Skip to main content

Must read Terms of Service & Privacy Policy and be at least 18

Must read Terms of Service & Privacy Policy and be at least 18

 
scarab03

Kansas City Kansas banned the Employers Asking Job Applicants if they have ever been convicted of a felony.

http://www.kmbc.com/news/kck-poised-to-join-other-cities-in-ban-the-box…


Last post
12 posts / 0 new

 
Chrysostom15

This isn't always a good thing.  The federal government offers a program to pay companies to hire exfelons.  You may find that, for some jobs, saying you are a felon may help you get the job.  Not to mention that it looks bad to have no recent job.  Mentioning your jobs in prison, your sudying there. etc. could be better than not and having a blank time on your resume.

Also an employer could still ask about prior work expereince, and/or a reference from a recent or current job. A resident who has been there a while, isn't going to have outside work expereince and inside expereince may well reveal the time in residence.  There are a bunch of other ways to get the information without being allowed to ask directly. 

 

Some residents can probably get passed some of the questions like that some of the time.  For example, if you move to an area because of a wife, husaband, boyfriend, or girlfriend, you can answer questions about why you are looking for a job there by saying you recently re-located to be with your significant other and are new to the area looking for a job.  Some might move out to live with an older parent and take a few days off before looking for jobs and say you spent a while caring for an elderly relative and moved there to be with the person and such.  These types of work around exist for some people some of the time.  Especially if you have a short time and you only have to explain a few months.  If you are a resident for 5 years and have no work durign that time that isn't related to the insitution, you are going to have a tough time.  Also, if you were found guilty of a crime that got news attention, a google search will find that.  An employeer not allowed to ask, can still find it out easily in that sitution. Plus there are other ways.

 

 

 

 
jabbar12

Latest Jobs

 
jona

To me this law is a good thing. An applicant with a history gets the chance to make a good impression at the interview, and then it's up to the employer to decide if they think this person has changed or not or if the crime was relevant for the job.
Employers are responsible for the safety of their employees and customers, and especially with in the US with its almost non-existent rehab programs I believe that employers should have the right to know about the applicant's past, at least about crimes of a certain nature that were committed quite recently.

Here in my country employers are only allowed to ask for convictions if they are crucial for a job in this field, for example if a cashier has ever been convicted because of theft in the job, of if someone who is supposed to work with children has ever been convicted because of abuse of a minor. BUT here we have quite intensive rehab programs and people get help to change, so the situation is different.

 
Amantha

They still have to pass the background screening, so all this is essentially doing is getting someone an interview. So assuming they are well liked in the interview, they can discriminate on the back end. How is this progress again?

They aren't discriminating...they didn't pass the background check. It's up to them to make the right impression in the interview to convince the interviewer that they are worth taking a chance on them despite having a criminal record. You aren't going to get a decent job right out of the gate, you have to earn that. There is another option..don't commit a crime that would prevent you from getting the job you want. This gets them in the door and that's better than before.

 
Metaxu

They still have to pass the background screening, so all this is essentially doing is getting someone an interview. So assuming they are well liked in the interview, they can discriminate on the back end. How is this progress again?

Yeah, I thought the whole ban the box campaign is just a bit of spin. What relevance does it have in this day and age of super-public records collated by all those for-profit enterprises promising you a full background check for $49.99? I understand employers use service providers that are one tier up from the $49.99 sleazier ones, but still... no prospective employee will ever be told that they've been turned down because of a background check. All that they'll be told, as a means of appeasement and to prevent future litigation, is that the company found a 'good match' in another candidate.

 
deckard

[QUOTE=scarab03;1173290][B]A list of places who hire those with a past: [/B]

