June

In March, the United States District Court for the Central District of California granted final approval of a Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) class action against McDonald's.
 
James Wesley Carter alleged that the fast-food restaurant violates rights of consumers by failing to provide job applicants with a clear and conspicuous disclosure, in a document consisting solely of the disclosure.
 
The settlement class includes all employees or applicants for employment at McDonald's who did not receive the stand-alone document. McDonald's has agreed to pay $950,000 to class members and also ceased obtaining background reports as of Nov. 12, 2015.

Courts have been struggling to define the contours of standing in "no injury" ever since the Supreme Court decided Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins last year. The District of Minnesota recently granted a motion to dismiss a Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claim in which a plaintiff alleged that the defendants failed to provide a compliant background check disclosure.
 
In Fields v. Beverly Health and Rehabilitation Services, Inc. et al., the plaintiff worked for the defendants for 14 months. She later sued the defendants, claiming that their background check authorization did not constitute a document consisting solely of the disclosure that a background check would be obtained. According to the Court, the FCRA 's disclosure provision does not give consumers a right to sue upon receipt of a con-confusing disclosure that was simply presented in an improper form.

In April, the New York City Council approved legislation that will ban employers from requesting or using job applicants' salary history when making hiring decisions.

Introduction 1253-A is similar to those bans in Massachusetts and the City of Philadelphia, along with 20 other city and state legislatures that have introduced provisions.

It is intended to address gender-based wage disparities by eliminating the potential for discrimination based on previous salary.