Search form

New York Bars Insurers from Denying Commercial Crime Coverage Due to Employee’s Prior Criminal Conviction

By Susan M. Corcoran, Richard I. Greenberg, David S. Greenhaus, Christopher M. Valentino, Bradley M. Pryba and Nadav Zamir
  • January 12, 2017

The New York State Department of Financial Services (NYSDFS) has promulgated a regulation that requires insurance companies to provide Commercial Crime Coverage to employers who have prior knowledge of an employee’s prior criminal conviction. Commercial Crime Coverage is defined as coverage under a policy of commercial risk insurance that provides burglary and theft insurance or fidelity insurance.

NYSDFS was created in 2011, replacing the New York State Banking and Insurance Departments. It supervises many different types of financial services institutions, including insurance companies. The Department has a stated goal of guarding against fraud and financial crises, as well as modernizing regulation of financial services in New York. Its regulations can have ripple effects for companies dealing with financial services institutions and insurance companies.

The new regulation (Title 11 of the New York Codes Rules and Regulations Part 76), issued by NYSDFS on December 6, 2016, applies only to insurers whose insured has engaged in a Correction Law Article 23-A analysis.

The Correction Law forbids discriminating based upon a conviction for a previous criminal offense, unless there is a direct relationship between the criminal offense and the employment sought. The Correction Law specifies eight factors, including the public policy of the state, when analyzing whether there is a “direct relationship.”

Eight Factors

Eight factors to determine a “direct relationship” under Article 23-A:

  1. The state public policy encouraging the employment of persons previously convicted of one or more criminal offenses;
  2. The specific duties and responsibilities necessarily related to the employment sought or held by the person;
  3. The bearing, if any, the criminal offense(s) will have on the person’s fitness or ability to perform one or more such duties or responsibilities;
  4. The amount of time that elapsed since the criminal offense(s);
  5. The age of the person at the time of the criminal offense(s);
  6. The seriousness of the criminal offense(s);
  7. Any information produced by the person, or on his or her behalf, regarding rehabilitation and good conduct; and
  8. The legitimate interest of the employer in protecting property and the safety and welfare of specific individuals or the general public.

Effective Date

The regulation is effective July 1, 2017. It will be applied only prospectively to policies issued, renewed, or delivered in New York after that date.

However, insurers may properly audit employers and require them to maintain adequate records to demonstrate that the employer, in fact, conducted the full Article 23-A analysis. This process therefore may begin before the effective date for policies to be issued on or after July 1, 2017.

Next Steps

Employers in New York should be familiar with their obligations to consider the Article 23-A factors prior to denying employment. The new regulation is another incentive for keeping accurate records of the analysis, as an employer may otherwise lose the benefit of commercial crime insurance coverage.

If you have questions or concerns about this or other workplace developments, please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney.

©2017 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

November 10, 2017

The Speak Out Evolution from Ms. Magazine to #MeToo: The Time Is Now for Employers to Re-Examine Their Practices

November 10, 2017

In a November 5, 2017 article, The New York Times harkened back to the 1977 Ms. magazine cover depicting sexual harassment on its cover. The point was to illustrate the fact that the 1977 Ms. cover is just as relevant today as it was then. In 1986, more than 20 years after the enactment of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the U.S. ... Read More

October 30, 2017

Chicago Adopts ‘Hands Off Pants On’ Law to Protect Hotel Workers from Sexual Harassment, Assault

October 30, 2017

To provide hospitality workers greater protections against sexual harassment and assault, the Chicago City Council passed the “Hands Off Pants On” Ordinance on October 11, 2017. The Ordinance requires all hotels in the City to adopt a panic button system and an anti-sexual harassment policy. The Ordinance was passed after months of... Read More

October 24, 2017

California Adds ‘Transgender,’ ‘Gender Nonconforming Individuals’ to Sexual Harassment Prevention Training for Supervisors

October 24, 2017

Employers subject to California’s mandatory sexual harassment training requirement for supervisors will need to ensure their programs include prevention of harassment based on gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation following an amendment (SB 396) to California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). On October 15... Read More

Related Practices