1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Restricting Credit Checks for Employment Decisions Act . 2. Findings Congress finds the following: (1) The use of credit reports as a factor in making hiring decisions has been found to be prevalent in a diverse array of occupations, and is not limited to certain high-level management or executive positions. (2) According to the California Labor Federation, only 25 percent of employers researched the credit history of job applicants in 1998. However, this practice had increased to 43 percent by 2006 and to 60 percent by 2011. (3) A study titled Do Job Applicant Credit Histories Predict Job Performance Appraisal Ratings or Termination Decisions? , published in 2012, found that, while credit history might conceptually measure a person’s level of responsibility, ability to meet deadlines, dependability, or integrity, it does not, in practice, actually predict an employee’s performance or likelihood to quit. Credit reports contain many inaccuracies and credit history can be contaminated by events that are sometimes outside a person’s control, such as a sudden medical expense after an accident or the loss of a job during an economic downturn. The study found that there is no benefit from using credit history to predict job performance or turnover. (4) Despite the absence of data showing a correlation between job performance and credit-worthiness, employers continue to use credit checks as a proxy for assessing character and integrity. According to a 2012 Society for Human Resource Management survey, organizations indicated that they used credit checks on job candidates primarily to reduce or prevent theft and embezzlement and to minimize legal liability for negligent hiring. (5) The use of credit checks for employment purposes creates a true catch-22 for unemployed people with impaired credit. For example, the financial hardship caused by losing a job may cause some unemployed individuals to make late or partial payments on their bills, but their poor credit standing caused