesn't submitting to something mean one would have to be asked? From things that I have read, even though I checked and signed a paper stating I would "submit" to a check, this does not mean the same as letting one know you are doing one, or going to do one. That is not the authorization itself. And, Yes I know the employer has the right to do one. In most states this would be a violation, UNLESS they are using an inhouse check and not a third party through the FCRA to do the check. They did use a third party. Also, from what I read, this paper/form is supposed to be separate from the application, which it was not, and I did not get a copy of it. Plus I did not receive any kind of disclosure or notice before, during or after, which I am Entitled to.
Anyway, I live in Philadelphia PA where the law now says that I do not have to disclose that info on the application (to which Reason I left it Blank, but did Check Later that I would "Submit" to one). What I was trying to say about the citizenship thing was that, as important as it is, if she noticed I did not check this tiny little box on a tiny little black bar of the application because it was really obscure in its placement, then she should have noticed that I left the background check disclosure empty and Asked about that also, but she did not say anything about it. I didn't even notice that box until she mentioned it because it is so obscure, and she said everyone was missing it. I'm Definitely not hiding my citizenship, and this has Nothing to do with my question, except that she did not ask any other important questions that she Should have asked during the hiring process!
I only asked this question for opinions, and guidance if needed, that's it. Not for anyone to judge anything about me other then what I said and asked. I appreciate any and all replies regardless.

I fully agree with Scott and Tickle. You are likely considered to be an "at will" employee. They could let you go even if your records was clean, you do not have a right to employment in most states unless you are under contract. The job started as seasonal and you worked that season. I do not know what is on your records but it could be something which causes you to not be bondable, no one hires folks for the cash office who can't be bonded. I think you need to let this go and start looking for another position.

I never did say that I thought my rights were violated, I only asked if anyone thought they were, and steps I could take if they were.

Please don't insult our intelligence. People don't ask a question like that unless they think there is a possibility their rights were violated.


Yes I did check a box stating that I would "submit" to one, but don't they still have to ask? Doesn't submitting to something mean one would have to be asked?

No they don't, the form you filled out gave them permission. They don't need to ask again. I don't know what you are reading, but you may be misreading or misunderstadning


Anyway, I live in Philadelphia PA where the law now says that I do not have to disclose that info on the application (to which Reason I left it Blank, but did Check Later that I would "Submit" to one).

What law? I can't imagine a law allowing people to not answer about criminal background.


What I was trying to say about the citizenship thing was that, as important as it is, if she noticed I did not check this tiny little box on a tiny little black bar of the application because it was really obscure in its placement, then she should have noticed that I left the background check disclosure empty and Asked about that also, but she did not say anything about it. I didn't even notice that box until she mentioned it because it is so obscure, and she said everyone was missing it. I'm Definetly not hiding my citizenship, and this has Nothing to do with my question, except that she did not ask any other important questions that she Should have asked during the hiring process!

An employer is required to verify that an applicant is legally allowed work in the US. So its not surprising that she would have checked that part of the application. She may have assumed there was no criminal history which is why she didn't question it.


I only asked this question for opinions, and guidance if needed, thats it. Not for anyone to judge anything about me other then what I said and asked. I appreciate any and all replies regardless.

And you got opinions. But we have to make judgments based on what you post to be able to provide those opinions.

Application forms ( any I have ever seen) is worded to give them the right to run a background check on you. You were asked about your record and refused to answer it honestly. By leaving it blank you gave them the impression that there was no record. You can be fired for representing the application, I have fired many for that.

So they had valid grounds just by the way you did the form to fire you.

They were within their rights to let you go.

Please don't insult our intelligence. People don't ask a question like that unless they think there is a possibility their rights were violated.

Umm, that's EXACTLY my point and what I said/am saying/been saying... Possibility. I did not say, they clearly were. I only made statements that asked if anyone thought they were. NOT that I was sure they were, AND OR did anyone else think so TOO. I asked why they thought they were... IF they were, and what I could do... IF they were! I personally DON'T know for sure myself, and that is WHY I ASKED and took the time to explain as much as I did. Through past experience and everything that I seem to have read, something isn't sitting right with me and I just need to know with a sureness for goodness sake that I was not wronged. There are so many loopholes and such that companies can try and use to jump through just by the wording of certain statements, which is why I really haven't been able to make sense of the information I gathered from what I have read, and why I was hoping someone here could maybe tell me, explain further, and or clarify the correct rules/laws/regulations regarding the info I gave, for the state I'm in, and the questions I had. If you can't tell me with assuredness or without doubt, yes or no, why, and without bias, then its really of no use, is it? Let me tell you, I am not insulting anyone's intelligence, as that is not my intention. You may claim that as your own statement, and let it be within your own conscience if you think that. It is of no use to me to insult anyone's intelligence anyhow, ESPECIALLY when I'm the one ASKING questions and seeking answers!


No they don't, the form you filled out gave them permission. They don't need to ask again. I don't know what you are reading, but you may be misreading or misunderstadning.

This is more along the lines of what I am asking for, thank you for this. I may have misread or misunderstood, yes. However, could you elaborate more so I can get a more complete understanding? Why do you think or know that I misread or misunderstood? Is this just your answer, or does it actually say this somewhere, like in the law, or is it just universally known? I KNOW the form IS Supposed to be a Separate form, ALONE, COMPLETELY separate from the application to be lawful and to be used as an absolute authority to do so. I never got a separate form, let alone a copy of one. I ONLY checked a box which was included WITH the application. So you're absolutely sure and saying this STILL qualifies as the ONLY permission ever needed, regardless that it WAS NOT asked on a separate form, AND regardless of the wording they used, it was still OK? I'm only asking to clarify for myself, so please don't get upset.


