The National Trial Lawyers
  • Home
    • Meet Our Team
    • Contact Us
    • Mission & Goals
    • FAQ
  • Webinars
  • News
  • Membership Directory
    • Top 100 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 100 Map – Criminal Defense
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Civil Plaintiff
    • Top 40 Under 40 Map – Criminal Defense
  • Top 100
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 100 President’s Message
    • Diplomat
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 100 Badge
    • Media
  • Top 40
    • Civil Plaintiff Officers / Executive Committee
    • Criminal Defense Officers / Executive Committee
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Bootcamp
    • Benefits
    • About
    • Top 40 President’s Message
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Top 40 Badge
    • Media
  • Specialty Assoc
    • About
    • Shop
    • Officers
    • Membership Renewal
    • Member Profile Updates
    • Media
  • Nominate
    • Top 100
    • Top 40
    • Specialty Association
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer of the Year
    • Trial Team of the Year
    • America’s Most Influential Trial Lawyer
    • America’s Most Influential Law Firm
    • Lifetime Achievement Award
  • Shop
  • Magazine
    • A-List
  • Education and Networking Agenda
    • Trial Lawyers Summit
      • Summit Sponsors
    • Top 40 Under 40 Trial Academy Boot Camp
    • Mass Torts Made Perfect
    • The Lanier Master Class 5.0 Trial Academy 2021
    • Webinars
  • Hall of Fame
    • Trial Lawyer Hall of Fame

Class Action Privacy Lawsuit Filed Against Social Media Giant LinkedIn

Posted on December 8, 2014 by Eleanor Smith

imgres-1LinkedIn, the popular social media giant that boasts over 300 million users worldwide, has recently been sued in a class action lawsuit over privacy violation claims.

The plaintiffs, who each have their own individual stories, claim that LinkedIn destroyed their chances at employment while violating their privacy.

The complaint was filed against LinkedIn by four individual plaintiffs over its premium “reference report,” which contains the names, locations, employment areas, current employers, and current positions of all persons in the user’s network who may have worked with the applicant.

This class action of plaintiffs claim that LinkedIn not only sold employment information that may or may not be accurate, but also obtained said information in part from unwitting members.

Fair Credit Reporting Act

The plaintiffs, Tracee Sweet, Lisa Jaramillo, James Ralston, and Tiffany Thomas, claim that they have been harmed by LinkedIn’s alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and are seeking both damages and injunctive relief.

The complaint alleges that members are not notified when potential employers run a report on them, meaning “any potential employer can anonymously dig into the employment history of any LinkedIn member.” This practice, according to the complaint, leads to “hiring and firing decisions based on the information gather[ed], without the knowledge of the member, and without any safeguards in place as to the accuracy of the information that the potential employer has obtained.”

The purpose of the Fair Credit Reporting Act is to promote accuracy, fairness, and the privacy of personal information assembled by credit reporting agencies. The complaint adds, “Such secrecy in dealing in consumer information directly contradicts the express purposes,” for which the Fair Credit Reporting Act was originally legislated and enacted.

Allegedly, LinkedIn has actually been promoting its service specifically to employers, with statements such as “find references who can give real, honest feedback” and “get the real story on any [job] candidate.”

Inaccurate information

The plaintiffs together allege LinkedIn has created a marketplace in which it “sells employment information that may or may not be accurate . . . without complying with the FCRA.” Each have had their own adverse individual experiences with employment opportunities that they feel are directly tied to the involvement of LinkedIn.

Plaintiffs Sweet, Jaramillo, Thomas, and Ralston, feel they were wrongly denied employment opportunities due to the reporting practices of LinkedIn. However, LinkedIn spokesman Richard George has said, “[LinkedIn] take[s] member privacy very seriously. We believe that the legal claims in the recently-filed lawsuit are without merit, and we intend to fight them vigorously.”

  • Tracee Sweet of Georgia was recently offered a job following a job interview. However, the job offer was later revoked after Sweet’s references had been checked and the company changed their mind based on those references. The kicker? Sweet did not provide any references herself, but her LinkedIn profile was accessed by the company with whom she interviewed.
  • Lisa Jaramillo of Florida was contacted by an in-house recruiter about a job. The company originally seemed very interested in Jaramillo, but did not continue to pursue her after she connected with another person on the company’s team via LinkedIn.
  • Tiffany Thomas of Florida, noticed a manager from a potential job had viewed her LinkedIn profile and applied for a job with the company. She completed an interview, but has not received word back regarding whether the company will offer her employment since her LinkedIn profile has been viewed.
  • James Ralston of California was approached by a job recruiter and asked to fill out an online form. However, Ralston was later told that both potential employers had declined to interview him.

Richard George, LinkedIn’s spokesman, has stated that, “A reference search, which is only available to premium account holders, simply lets a searcher locate people in their network who have worked at the same company during the same time period as a member they would like to learn more about. A reference search does not reveal any of that member’s non-public information.”

The case is Tracee Sweet, Lisa Jaramillo, James Ralston, and Tiffany Thomas v. LinkedIn Corporation, Case5:14-cv-04531-PSG, Northern US District Court of California.

 

Posted in Class Actions, Employment

Comments are closed.

News Categories

Subscribe to Blog and VFJ via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog, the Voice for Justice and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Read about other Top Jury Verdicts

Sterling Bancorp Agrees to $12.5 Million Settlement with Oklahoma Police Pension & Retirement System

Sterling Bancorp Agrees to $12.5 Million Settlement with Oklahoma Police Pension & Retirement System

Sterling Bancorp Inc. agreed to pay $12.5 million to settle a class-action lawsuit filed by the $3.1 billion Oklahoma Po[Read More...]
Boy Scouts of America and The Hartford Enter $650 Million Settlement for Sex Abuse Claims

Boy Scouts of America and The Hartford Enter $650 Million Settlement for Sex Abuse Claims

After years of legal dispute, The Hartford has entered into a settlement agreement and release with the Boy Scouts [Read More...]
Playland Operator Reaches $12 Million Bankruptcy Settlement

Playland Operator Reaches $12 Million Bankruptcy Settlement

The Westchester County Board of Legislators last week approved a bankruptcy court settlement with Standard Amusements regardi[Read More...]
Santa Fe Agrees To a $36M Settlement With the Firms Responsible For Constructing Its Water Project

Santa Fe Agrees To a $36M Settlement With the Firms Responsible For Constructing Its Water Project

The board of the Santa Fe city and county’s joint Buckman Direct Diversion agreed to a $36 million settlement last wee[Read More...]
Health Net Repaid $97.2M To Settle an Investigation Confirming It Over-Billed the U.S. For Veterans Care

Health Net Repaid $97.2M To Settle an Investigation Confirming It Over-Billed the U.S. For Veterans Care

A Rancho Cordova health insurance company has repaid $97.2 million to settle an investigation into inflated claims submitted [Read More...]

#LegalNews

@@TheNTLtop100

Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy

Attorney information and content provided on this website is provided for the benefit of members of The National Trial Lawyers and as a public service by Legal Associations Management, Inc. The website and all data are the property of Legal Associations Management, Inc. Data, including without limitation attorney information and content, on the site may not be mined, sold, or used commercially for any purpose without the explicit written consent of Legal Associations Management, Inc. This site may not be accessed by any automated program for extracting data for any use. By accessing and using the site you agree that you will not develop, support or use software, devices, scripts, robots, or any other means or processes (including crawlers, browser plug-ins and add-ons, or any other technology) to scrape data or otherwise copy profiles and other data. Unauthorized use or attempted unauthorized use of this system may subject you to both civil and criminal penalties.