Aamco
Ace Hardware
Albertson’s
Allied Van Lines
American Greetings
Anderson Windows
Apple Inc.
Applebee’s
Aramark
AT&T
Avis Rent a Car
Avon Products
Bahama Breeze
Baskin-Robbins
Bed, Bath & Beyond
Black & Decker
Blue Cross & Blue Shield Association
Braum’s Inc
Bridgestone
Budget Rent a Car
Buffalo Wild Wings
Campbell’s Soup
Canon
Carl’s Jr
Carrier Corporation
Caterpillar Inc.
CDW
Chick-fil-A
Chili’s
Chipotle
Chrysler
Cintas
Community Education Centers
ConAgra Foods
Dairy Queen
Dart Containers
Dart Containers
Deer Park Spring Water
Delta Faucet
Denny’s
Divizio Industries
Dole Food Company
Dollar Rent a Car
Dollar Tree
Dr. Pepper
Dunkin’ Donuts
Dunlop Tires
DuPont
Duracell
Eddie Vs Prime Seafood
Embassy Suites
Epson
ERMCO, Inc.
Family Dollar
Firestone Complete Auto Care
Food Services of America
Frito-Lay
Fruit of the Loom
Fujifilm
Genentech
General Electric
General Mills
Georgia-Pacific
Golden Corral
Goodwill
Grainger
Great Clips
Greyhound
Hanes
HH Gregg
Hilton Hotels
Home Depot
IBM
IHOP
Ikea
In-N-Out Burger
International Paper
Interstate Batteries
J.B. Hunt Transport
Jack in the Box
Jiffy Lube
Jimmy Johns
Jimmy Johns
Kelly Moore Paints
KFC
K-Mart
Kohl’s
Kraft Foods
Kroger
LongHorn Steakhouse
Lowe’s
LSG Sky Chefs
McDonald’s
Men’s Wearhouse
Metals USA
Miller Brewing Company
Motorola
NFL
Nordstrom
O’Charleys
Olive Garden
Pactiv
Pappadeaux
PepsiCo
PetSmart
Phillip Morris Inc.
Pilgrim’s
Pilot Flying J
Praxair
Preferred Freezer Services
Raddison
Red Lobster
Red Robin
Restaurant Depot
Reyes Beverage Group
Rubbermaid
Safeway
Salvation Army
Sara Lee
Seasons 52
Shawnee Steele
Sony
Subway
Sysco
Teleperformance
Tesla
The New York Times
Toys R Us
Trader Joes
Tyson Foods
U-Haul
US Foods
US Steal Corporation
Volunteers of America
Walgreens
Wendy’s
WinCo Foods
Wyndham Hotels
Xerox
Yard House[/QUOTE]

Where did you get this list from?

 
deckard

They still have to pass the background screening, so all this is essentially doing is getting someone an interview. So assuming they are well liked in the interview, they can discriminate on the back end. How is this progress again?

 
scarab03

[B]A list of places who hire those with a past: [/B]

Aamco
Ace Hardware
Albertson’s
Allied Van Lines
American Greetings
Anderson Windows
Apple Inc.
Applebee’s
Aramark
AT&T
Avis Rent a Car
Avon Products
Bahama Breeze
Baskin-Robbins
Bed, Bath & Beyond
Black & Decker
Blue Cross & Blue Shield Association
Braum’s Inc
Bridgestone
Budget Rent a Car
Buffalo Wild Wings
Campbell’s Soup
Canon
Carl’s Jr
Carrier Corporation
Caterpillar Inc.
CDW
Chick-fil-A
Chili’s
Chipotle
Chrysler
Cintas
Community Education Centers
ConAgra Foods
Dairy Queen
Dart Containers
Dart Containers
Deer Park Spring Water
Delta Faucet
Denny’s
Divizio Industries
Dole Food Company
Dollar Rent a Car
Dollar Tree
Dr. Pepper
Dunkin’ Donuts
Dunlop Tires
DuPont
Duracell
Eddie Vs Prime Seafood
Embassy Suites
Epson
ERMCO, Inc.
Family Dollar
Firestone Complete Auto Care
Food Services of America
Frito-Lay
Fruit of the Loom
Fujifilm
Genentech
General Electric
General Mills
Georgia-Pacific
Golden Corral
Goodwill
Grainger
Great Clips
Greyhound
Hanes
HH Gregg
Hilton Hotels
Home Depot
IBM
IHOP
Ikea
In-N-Out Burger
International Paper
Interstate Batteries
J.B. Hunt Transport
Jack in the Box
Jiffy Lube
Jimmy Johns
Jimmy Johns
Kelly Moore Paints
KFC
K-Mart
Kohl’s
Kraft Foods
Kroger
LongHorn Steakhouse
Lowe’s
LSG Sky Chefs
McDonald’s
Men’s Wearhouse
Metals USA
Miller Brewing Company
Motorola
NFL
Nordstrom
O’Charleys
Olive Garden
Pactiv
Pappadeaux
PepsiCo
PetSmart
Phillip Morris Inc.
Pilgrim’s
Pilot Flying J
Praxair
Preferred Freezer Services
Raddison
Red Lobster
Red Robin
Restaurant Depot
Reyes Beverage Group
Rubbermaid
Safeway
Salvation Army
Sara Lee
Seasons 52
Shawnee Steele
Sony
Subway
Sysco
Teleperformance
Tesla
The New York Times
Toys R Us
Trader Joes
Tyson Foods
U-Haul
US Foods
US Steal Corporation
Volunteers of America
Walgreens
Wendy’s
WinCo Foods
Wyndham Hotels
Xerox
Yard House

