Domino’s Background Check Class Action Lawsuit

A class action lawsuit claiming Domino’s Pizza conducted background checks on applicants that violated federal law will survive in court after a Maryland federal court denied Domino’s motion to dismiss the case.

The Domino’s Pizza background check class action lawsuit alleges that Domino’s did not comply with the legal requirements of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by (1) running background checks on employees without proper authorization, and (2) “systematically” failing to provide employees with copies of their background checks prior to taking adverse employment action against them.

The Plaintiffs in the Domino’s background check class action lawsuit claim they had checks performed on them before they started working, and were later terminated based on undisclosed information in their background checks that was never shared with them by Domino’s. In both instances, the Plaintiffs were not provided a copy of the report or advised of any rights before the termination. In addition, the Plaintiffs claim they had to sign a consent form that contained extraneous information and was not separate from the application packet.

Under the FCRA, employers must provide certain information to consumers before taking any adverse action against them, such as not hiring them or terminating them if the background check is completed after hiring. This includes providing a copy of the background check report as well as a statement of their rights prepared by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which enforces the FCRA. This is to ensure that consumers are protected against inaccurate or incomplete background checks and are given the opportunity to set the record straight.

The FCRA also mandates that disclosures be in a “standalone” document “that consists solely of the disclosure,” and do not contain unnecessary extraneous information that could distract the consumer.

The Court did not rule on the facts in the case, but ruled that the Plaintiffs had shown sufficient evidence to deny Domino’s motion to dismiss the case. The Court also refused Domino’s motion to strike allegations that the conduct was willful, which means the Plaintiffs can seek statutory damages of up to $1,000 per person, as well as potential punitive damages

The case is Singleton, et al. v. Domino’s Pizza, Case No. 11-cv-01823-DKC, U.S. District Court, Maryland.