Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bosses could be forced to hire more workers with criminal records under new equality guidelines
Daily Mail UK ^ | February 24, 2013 | Staff

Posted on 02/24/2013 6:40:36 AM PST by COUNTrecount

Employers in the U.S. may soon have to hire more workers with criminal backgrounds under new equality guidelines issued by the federal government.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s guidelines warn companies against rejecting minority applicants who have committed a felony or other offense, recommending that those companies eliminate policies which ‘exclude people from employment based on a criminal record.’

According to the EEOC, civil rights laws already prohibit employers from selectively hiring job applicants who are of different ethnic backgrounds but have matching criminal histories.

The latest update from the EEOC was issued out of concern that employers might disproportionally decline applicants from minorities since a greater number of African Americans and Hispanics are getting arrested for crimes, according to the guideline report.

‘There is no Federal law that clearly prohibits an employer from asking about arrest and conviction records,’ the EEOC’s website states.

However, using such records as an absolute measure to prevent an individual from being hired could limit the employment opportunities of some protected groups and thus cannot be used in this way.’

The agency's commissioners approved the report in a 4-1 vote in April 2012.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: backgroundchecks; bmw; criminalrecord; dollargeneral; eeoc; racism

Warning: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's guidelines warn companies against rejecting minority applicants who have committed a felony or other offense.

1 posted on 02/24/2013 6:40:39 AM PST by COUNTrecount
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
a greater number of African Americans and Hispanics are getting arrested for crimes

Could it be that they commit a greater number of crimes in proportion to their percentage of the general population? Naahh.

2 posted on 02/24/2013 6:46:10 AM PST by Disambiguator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
Also known as "EEOC Hire a Democrat program."
3 posted on 02/24/2013 6:49:32 AM PST by Perseverando (Gun control? It's really not about gun control is it? It's really about PEOPLE CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

For those who have been convicted of a crime...what is the recidivism rate ?

Under the enterprise corruption laws in place, if I were to hire a drug dealer, and they began selling drugs at my establishment without my knowledge, I could open my business to seizure under those statutes.

Is the stigma of being convicted of a crime one the reasons not to commit a crime ?


4 posted on 02/24/2013 6:51:59 AM PST by Ouderkirk (Obama has turned America into an aristocracy of the unaccomplished.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Wow, this isn’t even satire.


5 posted on 02/24/2013 6:53:00 AM PST by TwelveOfTwenty (Ho, ho, hey, hey, I'm BUYcotting Chick-Fil-A)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Depending on the job I would have no problem hiring non violent offenders but it needs to be left up to the employer.

When I was a paint room foreman my crew was almost entirely made up of parolees working out of a halfway house and they were the best crew in the shop.


6 posted on 02/24/2013 6:54:24 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Liberalism is a mental disorder. That’s the only explanation.


7 posted on 02/24/2013 6:56:40 AM PST by I want the USA back (Liberalism is an inability of the thinking apparatus to function properly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FReepers

FReepers! Prepare for green!



Click the Pic


Support Free Republic

8 posted on 02/24/2013 6:59:18 AM PST by deoetdoctrinae (Gun free zones are playgrounds for felons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Employers can refuse a person if they smoke, but they can’t refuse a person with a criminal record?

How equal is that?


9 posted on 02/24/2013 6:59:30 AM PST by dforest (I have now entered the Twilight Zone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dforest
How insensitive of you! Smoking is a choice. Criminals are forced into committing crimes by our unjust society. </sarcasm>
10 posted on 02/24/2013 7:05:13 AM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dforest
Employers can refuse a person if they smoke, but they can’t refuse a person with a criminal record?

How equal is that?

Smoke within 15 feet of a building entrance, get a criminal record for it, get turned down for a job, sue the bas*****'s! The new American Dream

11 posted on 02/24/2013 7:05:29 AM PST by Bernard (John Kerry as SOS will be the almost-perfect symbol of the Obama administration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

As a home owner and business owner I would have liked to be told that the painting crew was made up of parolees.

I would choose to not have them on my premises, looking at my personal/business possessions, seeing what kind of security I had.

We do not hire anyone without doing a complete background check, including fingerprinting.


12 posted on 02/24/2013 7:07:23 AM PST by COUNTrecount (Clear eyes. Full hearts. Can't fail .But We Did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TwelveOfTwenty

IIRC, DoJ also wanted mentally ill people to be hired as lawyers or something, but I may be mis-remembering it.


13 posted on 02/24/2013 7:11:01 AM PST by PghBaldy (12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

As should be your choice but it would have also been your loss.


14 posted on 02/24/2013 7:13:20 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Why, only parolees can do a good job painting?

Ridiculous statement.


15 posted on 02/24/2013 7:30:46 AM PST by COUNTrecount (Clear eyes. Full hearts. Can't fail .But We Did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Recidivists sprung through politically correct treatment from the justice system commit the majority of the gun crimes in our country. But that’s not the script. The script is to go after white, law-abiding sportsmen.


16 posted on 02/24/2013 7:36:44 AM PST by BillyBonebrake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Its really sad when FReepers fall to using childish little democrat style strawmen.

Here’s my strawman for you. You apparently don’t want it to be anyone’s choice to hire who they wish. Bet you’re pleased with the fact that a guy who wrote a bad check can’t load luggage on an airliner but an illegal alien with no history can.

It should be employer choice but that’s apparently not enough for you. Now go wave your genitalia at someone else because its not nearly as impressive as you think it is.


17 posted on 02/24/2013 7:46:52 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
" could limit the employment opportunities of some protected groups and thus cannot be used in this way.’ "

and there it is... felons are now a Protected Group...

