Skip to content
Link copied to clipboard

Sheetz accused of racially discriminating with worker background checks

Sheetz's policy of screening applicants' criminal history disproportionately affects candidates who are Black, American Indian, and multiracial, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said.

A Sheetz convenience store gas station in Berwick, Pa., in 2022.
A Sheetz convenience store gas station in Berwick, Pa., in 2022.Read moreTOM GRALISH / Staff Photographer

Sheetz, a Pennsylvania-founded convenience store chain, has been charged by the federal government of using a racially discriminatory hiring practice.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) filed a lawsuit on April 17, alleging that Sheetz, through its criminal background screening process, denied employment to certain job applicants because of their race. The chain has been doing so since at least 2015, the complaint said.

Nick Ruffner, a spokesperson for Sheetz, said the company has been working with the EEOC for nearly eight years “to find common ground and resolve this dispute.” Ruffner said the company is taking the allegations seriously.

According to the lawsuit, Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, and multiracial job candidates were disproportionately denied jobs at Sheetz because of their criminal justice history.

Specifically, the EEOC found, while white job applicants were denied jobs because of their history in about 8% of cases, that rate of denial was 14.5% for Black applicants, 13% for American Indian/Alaska Native applicants and 13.5% for multiracial applicants.

“Sheetz does not tolerate discrimination of any kind. Diversity and inclusion are essential parts of who we are,” Ruffner said.

Guidelines from the EEOC say even a “neutral” policy, such as excluding any applicant with a criminal conviction, could violate the law if the exclusion is not job-related and based on a business need.

“Federal law mandates that employment practices causing a disparate impact because of race or other protected classifications must be shown by the employer to be necessary to ensure the safe and efficient performance of the particular jobs at issue,” EEOC regional attorney Debra M. Lawrence said. “Even when such necessity is proven, the practice remains unlawful if there is an alternative practice available that is comparably effective in achieving the employer’s goals but causes less discriminatory effect.”

While the case was filed in federal court in Baltimore, the lawsuit noted that Sheetz has more than 20,000 employees across at least 700 stores in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia, and North Carolina.

There are about 300 Sheetz locations in Pennsylvania, but none in Philadelphia. The closest locations to the city are in Morgantown and Reading, Pa., about 40 miles away. The convenience store and gas chain is often seen as a competitor to Wawa, which is based just outside Philadelphia. The rivalry is a common talking point for politicians, including last week when President Joe Biden shopped at both chains during visits to Pennsylvania.

The chain was also in the spotlight last year for a controversial policy stating that employees may not have “obvious missing, broken, or badly discolored teeth.” Sheetz ended up getting rid of the rule, known as the “smile policy” after media reports prompted a review.

Sheetz was listed on Fortune’s 2024 list of best companies to work for, coming in at No. 60.