Will I be forced to hire an employee with a criminal past?

[zsdersw]

I don't think the government can or should force anyone to hire anybody, but there has to be another answer for criminals than being on the taxpayer dime the rest of their lives.

 

[Chuck_v]

I would say sexually related crimes and maybe drugs, otherwise I wouldn't have a problem with hiring a man with a conviction. If a man knows he has done something wrong and wants to be a better man, then it's going to be pretty hard if he can never get a job. If the person really wants to have a better life then he'll probably is going to do his best keeping the job.

So I wouldn't rule out a person with a criminal background, if he was the best suited for the job.

Life of a criminal...hard ain't it. They picked it now they can live with it. Just how much compassion did they have for their victim(s)? The only sorry a criminal ever has is sorry they got caught. Ever notice how once they are in prison they are all innocent, they all get religion and just want ONE more opportunity to be a good citizen?

 

[MixMasterTang]

Life of a criminal...hard ain't it. They picked it now they can live with it. Just how much compassion did they have for their victim(s)? The only sorry a criminal ever has is sorry they got caught. Ever notice how once they are in prison they are all innocent, they all get religion and just want ONE more opportunity to be a good citizen?

What is your answer then, kick them out on the streets unable to get a job after their time is served which basically will lead them to having no choice but to A) Live a crappy life on government assistance, or B) Go back to a life of crime?

 

[Linux23]

Well, unless your only punishment for any and all crimes, regardless of degree or any other circumstances, is death... the only other option is to have them be on the taxpayer dime the rest of their lives in one way or another.

execution.

or ship them off to a remote island.

 

[Texashiker]

Going to jail is supposed to pay whatever debt to society there was deemed to exist. Plenty of people with a criminal record can prove to be hard workers as they live w\ the stigma and having to worry about the average ignorant person reviewing their criminal background during a hiring process.

A couple of years ago a registered sex offender was renting the house across the street from where I live. The guy was convicted of having sex with a 14 or 15 year old girl, when he was something like 34 years old.

He served something like 10 years in prison, but before the conviction he served in the marines.

He did something he knew was wrong, and now he is going to be labeled a sex offender for the rest of his life. As far as I know, he was a law abiding citizen, except for that one mistake.

The guy did not kill the girl, he did not rape her, did not kidnap her,,, and now he is labeled for life.

Someone has a lapse of judgement, and they are punished for the rest of their lives, how does that make sense?

I wonder how many people are forced into a life of crime because they can not find gainful employment due to a mistake they made 10, 15 even 20 years ago?

 

[First]

I own a gym.

lol, this explains a lot.

 

[highland145]

lol, this explains a lot.

Like what?

 

[airdata]

sex offenders is a related but different topic...

lots of difference between the 19 year old fucking the 15 year olds and the creepy 40 something fucking the 15 year olds.

But they all get lumped together w\ the same label.

 

[biostud]

Life of a criminal...hard ain't it. They picked it now they can live with it. Just how much compassion did they have for their victim(s)? The only sorry a criminal ever has is sorry they got caught. Ever notice how once they are in prison they are all innocent, they all get religion and just want ONE more opportunity to be a good citizen?

I like that you don't believe people can improve.....

I've never said that people are innocent, I'm just saying if a person really wants to change I would give him a chance. I would rather have an ex-con have a real job than doing more crime.

 

[Texashiker]

Life of a criminal...hard ain't it. They picked it now they can live with it. Just how much compassion did they have for their victim(s)?

There is a difference between a career criminal, and someone who has a lapse of judgement.

But society treats them the same.

Is it fair to tell a 50 year old he did not get the job because he wrote a hot check when he was 19 years old?

 

[highland145]

There is a difference between a career criminal, and someone who has a lapse of judgement.

But society treats them the same.

Is it fair to tell a 50 year old he did not get the job because he wrote a hot check when he was 19 years old?

Remember the Wells employee that got fired for .10 theft 50 year ago. New bank regulations, FTL.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...rd-dime-laundromat-50-years-article-1.1147824

 

[simpletron]

This link provides scenarios covered by their 'guidance'

http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/arrest_conviction.cfm#IV

Some of it seems fairly obvious: White guy + black guy have same prior misdemeanor, but you tell the black guy sorry criminal past is a problem, but then hire white guy. That becomes racial discrimination.

It does say arrest records with no convictions should have no bearing on employment, which seems sensible because that's assuming guilt rather than innocence just for an 'arrest'. You do think people are innocent until proven guilty no?

I think this summarizes what employers need to do:

The Eighth Circuit identified three factors (the “Green factors”) that were relevant to assessing whether an exclusion is job related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity:

1. The nature and gravity of the offense or conduct
2. The time that has passed since the offense or conduct and/or completion of the sentence
3. The nature of the job held or sought.

So just don't put a blanket policy of no criminals, no matter how small the crime was or how long ago it was type policy in place and you should be fine.

 

[zsdersw]

If you think former criminals should only get government jobs or should remain in prison for the rest of their lives, then you should be laughed at for your hypocrisy when you whine about the cost and size of government.

 

[boomerang]

I would say sexually related crimes and maybe drugs, otherwise I wouldn't have a problem with hiring a man with a conviction. If a man knows he has done something wrong and wants to be a better man, then it's going to be pretty hard if he can never get a job. If the person really wants to have a better life then he'll probably is going to do his best keeping the job.

So I wouldn't rule out a person with a criminal background, if he was the best suited for the job.

Do I have a choice whether to hire him or not? That is the real question here.

As I sometimes do, I have made a blanket statement that is not wholly true. I most certainly would not hold against an applicant a minor transgression done many years prior when he was a young person with little concept of the long term consequences of his actions. But the line must be drawn somewhere. I would hope that I still have the ability to make the determination for myself without fear of retribution. But I'm not sure I have that ability.

