SF plan would offer tax break for hiring felons

SF plan would offer tax break for hiring felons

www.sfgate.com

San Francisco businesses that hire people with felony convictions would get a tax break, under legislation expected to be introduced today.

"Ex-felons are among the most challenged populations in getting work,"

The goal is to shave about $10,000 off a business' companywide payroll tax burden for every new convict it hires full time.

(visit the link for the full news article)

This makes perfect sense. You have thousands of people who have lost their jobs, are losing their homes and who are struggling to support their families and instead of offering a tax incentive to support their getting jobs, they toss money at companies who hire felons.

A decent proposal would have been to offer the tax break to hire someone with a good work history who has been unemployed, not some low-life who has committed a felony.

For a small business, a $10K tax break is a significant sum and it would definately help hard working people out of work, thus potentially keep entire families off of public assistance.

I thought San Francisco, like the rest of California was broke anyway?

www.sfgate.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I actually don't have a problem with this policy.

I worked in the legal system for many years, and do you realize how hard it is for someone with a criminal background these days to get anything more than the most menial of temporary jobs? Maybe someone made a mistake as a kid, or has a conviction from recreational drug use, but employers won't even give them the time to get an interview.

If someone has served their time as demanded by society in jail or prison, why is it a good thing we continue punishing and castigating those who legitimately try to get their lives in order and do something productive?

Lowlifes who become felons include:
Recreational drug users
People who had too much to drink one night
People who screw up too badly on their taxes
People who forget to register a weapon

And for their mistake, thanks to all our instant check systems, their lives are ruined and they don't have the opportunity for consideration for employment. In an ideal world, you wouldn't need incentivization, but in this world, maybe you do.

Frankly, if a tax break will give these people a chance to get jobs, I see it as a win-win. Because if you say they can't get jobs, why would you be surprised when they take up some illegal method to survive? Lots of studies have been done on just this subject if you want to look.

I also guarantee you the tax break for them having a job would cost a lot less and provide a lot more than social services to support them, whether they be positive or incarceration based.

I do think there are cases where a criminal record hinders the person far more than whatever the crime that was done far more than they deserve, and generally for far longer. Being unable to work isn't a just punishment for most crimes, but it is one on the side. I think we all would agree on that.

However, there are far too many people in need of jobs right now. I'm not sure if it's right to make it easier for felons when most of the people in need of help(and that that money could be helping), are unemployed from the economy and free of any record. I don't think now's the proper time for this.

~
Side thought now. Aren't stable jobs a big point in reintegrating into society? Isn't it statistically proven that the inability to get a job makes a felon more likely to return to crime? If this was intended as a rehab project, I'd see that differently than just an 'easier for them to get employed' project. Though I'm not learned enough in that to know if that'd be effective at reducing crime.

SF is just getting up to the times...


back in 1990, just having blown in from a cross country trip...
i diverted myself from trying for employment at Las Vegas (to wit: the Pyramid or the MGM zoo thing)

i looked toward Phoenix as the next logical job local...

by the next day i was working for Hernandez Construction... who hired a lot of marginal people (guys on probation or parole...) because it was a bonus for a 'minority' corporation to hire the marginal people.

Of the several projects the company had was providing skilled manpower for Allied Signal (now merged into Honeywell),,, at a number of jet engine plants around Phoenix/Chandler and other areas in Maricopa/Pima counties


i say bravo... even though the hiring practices were sorta shady... they provided a great service...
but at 30% below 'prevailing wage' rates--->
BUT thats another story

thats good news, to often are people who served time stereotyped as still being bad people.. i'm not even innocent of that myself...
once done serving the time i don't think you should even have a criminal record so it helps them reintegrate back into society as an equal with everyone... instead of being some kind of outcast that has a hard time finding jobs still.

I think this is one of throe things that looks good on paper and sounds good but in the real world it will end up doing more harm than good. Some people will let one man go so they can hire 2 in his place and still pay less. And some of those jail birds may just keep on doing what got them put in jail in the first place for and the people who hire them may be sorry that did. It may be a nice idea but I think it is not going to work as planed.

reply to post by fixer1967

which is a good reason to not even have public criminal records once a person is finished serving time.
it creates more classes of people, which divide a countries unity.

I like this idea but a better one is to change the definition of a felony. Few people realize how minor a crime can be to qualify as a felony. The present definition of a felony is " any crime for which the maximum penalty is a year or more in prison" That's a very low bar and should be raised to say 10 years. Martha Stewart is a felon as is Pete Rose. You really think they are monsters.?

Now do companies who employ people have an insurance company who desires that the said company does not hire felons or higher premiums or worse??? I actually worked for a company who told me they could not hire felons because their insurance would not permit. I thought most felons got jobs like dishwashing, cleaning toilets etc where RISKS and TEMPTATIONS were low or non existent. Now if your company insurance does not have a prob hiring felons....pay them the same as you do an illegal alien? What benefit for the company besides the tax break hiring felons? I would rather see those tax dollars spent educating the young on why NOT to become a felon. Proactive yeah.

So now unemployed workers have to compete with felons that can get the job just for being a criminal. Why not just give a general tax break for hiring a new employee? I think they are finding out that placing every Tom, Dick and Harry in prison is costing to much to sustain, that's the real underlining issue here. That's pretty bad in a economy that is failing right now. Let's take a look at your resume... It's says here back in 2006 you was arrested for robbing a bank. I'm sure we can work something out

Originally posted by sean
Let's take a look at your resume... It's says here back in 2006 you was arrested for robbing a bank. I'm sure we can work something out

Bank robbery?????. Most felons just broke some silly drug law. As i said earlier, we need to redefine what a felony is.

How about tax breaks for hiring anybody? I might agree with this 10 or so years ago, but now? This seems to just give business a cheap labor in the sense of tax breaks. So now ex-criminals are going to have a easier time getting a job now then the average Joe.

Again, I'm not against this I think everyone deserves a second chance and most felonies are just bogus drug charges. However given the current situation I think this is the last thing we should be worrying about.

I don't see the problem here. You have a problem already with people being locked up and not being able to get jobs, and if an ex con cannot work he or she will go right back to what caused them to get locked up in the first place.

The ignorance on this forum is astounding. What would you prefer, an ex con that is put back to work in society trying to earn his own way, or someone who is back out on the streets selling drugs or is using a slim jim to open your car door?

Nothing wrong with this, and I support this all the way.

PEOPLE complain about felons being at the work place, but then complain about how they don't have a job when they get out. That's because close-minded people like you all refuse to hire them.

Originally posted by illuminatislave
The ignorance on this forum is astounding. What would you prefer, an ex con that is put back to work in society trying to earn his own way, or someone who is back out on the streets selling drugs or is using a slim jim to open your car door?

People are just natural bigots.They're not allowed to persecute on basis of race or religion anymore, so they use criminal record instead.

Perhaps the evil Walmart is behind this....the prison/store. Shoppers are patted down and x-rayed before entering. The "employees" of course work for pennies a day, and cannot leave until "time served" but the big benefit for those who have peoples on the inside is....you can shop and visit your daughter doing her stretch for dealing while she is getting OJT while in jail and will have something to put on her resume. But your son cannot get a guard job there because of nepotism.

...make jobs for Americans.