Topic
Background checks, screening, and testing
Criminal-record and consumer-report screening, drug and alcohol testing, and honesty tests.
Orono — Morning light through the oaks. Photo: Dave Madgett Photograph: Sunlight breaking through trees above a lake in Orono.
4 guides
The guides
Just fired
Ban the Box Moves the Question, It Does Not Remove It — and the Only Penalty a Private Minnesota Employer Faces for Asking Too Early Is an Administrative Fine
Minn. Stat. § 364.021 stops a public or private employer from asking about criminal history until the applicant has been selected for an interview or given a conditional offer. Section 364.06, subd. 2(d), then says the administrative penalties for a private employer's violation "are exclusive." Two other bodies of law — Minn. Stat. ch. 13C and the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act — govern the report itself, and those do carry private remedies.
Read the guideStill employed
Minnesota Bans the Honesty Test, Not Only the Polygraph — and the Section Carries No Theft-Investigation Exception
Minn. Stat. § 181.75 forbids an employer to directly or indirectly solicit or require a polygraph, a voice stress analysis, or any test purporting to test the honesty of an employee or applicant, and makes a violation a misdemeanor with a private civil action attached. The federal Employee Polygraph Protection Act is written around a device and carries exemptions Minnesota's section does not.
Read the guideStill employed
Minnesota's Genetic-Testing Statute Reaches an Employer With One Employee and Allows Treble Damages — GINA Starts at Fifteen and Has No Disparate-Impact Claim at All
Minn. Stat. § 181.974, subd. 2, bars an employer from administering a genetic test or collecting protected genetic information as a condition of employment, and subd. 3 lets a court award up to three times actual damages plus punitive damages, costs, and attorney fees. The federal statute reaches an employer with fifteen employees, routes the claim through Title VII's procedures, and 42 U.S.C. § 2000ff-7(a) forecloses a disparate-impact cause of action outright.
Read the guideStill employed
A Minnesota employer may test you only under a written policy and only in five situations — and a first positive confirmatory test is not by itself a lawful reason to fire you
Minn. Stat. § 181.951, subd. 1, bars an employer from requesting or requiring a drug or alcohol test except as the section authorizes, and only under a written policy containing everything § 181.952, subd. 1, requires. Section 181.953, subd. 10(b), then bars discharge on a first positive confirmatory test unless the employee was offered counseling or rehabilitation and refused it or failed to complete it.
Read the guide
Glossary
Terms that come up
Nothing on this page is advice about your job, and no article can be. If you want your own facts looked at, a Minnesota employment attorney can do that — and several of the deadlines described on this site are short enough that waiting is itself a decision.