Wells Fargo Background Policy Upheld by Court
Wells Fargo were deemed to be correct and nondiscriminatory in terminating employees and refusing job applicants on the basis of criminal offenses.
The appellants are ten African Americans and Latinos who sued Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) on behalf of a putative class, alleging discriminatory employment practices in violation of Title VII and the Iowa Civil Rights Act. They seek reversal of the district court’s1 grant of summary judgment in favor of Wells Fargo. Specifically, the appellants argue that the court erred in concluding that they failed to establish a prima facie case of disparate impact. They also challenge the magistrate judge’s2 order granting in part and denying in part their Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) motion seeking additional time for discovery
Federal law prohibits "any person who has been convicted of a criminal offense involving dishonesty or a breach of trust" from working in a financial institution insured by the Federal Deposit Insurcance Coporation, which can result in heavy fines.