And you got opinions. But we have to make judgments based on what you post to be able to provide those opinions.

Judgegment and opinion are two different things. No, you do not "have" to make judgements. You chose to. I gave a lot, if not all the necessary info needed to support my questions, to get valuable opinions/answers from others, NOT JUDGEMENTS. Certainly not judgements against my character OR anything else.


I think you need to let this go and start looking for another position.

I'll tell you when I'll let it go. When I am satisfied with the answers, and when they make sense to me as to the questions I asked is when I will let it go. I will let it go when I get clear, and complete opinions and answers, which include LESS judgement about ME concerning what may or may not be in my background. AND I will let it go when they have MORE to do with the questions rather than my character OR anything else, all of which I left NO room to be even spoken about in the first place. I will let this go when I am exactly well and ready. Just saying.


What law? I can't imagine a law allowing people to not answer about criminal background.

There are VERY FEW states, but there is a VERY RECENT law IN Philadelphia PA in which you do not have to fill out the background disclosure, and or can at least check NO. EVEN - EVEN - IF you - DO HAVE - a background. As a matter of fact, they're not supposed to ask that question any more on the job applications! Look it up. And who said anything about a criminal background? I didn't! See what I mean... Judgements, and with out cause! Affectionately, those statements are useless to me.


An employer is required to verify that an applicant is legally allowed work in the US. So its not surprising that she would have checked that part of the application. She may have assumed there was no criminal history which is why she didn't question it.

Really? I know that. Once again, I said this didn't have much really to do with my question, EXCEPT for that FACT that she asked about this, and the FACT she DIDN'T ask about the background disclosure being left BLANK. That's it! At any rate, required or not, They Are Both Equally Important questions, if not the background more so, I think, when you get deep down into it. Would you agree or disagree? As an employer wouldn't you rather know if there is a history of a background first, AND THEN ALSO if they were a citizen or not? Would you rather just assume, or be SURE of BOTH of these questions AND any others? As a manager or HR person, I know I would have asked about anything left blank or not filled out completely when going over the application. She DIDN'T question it, because she DIDN'T fulfill her duties. Right or no?

Let me reframe my question a bit and see if we can sideswipe the judgements. With Everything stated thus far, did this company do their job right on their end? Did they perform within the law, the way they, or a company should? Is there anything in what I said that tells you that any of my rights have been violated in anyway whatsoever? Yes or no, why do you agree or disagree, and where you took your information from by which you agree or disagree if possible. That is ALL I WANT and NEED TO KNOW. If you have further questions that you think you need to know to be able to give me a full opinion/answer, you should please ask me. Thanks.

Side Note: As of today they still have not given me or sent me a copy of my rights and my report. An entitlement I should have been afforded and should not have to ask for myself. I will be calling tomorrow to find out if they plan on ever providing it to me, or if they were waiting for me to ask for it. Either way, its wrong. I think it's kind of odd why the HR manager that hired me couldn't let me go me when she had many chances to do so when I saw and spoke to her a few times on my last day and the day before. She had the other HR person do it for some reason, even still when I called back and I spoke to her first, she gave the phone to the other girl. Neither of them have more authority over the other either. The impression that I get of the HR manager that hired me is that she is extremely shy/meek, and not fond of ANY confrontation whatsoever whether it may or may not even come up. How she even got this job and is able to keep it is beyond me. What should have happened was, SHE should have told me it was my last day ON that last day I was there, AND or SHE should have, at the least given me or told me of the "pre-adverse action disclosure" AT THAT TIME. NOT told me the other HR manager will call me with my Schedule! I believe she was scared to do her job and let me go either because a.)she was fond of me, as a person, and felt bad and didn't want to be the one to let me go, or b.)because she was afraid of some of the things that someone could possibly say in a situation like this, and she doesn't know how to handle those types of situations. I suspect it was partly both of these 2 reasons together. She did like me, but she was scared too, that I could possibly blow up and say something nasty to her that she was not prepared to hear and deal with, because she seen this type of thing happen before with others and got overwhelmed. I can say without a doubt though that I never gave her or anyone at this place ANY reason to ever think I would ever get irate, or that I was even the irate or outrageous type of person. I'm surely not, I'm quite the shy and weak kind of person myself! This is the only place that EVER did this to me in this way behind my back, sneakily, shadily, crazily if you ask me. I was let go from a place before and it went down NOTHING like that. The only thing they seemed to have done somewhat right was they did wait a required 5 days from what should have been the pre-adverse action disclosure, to what should have been the adverse action notice to tell me, but they didn't give me an acutal disclosure or notice, unless saying nothing to me counts as the pre-adverse action disclosure, and then calling me 5 days later counts as the adverse action notice itself. The last thing they should have done was provided or sent me a copy of the report with the name, address, and numbers of the agency they used, and who I could contact if I wished to dispute the info found.

A different story, under similar circumstances... I once worked at a job where they pretty much Did Everything that this job DID NOT do regarding a background check, and this too was after the fact that I was already hired and working. No, they did not fire or let me go either, they kept me even after the check. I did forego a slight demotion, but they kept me. I later left, at my own will. Figure that huh? I am extremely confused on what is right and what is not. Alas, I am still sppreciative of any and all further replies.

What this has come down to basically semantics. You ask if you rights were violated. I respond that I don't know why you think they were. You respond that you never said you thought they were. But the fact remains that, by asking the question, you had to have thought the possibility existed that they were.

And yes we do have to make judgments. I've been doing this for a long time and it is rare that we have all the facts to give specific advice.

But the bottom line here to answer your rephrased question, is that the company did NOTHING outside the law. Definitely, nothing that is actionable in a court of law. Every response here said the same thing. So the advice to let it go and move on remains.