The complaint alleges that in July 2016, plaintiff Robert Piveronas received a formal offer from Sodexo for a facilities management position. Sodexo informed the plaintiff that his experience and education qualifications were sufficient for the position and set a start date of August 1, 2016, and encouraged Piveronas to proceed with resigning from his current job.
Sodexo notified Piveronas on August 1, 2016, that he was no longer a suitable candidate for the position as a result of Sodexo’s inability to verify whether he had earned a GED. The plaintiff alleges that Sodexo then delivered the pre-adverse action letter several days after he had been verbally notified by Sodexo that they were retracting the offer.
Never having graduated high school, Piveronas enrolled in but did not complete a GED program. According to the complaint, Piveronas argues that this had never been a point of contention with his previous employers and Sodexo did not mention during the interview process that it would pose a problem.
According to the action, while Sodexo representatives were wrapping up interviews, offering Piveronas the position and setting a firm start date for employment, a consumer reporting agency was simultaneously still in the process of interviewing friends, neighbors and associates of Piveronas.
Piveronas’ suit represents a potential class of applicants and employees who allege Sodexo failed to provide them with one or more of the following disclosures required by the FCRA:
- A stand-alone disclosure that a consumer report would be procured for employment purposes;
- An investigative consumer report disclosure that satisfied all of the statutory requirements;
- A pre-adverse action letter prior to final adverse action being taken; and
- A summary of rights under the FCRA.
The case is Piveronas v. Sodexo Inc., number 2:17-cv-00446 in the U.S. District for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
Source: Law360.com, 4/10/2017
Posted: April 11, 2017