New York City Council Passes 'Ban The Box' Bill Restricting Use Of Criminal Records In Hiring

Bout time! They must be realizing how bad it's getting for people with increasing recidivism rates.

Source

NEW YORK -- Carl Stubbs, 63, stood outside New York City Council chambers Wednesday in anticipation of the council’s vote on the Fair Chance Act -- a bill that would delay when many of the city’s private sector employers can ask job applicants about their criminal history.

Later on it goes on to say that being black and having a felony will not get you hired. That's bs having a felony will put you in a position where you can only get hired if you know someone.

a reply to: onequestion

This is a long time coming. The reason for jail was to put you away for a time, serve your time, then you are in the clear. There aren't supposed to be lingering repercussions from your incarceration hanging over your head once you are out of jail.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's cometely counter productive to stop someone from being able to make money.

It's totally asinine.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Right because everyone who goes to prison learns their lesson and comes out a better person.
Never mind the personal history and behaviour traits that put them there in the first place.
Now I'm not talking about the tens of thousands that get locked up on stupid drug charges but the murderers, rapists, violent offenders. And I'd really rather not have a known theif handling cash in a retail environment either.

a reply to: AutumnWitch657

Then your issue is in reforming the system so you can trust that people come out better versions of themselves and not with the 17 million people who have felonies and the 65 million people with criminal records.

Trust me you don't want to live in a world where 1 in 5 people can't participate in the economy.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Right because everyone who goes to prison learns their lesson and comes out a better person.
Never mind the personal history and behaviour traits that put them there in the first place.
Now I'm not talking about the tens of thousands that get locked up on stupid drug charges but the murderers, rapists, violent offenders. And I'd really rather not have a known theif handling cash in a retail environment either.

Well when someone repeat offends, they go back to jail and have to serve a new debt to society. Though you do bring up a good point. Jails should be rehabilitation centers, not just an adult time-out building.

What really needs to come to an end is the practice recently of running a credit check on a person looking for a job. That doesn't really tell an employer anything as there can be many reasons other than just not paying a bill for someone to not have good credit.
I had a good candidate for a position I was responsible for filling. Schooled, settled, experienced. But because she had steep medical bills she was way behind and her credit was in the toilet. I was not allowed to hire her based on company policy regarding credit scores.
The dimwit I was forced to hire called in with the lamest excuses, came in late, went home early. On a day I really needed her for a big sale event she showed up in a Halloween costume and said she could only stay an hour as she had a party to go to. I fired her on the spot and still had to file a length report about why. .

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Some people just cannot be rehabilitated.

a reply to: AutumnWitch657

This, too, is a problem with hiring people. Credit checks certainly shouldn't be a requirement to hire someone.

a reply to: AutumnWitch657

Yes so now everyone should suffer.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

And just what do you tell the person who becomes the victim of a repeat offender? Oh sorry, he paid his debt to society, we didn't think he would rob you the first time you turned your back. Or we didn't think he'd beat the crap out of the guy he didn't like on the loading dock. Or sorry that lady from accounting reminded him of his mother who abused him and that's why he murdered her. No you want to avoid potential problems and big issues like these.
Set them up with an internet business. No co workers.

a reply to: AutumnWitch657
What do you tell the millions of people who just want to live life again?

a reply to: onequestion

I'm talking about hiring without knowing the potential for severe problems.

a reply to: AutumnWitch657

So because someone MAY repeat offend, that means we should punish every person who EVER breaks a law and gets caught? How about letting the perp establish a pattern of repeat offenses and repeat jailings before writing them off like that?

Naturally, that may result in more people being victimized, but if you also try to seriously rehabilitate criminals while in jail, I'd bet that eventually repeat offenders would drop.

But all that is negligible yes the guy may be a repeat offender, but why should that stop someone from hiring them? If he's a repeat offender, he's going to repeat offend regardless.

I can see both sides of the coin here.

For example, my ex is a BS artist and can talk nearly anybody into anything. It's what she does. If an employer were unable to look at her criminal history, they'd never know she's been charged, and convicted, for taking money from employers in one form or another. She can spin a tale that'll knock your socks off. Without the ability to look into her background, potential employers have no idea who they're hiring beyond what that person says in an interview.

That being said, if a person did a bit for misdemeanor larceny 20 years ago and hasn't gotten so much as a parking ticket since, why not hire them? It shouldn't be held against them.

Habituals, violent offenders, and those who've stolen from previous employers shouldn't be completely immune to this I don't think.

Guess what? Many of them are still going to run a background check and the more savvy employers will know what to say to you when the do not hire you to prevent a discrimination suit.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yep.

"Gee wouldn't you know it, we found another applicant who was better qualified. Sorry about that."

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus


Guess what? Many of them are still going to run a background check and the more savvy employers will know what to say to you when the do not hire you to prevent a discrimination suit.

Good point. This is how companies get away with age discrimination still.

Good.

Now really impress me and allow ex-cons to vote and own firearms.

originally posted by: beezzer
Good.

...own firearms.

In New York!? You would be lucky if you could make a finger gun and point it at someone.