Former Michigan Governor, Rick Snyder, placed a ban on ban-the-box ordinances when it comes to cities in Michigan and other local governments limiting private employers from asking about criminal histories at any point in the hiring process. This legislation, Act. No. 84, heads in the opposite direction that many other states, cities, and local municipalities are heading. However, one city in Michigan, Grand Rapids, enacted a new “Human Rights” ordinance regarding discrimination in housing, employment, etc., which went into effect on December 1, 2019. This ordinance seems to be designed to skirt around Act. No. 84.

This new ordinance adds several categories to the list of protected classes and states it is unlawful to discriminate base on “actual or perceived color, race, religion or creed, sex, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, national origin, genotype, age, marital status, medical condition, disability, height, weight, or source of lawful income (cumulatively known as protected classes)”

So, what do these classes have to do with ban-the-box laws? These are areas for potential discrimination, and the city commission considers this ordinance to be a “discrimination” law and not a ban-the-box law.

What this means for landlords, property managers, and employers is they can’t make sweeping adverse action decisions regarding criminal histories. When considering conviction records, they must look at each person, and each conviction for that person, on a case-by-case basis. They must consider:

• the nature and severity of the crime

• the age of the individual at the time of the crime

• whether there have been repeat offenses

• whether the individual maintained a good history before or after the conviction

• evidence of rehabilitation efforts

• whether the crime for which the individual was convicted may pose a demonstrable risk to the health, safety, or welfare of other employees or persons or to property

According to the Legal Update by Seyfarth Shaw, the last point would include manufacturing or distributing illegal drugs. Seyfarth further states that while the ordinance does not allow arrests not resulting in convictions to be considered, “the Deputy City Attorney has opined that pending charges may be considered in employment and housing decisions.”

This ordinance also states:    

1.     No person shall adopt, enforce, or employ any policy or requirement, or publish, post, broadcast, or distribute any advertisement, sign, notice, or solicitation which discriminates, or suggests, supports, or affirms discrimination, in the provision of housing, employment, public accommodations, or public services.

2.     No agent, broker, or any other person shall discriminate in making referrals or listings or providing information with regard to housing, employment, public accommodations, or public services. A report of such person’s responsibility for a violation of this Ordinance shall be made to an applicable licensing or regulatory agency for such person or business, if any.

3.     No person shall coerce, threaten, or retaliate against an individual for making a complaint or assisting in the investigation regarding a violation or alleged violation of this ordinance, nor require, request, conspire with, assist or coerce another person to retaliate against an individual for making a complaint or assisting in an investigation.

4.     No person shall conspire with, assist, coerce, or request another person to discriminate in any manner prohibited by this ordinance.

If you do business in Grand Rapids, MI, review your policies and procedures and make sure you are in compliance with this new ordinance. Don’t forget to train your staff on this new ordinance and on any resulting updates to your policies and procedures.

Additional ASE Resources
ASE Background Screening - If you need assistance with your background screening process, ASE can help.  Our new system integrates with most ATS's.  Contact Susan Chance to learn more.

Sources: legislature.mi.gove, Seyfarth.com, fhcwm.org