Who Decides What's Job-Related? San Francisco's Fair Chance Amendment Shifts the Answer

The Short Answer

In San Francisco, for certain types of criminal convictions, the law now decides what's job-related — not the employer. The city's newest changes to the Fair Chance Ordinance (FCO) take effect on August 10, 2026. They create a narrow set of convictions that can never be used to deny a job. This marks a big shift from the old way, where employers had the final say after reviewing each applicant's history.

How Fair Chance Hiring Used to Work

For years, San Francisco's Fair Chance Ordinance focused on process. Employers had to:

• Wait until after a conditional job offer to ask about criminal history
• Do an individualized assessment of each applicant
• Consider evidence of rehabilitation and other positive factors
• Give applicants a chance to respond before making a final decision

But here's the key point: the law didn't tell employers what decision to make. After going through the steps, the employer still got to decide if a conviction was directly related to the job. That discretion was protected.

The New Rules: Four Conviction Categories Are Off Limits

The updated ordinance adds four new categories of convictions that cannot be considered “directly related” to any job. These are:

• Crimes involving abortion-related healthcare
• Crimes involving gender-affirming care
• Crimes involving drag performances
• Crimes involving spontaneous abortion

If an employer tries to reject, fire, or demote someone based on one of these convictions, that's automatically a violation. The employer doesn't get to argue it's job-related. The law has already made that call.

Why This Change Matters So Much

This is more than just adding four items to a list. It changes the whole philosophy of fair chance hiring. Before, the law said: “Employers, here's how to make your decision fairly.” Now, for these specific cases, the law says: “There is no decision to make. The answer is no.”

Imagine you're a hiring manager. You do a full assessment. You weigh the evidence. You decide the conviction matters for the role. Then you find out the conviction is in one of those protected categories. Your hands are tied. You must withdraw the job rejection and offer the position (if other conditions are met).

That's a huge change. It means the city is no longer just telling you how to think. It's telling you what the right answer is.

The Revised Assessment Process: More Protection for Applicants

The amendments also change the steps employers must follow after an applicant responds to a background check concern. Three important updates:

• Acknowledgment required: The employer must tell the applicant they got the response within 14 days.
• Wait period: The employer must hold off any final decision for a reasonable time while rechecking things.
• Mandatory withdrawal: If the applicant shows (with facts) that the only reason for the rejection is a protected conviction, the employer must drop the rejection. No exceptions.

That last part is powerful. Before, the employer just had to “reconsider.” Now, in these protected cases, the employer must follow the law and withdraw the adverse action.

OLSE Gets More Power (But Only in These Cases)

The Office of Labor Standards Enforcement (OLSE) is the agency that enforces the ordinance. In the past, OLSE rarely challenged an employer's decision about whether a conviction was job-related. Now, if an employer uses a protected conviction as the reason (even partly), OLSE can step in and say a violation happened.

So the agency isn't getting broad new power. It's getting a specific tool to stop employers from ignoring the new rules.

There are also bigger fines and penalties. But those are just extra motivation. The real story is who makes the call.

What Employers Should Do Right Now

If your company operates in San Francisco, you need to get ready before August 10, 2026. Here's a quick checklist:

• Update your job-adjudication guidelines to list the four protected conviction categories.
• Train recruiters and hiring managers on the new process, especially the 14-day acknowledgment rule and the mandatory withdrawal requirement.
• Review your background-check workflow so you don't accidentally ask about or use these convictions.
• Build an escalation path for any case that touches these categories — get legal review fast.

Don't wait. Even if these cases are rare, the penalties are serious.

What This Means for the Future of Fair Chance Hiring

San Francisco's change might seem small because it covers only a few unusual convictions. But it sends a strong signal. Lawmakers are starting to cross a line. They're not just managing the process anymore. They're deciding what counts as job-related.

Other cities and states may follow. If they do, we could see more laws that take certain factors off the table entirely — not because they're irrelevant, but because society says they shouldn't matter in hiring.

So who decides what's job-related? In San Francisco, for some convictions, the answer is the law. For everything else, employers still have room to make their own call — for now. Stay tuned.