18 posted on 02/24/2013 7:54:32 AM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

As an employer I am liable for the acts of my employees and I am negligent if I do not do a background check.After the results I decide if I will hire the candidate

Your attitude is confusing, your comments indicate that you have no idea that you know what you are talking about.

If one of your parolees came back to rob your customer YOU would be held responsible.

Remember Elizabeth Smart and who kidnapped her?

Do you have a genitalia issue and how is that comment pertinent to this discussion?

An Employer’s Liability for Employee’s Acts

Negligent Hiring or Retention
Negligent hiring or retention liability, unlike job related misconduct, arises from acts performed by an employee outside the scope of his or her employment. The most common example of this is to hold an employer liable for the criminal conduct of an employee, which is obviously outside the scope of employment. The basis for liability is that the employer acted carelessly in hiring a criminal for a job that the employer should have expected would expose others to harm. Here are a few examples:

¦Example 1: An ice cream sales company hires a man convicted of sexually assaulting a minor to drive its ice cream truck and sell ice cream to children. The business is likely liable because it was negligent in hiring a man known to have assaulted minors, and then giving him access to those minors as customers.
¦Example 2: An elder care facility hires a woman convicted of fraud and identity theft against elderly people to look after and care for the facilities patients. The business is likely liable because it was negligent in hiring a woman who was already convicted of scamming the elderly and giving her access to potential victims.
¦Example 3: A cable company hires a man without a background check and directs him to go to customer’s houses and install cable equipment. It turns out he’s been convicted twice of rape, and while at a customer’s house to install equipment, he rapes the occupant. The business is likely liable because it was negligent in hiring someone who has access to private houses without a background check, as well as being liable for hiring someone with a history of rape to meet privately with customers in their home.
The key to most negligent hiring and retention cases is providing employees with access to potential victims without doing the necessary examination of the employees’. Accordingly, to avoid liability for negligent hiring, an employer should always run a background check on an employee, and be especially careful if the employee has contact with the public. If you as an employer become aware of something after the fact, then handle the matter immediately to avoid negligent retention liability.


19 posted on 02/24/2013 8:10:35 AM PST by COUNTrecount (Clear eyes. Full hearts. Can't fail .But We Did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Will the fedgov follow its own rules?

How will the bureaucrats enjoy working alongside pedophiles, rapists, and murderers?

I used to hire ex cons, until I realized the danger that they posed to my other employees.

Employers have a duty to prevent workplace violence. How can this not be a consideration?


20 posted on 02/24/2013 8:13:42 AM PST by darth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

If you aren’t man enough to go back and read my original comment, you may as well crawl right back into God’s front pocket and feel smug about yourself.

You may go now.


21 posted on 02/24/2013 8:14:35 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Depending on the job I would have no problem hiring non violent offenders but it needs to be left up to the employer.

When I was a paint room foreman my crew was almost entirely made up of parolees working out of a halfway house and they were the best crew in the shop.

So your employer hired parolees without understanding his liability and neither did you? Got it.

22 posted on 02/24/2013 8:26:48 AM PST by COUNTrecount (Clear eyes. Full hearts. Can't fail .But We Did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Another reason to send jobs overseas.


23 posted on 02/24/2013 8:32:40 AM PST by monocle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Here’s a clue, go back and read my original comment if you can screw up the courage to do it.

You never know when the guy who wrote a bad check is going to go on a killing spree. LOL


24 posted on 02/24/2013 8:45:20 AM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: darth

Ex cons also pose a danger to your customers and if a crime is committed by them you are responsible.

We do a fingerprint check before we hire anyone.


25 posted on 02/24/2013 9:03:40 AM PST by COUNTrecount (Clear eyes. Full hearts. Can't fail .But We Did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I read your original comment.

Did you?


26 posted on 02/24/2013 9:12:22 AM PST by COUNTrecount (Clear eyes. Full hearts. Can't fail .But We Did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount
Let's see if I can read a little farther between the lines here.

The state wants to force employers to hire convicted criminals, because they need them hired.

For why?

The state plans on a huge increase in convicted criminals in the population and wants them generating tax revenue, rather than sucking it.

Convicted criminals allowed out in society on a state leash are much easier to control than sovereign citizens.

The state has no power over an honest man, (Reference Ayn Rand)

With monetary transfer "crimes", process "crimes", "hate crimes" and gun possession "crimes" et cetera, the state intends to eliminate the "honest man" for the purpose of citizen control.

We can't have him not working and not producing tax revenue, now, can we? Or voting for other than Rats?

Just yank the leash.

27 posted on 02/24/2013 11:04:40 AM PST by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it, and the Constitution and law mean what WE say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: COUNTrecount

Recruiter: Have you ever been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor? That’s robbery, rape, car theft, that sort of thing.
John Winger: Convicted? No.
Russell Ziskey: Never convicted.


28 posted on 02/24/2013 11:08:37 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: darth
Will the fedgov follow its own rules?

The Federal government is required by Constitutional Law to do so, and has never obeyed that law since 1789.

29 posted on 02/24/2013 11:10:03 AM PST by Navy Patriot (Join the Democrats, it's not Fascism when WE do it, and the Constitution and law mean what WE say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

My friend is a manager in a assay lab. Because of tax breaks they hire quite a lot of parolees. The jobs do not require dealing with customers and such. Some of them are good workers, but there is always risks. Bad stuff does go down occasionally.


30 posted on 02/24/2013 1:39:43 PM PST by dsrtsage (One half of all people have below average IQ. In the US the number is 54%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson