I have no problem hiring ex-offenders. But they’re being let down

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/dec/04/small-employer-hire-ex-offender-prison-literacy-programs

by LinuxBender • 4 years ago

38 18 4 years ago

gyjot2• 4 years ago

In fact, a person’s criminal history has become so trivial that although employers can ask a prospective candidate about it during pre-employment screenings or background checks, many states do not allow that employer to discriminate based on their findings.

Is this really true? As an employer, there are some crimes I'd be happy to give people a second chance on, but others, no way.

For example, I would 100% not hire a rapist or a pedophile. And I would only hire a murderer if there were exceptional mitigating circumstances.

Some crimes tell you a lot about someone's character, even if they have completed their prison sentence.

Dma54rhs• 4 years ago

Why then release people from jail or why not just kill them if after serving the sentence they are shunned from society. I probably think similarly to you but it begs a question why release if they haven't paid their debts to society.

notch656a3• 4 years ago

That was basically the original idea of felonies. They were basically hanging offenses because they cannot be rehabilitated and/or the crime is so heinous it can never be forgiven.

Instead felony has devolved into things like "had a roach of weed in the wrong state."

capableweb2• 4 years ago

Depends on the approach to why you jail someone. For some people, it's about keeping them away from society. With that mindset, they probably shouldn't be let out. For others, it's about revenge, to pay back for the harm you've done. Those people are probably fine with others being released, but still won't interact with them afterwards. Then the last section of people, hope jail can be a treatment, to fix people to be better. For those people, the belief is that we can rehabilitate people so after jail, they can re-integrated.

I'm in the latter camp, but the prison system in the US and a lot of the population seem to be of the opinion of the first two "belief systems".

gyjot2• 4 years ago

I think most of the time it's up to the employer on who they're willing to give a second chance to, except where there are extra checks on hires mandated by law, like if they'll be working with vulnerable people.

So in practise I believe this would only amount to a partial shunning by society, as at least some employers will be okay with hiring pretty much anyone who can do the job, regardless of their crimes.

nonameiguess• 4 years ago

It raises an even bigger question to me, which is what are we supposed to do with these people at all then? I can perfectly well understand why no employer will want to take a chance on them, but if nobody employs them, then they're on the street with no choice but to commit crime for money or die as a beggar.

Individually rational decisions add up to failure for society as a whole.

I think exactly the same thing every time I hear about a kid being expelled from a school. Legally, they have to go to school somewhere. What good does it do to make them someone else's problem? It's like those idiot cities that round up all their homeless and bus them to other cities.

Hell, take the homeless. We see calls all the time to push them away, raze all the tent cities, put spikes on benches and arrest people for sleeping on sidewalks. Why? Unless we're going to kill all homeless people, they have to live somewhere, don't they? What are they supposed to do?

blue039• 4 years ago

So they can struggle, go back to their old ways, and end up back in the system for 15 more years. This isn't just the case for these more vile crimes its also the case for even minor felonies. Generally people let out on probation, for example, are more-or-less permanently "imprisoned" and on a very short leash. It is remarkably easy to end up back in prison and it's not even as complicated as failing a drug test or missing counseling.

The entire system from the bottom up is rigged against a former con. If we are to believe justice systems should be rehabilitative than when the con is released they should be made whole and all record expunged. Otherwise, we may as well kill them. They are dead to society anyway. Supposing you aren't a young offender that gets out while you still have some strength the jobs that will hire you (mostly the more dangerous labor jobs) won't have any use for you.

It's a shame. This recruiter is a perfect example of perpetuating the system by giving two extreme examples. I'm sure they won't hire anyone with a felony. Mostly because in their upper middle class upbringing they never had the threat of prison held over them. Must be nice.

Aromasin• 4 years ago

Certain crimes exempt you from UK the Rehabilitation of Offenders act, so would come up in a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check. Rape and pedophilia convictions would be in those exemptions as far as I know, although I am no legal expert. You can find details on what employers can do here: https://www.gov.uk/employers-checks-job-applicants

There's another Guardian on the topic that seems to suggest the employer may have the ability to fire without repercussion according to the Sexual Offenses Act: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2003/may/25/workandcareers...

hyperman1• 4 years ago

Problem is the law tends to use big words for small crimes. E.g. there was the story of a 17 year old boy sleeping with a 16 year old girl. The girl's dad didn't like it, the police got involved, and the boy is now on the register as both a pedophile and a rapist. I'd have no problem hiring him.

But how do you filter him out from the other people labeled rapist/pedophile? You believe him on his word?

giraffe_lady• 4 years ago

No because that almost never happens, and it's basically the same handful of cases that have been getting mentioned over and over for years every time this comes up on the internet.

Go actually check the registry. First off in many places it's the opposite eg there is no crime of rape it's "aggravated sexual battery" or something similar. Which is heavy if you know any legal jargon but easy to miss if you don't.

And second it is overwhelmingly full of serious violent sex crimes and crimes against minors under 13. Even if you're in there looking for a case like you describe they're hard to find.

The drug war is the cause of almost all exaggerated or unjust convictions, not sex crimes.

2ICofafireteam• 4 years ago

The main problem I see is it's more work because there's another aspect of an applicant that needs investigating; an extra step with those with records.

I actually had a convicted killer as a helper for a short time and had even worked for his victim's company in the past.

It was a non issue because we all knew the details of the incident and knew the only person he is a danger to was dead. We didn't need to spend time researching him and there was no nagging doubts about our safety.

walrus01• 4 years ago

If you want to see an industry with a huge percentage of people with felonies on their record, look at the industry-standard hiring workflow for tower climbers.

capableweb2• 4 years ago

Any risky jobs have a high amount of otherwise "niche" people not accepted everywhere, as they can't be as picky with who works with them, the talent pool isn't as big as "number cruncher" at Ernst & Old.

I have no problem hiring ex-offenders. But they’re being let down

Related Stories