A Chicago woman has filed a lawsuit against Target, alleging the retailer unlawfully withdrew a job offer after discovering she had a pending criminal case—raising broader questions about hiring practices and the rights of applicants with unresolved charges.
The plaintiff, Courtney McElrath-Bey, 35, claims the company violated Illinois civil rights law when it rescinded a conditional offer for a warehouse role following a background check.
According to a report by CWB Chicago, the complaint stated that Target initially offered McElrath-Bey a position as an order picker or warehouse associate in October, contingent upon screening results. The background check revealed pending charges, prompting the company to issue what is known as a “pre-adverse action notification,” alerting her that the findings could affect her employment.
McElrath-Bey responded by stressing that the charges were unresolved and that she had not been convicted of any crime. She has pleaded not guilty to robbery and aggravated battery charges filed in March 2024 and maintains her innocence.
Despite her explanation, the lawsuit alleges the company ultimately withdrew the offer.
Legal argument centers on Illinois law
The case hinges on Illinois’ Employee Background Fairness Act, a 2021 amendment to the Illinois Human Rights Act that limits how employers can use criminal history in hiring decisions.
Under the law, employers must assess whether there is a “substantial relationship” between the alleged offense and the job or whether hiring the individual would pose an “unreasonable risk” to people or property.
McElrath-Bey’s legal team argues that Target failed to meet that standard and instead relied improperly on unresolved allegations.
The lawsuit, filed earlier this year, seeks damages and could potentially expand into a broader class action covering other applicants who were denied employment under similar circumstances.
Broader debate over fairness and risk
The case has ignited debate over how employers balance workplace safety with fair hiring practices, particularly when it comes to individuals who have not been convicted of a crime.
Supporters of stricter screening policies argue that companies must protect employees, customers, and assets, especially in roles involving inventory or public interaction.
Others contend that denying employment based on pending charges undermines the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” and limits opportunities for individuals seeking to rebuild their lives.
Legal experts note that laws like Illinois’ are part of a growing national trend aimed at reducing barriers to employment for people with criminal records, while still allowing employers discretion in high-risk situations.
What comes next
The case will likely test how courts interpret the balance between employer discretion and anti-discrimination protections under state law. If successful, it could have implications for hiring policies not only in Illinois but across the country.
For now, McElrath-Bey’s lawsuit adds to an ongoing legal and social conversation about second chances, workplace equity, and the evolving role of background checks in employment decisions.