Remember too, that just because I would not hire someone that does not exclude them from getting employment. There are many posters in this thread that would hire even violent offenders with little thought for the consequences. My business is not the sole provider of employment in the nation. I would like to retain the power to determine who I do and don't hire but my ability to make that choice is being eroded.

 

[IGBT]

the inside is now the outside. Get used to it.

 

[OverVolt]

You hold the individual who is seeking employment to the level of position competency, character, morals and ethics as you hold yourself and if in your estimate they do not meet that criteria you do not hire them...f**k the government.

Ah shit actually doing the job and doing it well. Totally forgot what the hiring process was about.

 

[OverVolt]

Do I have a choice whether to hire him or not? That is the real question here.

As I sometimes do, I have made a blanket statement that is not wholly true. I most certainly would not hold against an applicant a minor transgression done many years prior when he was a young person with little concept of the long term consequences of his actions. But the line must be drawn somewhere. I would hope that I still have the ability to make the determination for myself without fear of retribution. But I'm not sure I have that ability.

Remember too, that just because I would not hire someone that does not exclude them from getting employment. There are many posters in this thread that would hire even violent offenders with little thought for the consequences. My business is not the sole provider of employment in the nation. I would like to retain the power to determine who I do and don't hire but my ability to make that choice is being eroded.

I feel for you because this is why i think service has declined just about everywhere. There are incompetent hair cutters incompetent mechanics incompetent managers galore out there.

 

[biostud]

Do I have a choice whether to hire him or not? That is the real question here.

I agree 100% that it should always be your choice as an employer whether to hire or fire a person.

 

[Texashiker]

sex offenders is a related but different topic...

Like the opening post said " Will I be forced to hire an employee with a criminal past?", the guy who was renting the house had a terrible time finding a job.

Once employers saw he was a convicted sex offender, he rarely got the job.

Then the OP asked "will I be forced to hire."

When do we stop punishing people for a crime? They go to prison, pay their debt to society, then they are discriminated against for the rest of their lives.

 

[xgsound]

You are right to wonder what to do. Link to article that says the EEOC requires G4S Security firm to hire felons even though it is illegal in PA for security guards to be felons or they sue! http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323701904578276491630786614.html#articleTabs=article The suit was started in 2010 according to the second half of the article. It's hard to believe it's true. How can a company do right here? How can we change this?

Jim

 

[IBMer]

I think a lot of the issue stems from what I brought up in another thread. People generally do not feel that time served in prison is any significant punishment, and usually in fact can tend to make a more serious criminal instead. If prison was truly the punishment it should be, then this might be less of an issue.

 

[pcgeek11]

A couple of years ago a registered sex offender was renting the house across the street from where I live. The guy was convicted of having sex with a 14 or 15 year old girl, when he was something like 34 years old.

He served something like 10 years in prison, but before the conviction he served in the marines.

He did something he knew was wrong, and now he is going to be labeled a sex offender for the rest of his life. As far as I know, he was a law abiding citizen, except for that one mistake.

The guy did not kill the girl, he did not rape her, did not kidnap her,,, and now he is labeled for life.

Someone has a lapse of judgement, and they are punished for the rest of their lives, how does that make sense?

I wonder how many people are forced into a life of crime because they can not find gainful employment due to a mistake they made 10, 15 even 20 years ago?

Sorry, but he did Rape Her.

Sexual intercourse by an adult with a person below a statutorily designated age.

Statutory Rape:
The criminal offense of statutory rape is committed when an adult sexually penetrates a person who, under the law, is incapable of consenting to sex. Minors and physically and mentally incapacitated persons are deemed incapable of consenting to sex under rape statutes in all states. These persons are considered deserving of special protection because they are especially vulnerable due to their youth or condition.

In Texas:

Section 22.011 (a) (2) of the Texas Penal Code provides that a person who has sexual relations with a child younger than 17 years of age is guilty of Sexual Assault. Under this section of the Penal Code, "sexual relations" may include conventional sexual intercourse, oral sex, anal sex and/or oral-anal sex.

So yes he is a rapist and should be listed as a sexual predator.

 

[LTC8K6]

One of the problems with our society, we do not forgive.

Someone commits a crime at 19 years old, the act of an immature child follows the person through adulthood.

So what if you are forced to hire someone with a criminal act on their record?

Who is liable when that convicted criminal commits a crime in the workplace?

 

[Oldgamer]

Misdemeanors are not a big deal, shit 30% of Americans have some minor offense, but felonies would be highly scrutinized. What they are saying in the article makes sense, you should look at the offense, weigh how long its been since the applicant offended, and see how it relates to the job. In otherwords, if you have an applicant who has a DUI over 10 years ago, and no re-offense, and the job involves building computers, then it shouldn't be an issue hiring that person. But if you have someone who has a DUI and it was only 6 months ago, and the position is driving a company semi-truck, then you would not hire that person.

It means employers need to use common sense. In addition, minorities are disprportional targeted, profiled and arrested more than caucasian people, and there are many employers who are racist, and use the criminal record to avoid hiring people of color, not because of the criminal record.

 

[LTC8K6]

Like the opening post said " Will I be forced to hire an employee with a criminal past?", the guy who was renting the house had a terrible time finding a job.

Once employers saw he was a convicted sex offender, he rarely got the job.

Then the OP asked "will I be forced to hire."

When do we stop punishing people for a crime? They go to prison, pay their debt to society, then they are discriminated against for the rest of their lives.

Who is liable when this employee sexually assaults an employee's child on bring your kid to work day? Or at company day care?