zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. inetkn+(OP)[view] [source] 2017-08-02 16:32:09
> So we created a "save haven" where all parties knew the score

Does that mean that employers know what offenses were committed, and how long ago? Or does it just mean that they know that the candidate has been convicted of something, but figuring out whether that's a liability to the business or not needs to be discussed?

replies(2): >>RBBron+Y >>RBBron+Zt1
2. RBBron+Y[view] [source] 2017-08-02 16:37:15
>>inetkn+(OP)
Aside from any legal/HR consideration, we feel that everyone deserves a second chance, so we don't discriminate based upon the nature of the crime (but believe me, this is not an easy issue to reconcile). Ultimately, it'll be between the applicant and employer to resolve this. As it relates to liability to the business, there's a federal bonding program that has existed for decades, indemnifying employers from making at-risk hires. Interestingly, over this period of time, only just a few claims have every been made. The facts are that folks with jobs almost never recidivate. In fact, studies are now showing that these folks, for certain jobs, actually may be better employees. Hiring them is very good business.
replies(1): >>chriss+W3
◧◩
3. chriss+W3[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-08-02 16:53:04
>>RBBron+Y
My father owns a retail business that has four stores and employs a bunch of hourly workers. After growing up around the business and working there in my teens and twenties, I feel pretty confident that the risk of a second-chance felon is probably no more than the risk of any average off-the-street hourly worker. Bad apples show up all of the time. They steal a little money or some inventory, get fired, and life goes on. The risk is far greater for an ex-con: why would they risk going back to prison and losing a good job that gave them a second chance over a little money in the register or some inventory?
replies(1): >>RBBron+H4
◧◩◪
4. RBBron+H4[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-08-02 16:56:58
>>chriss+W3
Your father's experience is no exception, and you're right. Generally speaking, given the opportunity, these folks stay out of trouble.
5. RBBron+Zt1[view] [source] 2017-08-03 07:45:18
>>inetkn+(OP)
No, we don't inquire as to the nature of their crime(s). Aside from it opening a wasp nest's of legal issues, I personally believe that everyone deserves a second chance. (and certainly don't believe that I should stand in judgement of anyone). Ultimately, like an job board or HR resource, there's stuff an employer and prospective employee will have to hash out. My mission was/is to create an efficient marketplace that allows employers (especially large ones) to consider hiring this population at scale. Many have suggested some kind of vetting process, which I know would help the top 10% appliers, but I think they'd probably find success anyway. I'm not sure that it's fair to require someone who's already done their time to have to pass another test, just to get a job to feed his/her family. No easy answers here.
replies(1): >>inetkn+lT1
◧◩
6. inetkn+lT1[view] [source] [discussion] 2017-08-03 13:23:36
>>RBBron+Zt1
If you find that someone does not have any criminal history and is using your boards to apply for jobs, what action might your company take?
[go to top]