I was arrested for DUI in Pennsylvania in late 2003 and was recently
entered into the state's ARD program.  This program is a pre-trial
diversionary program for 1st offenders.  The benefits: I was not
"convicted" of the crime.  Additionally, I did not have to plead
guilty or no lo contendre (at least, according to my lawyer).  As
you'll see, this distinction is important to me.

I am currently looking for a job in the financial services industry. 
During the application process, I am required to answer certain
screening questions, some of which force me to fess up to my mistake
(for example, one application asked if I had ever been entered into a
pretrial diversionary program).

Recently, I applied to a New England Bank, and will soon be
interviewing for a position.  Luckily, the job application asked only
if I had been convicted, plead guilty or no lo contendre.  Again, with
PA's ARD program, I've been told that I was diverted to the program
before having to plead anything.

While I am glad that I have not yet had to disclose this, I am
concerned about whether this will appear in a criminal background
check. Is the bank allowed to obtain this information?  I have read
several articles that say that, in general, companies cannot ask about
arrests that don't lead to convictions. (Here's one:
http://www.businessweekasia.com/careers/content/jul2002/ca20020717_1599.htm).

Furthermore, the particular office of this bank is in Connecticut,
where I believe the law is more restrictive as to what can be
reported.

In summary, my question is, will my DUI arrest (which again did not
result in a conviction) show up on my potential employer's background
check?

Addendum: the salary for this job will likely be over $75K.  This is
important because I believe the FCRA law draws a distinction at this
salary level.  Also, this is an office job (no money handling, no
access to account balances).

A persective employer is forbidden to search for certain kinds of
background information, but inforcement is all but impossible. If a
perspective employer takes the time, risk and expence to find this
information, they will tell you they selected a different candidate
and/or are rejecting you for a reason that likely will not cause
problems for them. They might even hire you inspite of bad things they
found out illegally or legally. It is very unlikely that they will
tell anyone that they broke the law to get information. Most employers
have a list of safe reasons to give reguarding why they did not hire
you.  Neil

Neil,

Thanks for your feedback.   You are dead-on when you say they'll find
another reason -- already lost one job that way, after I honestly
answered a screening question on the job app.

Not sure how much expertise you have on this, but you indicate they
have to go through a great deal of effort to find this out.  If they
go through a 3rd party company, I would guess that it would require
very little effort on their part, and not a great expense.  Also, I
would expect that what a 3rd party could report would be VERY
regulated, hence if my arrest cannot be reported, the 3rd party agency
would not report it to the hiring company.