 
YMIHere

[QUOTE=scarab03;1158062]Today I was discussing this with others and once you scrutinize its core people start having different perspectives toward the subject. After a person made the comment (below) then I was flooded with mail that the question should remain on applications. However I remain firm, its a push for the good of rehabilitation and reform.

"With today's society and the crimes within this society, it is hard to have a blanket policy/law that covers everything and is fair to everyone. Taking the felony box off applications is good and bad. Good for the convicted drunk driver getting a job as a lifeguard at a public pool, not good for society if a convicted pedophile wants the same job. That also goes for another post of yours...life without parole. That is good and bad for not only the inmate but for society. Many many debatable points for both sides of this table."

As EM commented, "Now if only rehabilitation programming actually better prepared inmates for reintergration."
I believe there are so many solutions for this. Art being one of them used as a part of rehabilitation.

I work for an organization with college educators, psychologists, child therapists, etc...all have the 'paper' credentials backing them and that can pass any high security admissions. We proposed an art program that would NOT cost the prison a dime AND we would pay the prison so they could have their greedy profit. We provided two years of statistics in the areas of: security threat levels had lowered, the family ties became stronger which means they had more support on the outside, achieving personal goals as well as career goals, aggression levels lowered. We included additional information how 3 of our artists have gained employment and not used government benefits as a source of income or living vs those who had not participated in any of the art programs.

[B]We were denied.[/B][/QUOTE]

That is effed up.

Getting back to the quote....

I know each city is doing their own thing, but I was under the impression that all it did was take it off of initial job applications. Anyone who thinks this is a bad thing is an idiot. It's not to say that someone couldn't be discriminated against because of his felony, it just means that he gets to MEET the person who will do the discriminating. :D

Our city passed this as well and right now I'm working with an organization that is seeking to have it expanded to any vendors that do business with the city.

 
scarab03

Today I was discussing this with others and once you scrutinize its core people start having different perspectives toward the subject. After a person made the comment (below) then I was flooded with mail that the question should remain on applications. However I remain firm, its a push for the good of rehabilitation and reform.

"With today's society and the crimes within this society, it is hard to have a blanket policy/law that covers everything and is fair to everyone. Taking the felony box off applications is good and bad. Good for the convicted drunk driver getting a job as a lifeguard at a public pool, not good for society if a convicted pedophile wants the same job. That also goes for another post of yours...life without parole. That is good and bad for not only the inmate but for society. Many many debatable points for both sides of this table."

As EM commented, "Now if only rehabilitation programming actually better prepared inmates for reintergration."
I believe there are so many solutions for this. Art being one of them used as a part of rehabilitation.

I work for an organization with college educators, psychologists, child therapists, etc...all have the 'paper' credentials backing them and that can pass any high security admissions. We proposed an art program that would NOT cost the prison a dime AND we would pay the prison so they could have their greedy profit. We provided two years of statistics in the areas of: security threat levels had lowered, the family ties became stronger which means they had more support on the outside, achieving personal goals as well as career goals, aggression levels lowered. We included additional information how 3 of our artists have gained employment and not used government benefits as a source of income or living vs those who had not participated in any of the art programs.

We were denied.

 
Gipsy

Totally agree that this is a good thing.

 
Earthmother

I applaud this move! I feel that if someone has paid their debt to society by having completed their prison sentence, then thye should be given a second chance - a carte-blanche relaunch into society.

Now if only rehabilitation programming actually better prepared inmates for reintergration.