It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ban The Box

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2020 @ 03:40 AM
link   
Hi ATS, I'm writing with a topic that I think can become partisanship in agreement in the hiring process.

I am a supporter of the 'ban the box' ideal of removing the question of criminal background on a job application.

Personally, I feel the background box is inappropriate, because when you fill out an application you are nothing more than a piece of paper or an internet search. There are many applications that just get passed over due to that box being checked. I have been one of those guys before, hiring was all on me. I did the most hypocritical thing ever in those times and pass on those applications, that was my job, I didn't make the decision to pass on the box, my boss told me to. I was 19 and in a salaried position that paid me very well due to my work ethic and management abilities. $40,000 a year, in the year 2000, HELL YES, I'm a 19 year old making 40k with a fast food joint.

The thing is, I was recruited from another fast food joint (Arby's) that I was a shift manager at. Apparently I impressed the district manager in charge of the southwest region of subway so much through the drive through that he wanted me to work for him, so I did. I got fast tracked in the hiring process, and got sent into the assistant manager program at 18 years old. Rick (the regional manager/franchise owner) loved me and my work ethic, my ability to resolve customer issues (there really wasn't many), and that I was really fast and competent with every position in the store (crew member level). He wanted me as a manager of one of his stores, and constantly told me he will get me my own store soon.

He kept his word, and built a brand new subway for me to run. Bumped me up to general manager of the new store, I went from 28k/yr to 40k/yr literally overnight. I had just turned 19 when I got that promotion and added responsibility. I turned his new store into the top selling store of his 8 store franchise, now granted looking back, the new store grand opening probably played into the hype more than my local marketing efforts did, maybe. I ran that store for a little over 2 years, and was his top general manager of all stores in numbers in general.

He eventually trusted me enough to be the senior manager(acting area manager while other guy went to southern AZ to manage his 3 Tucson stores, I ran the 5 Phoenix stores as if I was him, so I gained area/regional manager training. I learned from this man an incredible amount of knowledge of management, accounting, hr, payroll, inventory, ordering, etc... I learned more than a college could have ever taught me.

When I finally moved on to bigger and better things after 5 years of faithful work, I let him know that I'm actually a convicted felon, and had I not I been fast tracked for hire by him personally I probably wouldn't have passed background check, that I was actually on probation for about two and a half years from the start of my employment. He was stunned, he said to me "you don't look like a felon, you're lying", I actually remember that convo almost word for word, I told him I actually am a convicted felon and that I stole something from my neighbor when I was 16.

I've felt that box my whole life, for something I did when I was a kid.

I've owned and sold my own business to fund my retirement starting at 55 (only 16 years to go!)
I have a CDL class A, double/triple/hazmat.
I am EPA universal certified.
I am OSHA 30 certified for training.
I am a Senior Refrigeration tech.

All of that means nothing when you check that box....

Ask about criminal background in person, not on paper, you never know who you will meet.




posted on May, 31 2020 @ 04:19 AM
link   
Once you have repaid your debt the Slate must be clean or forgiveness is not altruistic.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 04:31 AM
link   
a reply to: one4all

So someone gets caught sexually abusing a young child gets a ridiculously short prison sentence then comes out and applies for a job working with children.
Are you saying his previous conviction should not be flagged up?



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 04:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: one4all

So someone gets caught sexually abusing a young child gets a ridiculously short prison sentence then comes out and applies for a job working with children.
Are you saying his previous conviction should not be flagged up?


I think I said


Ask about criminal background in person, not on paper

I'm ok with a background check AFTER the interview.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 04:41 AM
link   
Not the kind of box I thought you were talking about. Was going to say, "Damn, who hates poon THAT much?"

No, do not "ban the job application box". Re-evaluate what crimes should be make or break deals, yes. Kiddie diddler wants a job? Kiddie diddler can pound sand. Convicted embezzler wants to be a cashier or bank teller? F# no, I don't think so. Thief wants to work theft prevention? Are you KIDDING me? Can we say inside jobs?

Kiddie diddler wants to be a prison janitor? Sure, let 'em knock themselves out. Embezzler wants to join a road crew and fill in pot holes? Go for it. Thief wants to maintain your area park? Ok, prune & mow away.

The box has a purpose, but it needs to be refined to keep offenders away from their original offense sources & anything similar that might be at risk for a repeat violation.

Edit: And yes, I understand your teenage background here, but it doesn't count if it was a one-off. Kids are stupid, and when it comes to breaking laws, most of the time, it only takes one run-in to fix that problem permanently. The issue, and what most people are going to default to thinking about, are repeat offenders, or gross offenders. I.e people who keep stealing over and over/steal massive amounts, and so forth. Not one-timers like you.
edit on 5/31/2020 by Nyiah because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 04:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Personally I think that anyone convicted of a crime such as paedophilia should be banned for life from ever applying for any job involving young children.
They forego their rights the minute they commit the crime and their names should be flagged up immediately in the application process.

Why waste everyone's time allowing it get to the interview stage?

One nonce allowed to slip through the net is one too many.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 04:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Nyiah

All of that can be found out after an interview, just said I'm for background checks AFTER the interview.

The box keeps you from even getting the time of day from any kind of good job.

All I'm saying is take it off the application, not take it away from the final determination.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 04:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: Nyiah

All of that can be found out after an interview, just said I'm for background checks AFTER the interview.

The box keeps you from even getting the time of day from any kind of good job.

All I'm saying is take it off the application, not take it away from the final determination.


No, I don't agree with that. I hate to go there, but time really is money for those HR people. You were high enough up to understand that wasted time costs you a lot. The point is to weed out the people that would be a wasted effort to interview. They can determine that by looking at the crime(s) listed. Like I said, re-evaluate what would be a make or break for the job in question, and keep or toss accordingly.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 04:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn



Personally I think that anyone convicted of a crime such as paedophilia should be banned for life from ever applying for any job involving young children.

An interview doesn't put a pedo in the same room as kids. You ask the criminal background during the interview, then do a background check after.

Why the insane hyperbole? I'm not in any way saying we should nullify background checks, I'm suggesting a method that would promote an opportunity for an interview.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 05:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

Its not hyperbole....certainly not from the victims perspective.

Just saying that people who commit certain crimes shouldn't be allowed to do certain jobs, paedophiles and working with children is the most obvious one.

So why waste everyone's time with conducting an interview?

And what you describe personally would be considered a juvenile crime, and a minor one, here in the UK and there would be no legal requirement to disclose it depending on the job applied for.

In the UK employers can ask for a thing called DBS check.
There are three types of checks giving varying amounts of details of current and spent convictions - basic, standard and enhanced.
Some employers ask for them, some don't and for the vast majority of jobs employers can not ask about spent convictions.

For the more sensitive jobs full disclosure is required and some convictions prevent people for applying for certain jobs.

en.wikipedia.org...

ETA.

Just to add; Paedophiles don't deserve an interview or a second chance, do you disagree with that for some reason?
edit on 31/5/20 by Freeborn because: Add ETA



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 05:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: one4all
Once you have repaid your debt the Slate must be clean or forgiveness is not altruistic.


I use to think that.

But I've since changed my mind.

Like a thug breaking in to a womans home trying to rob it, and shoving a gun in her stomach.( a guy everyone's currently rioting over).

Debts like those aren't societies. They're the victims.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: one4all
Once you have repaid your debt the Slate must be clean or forgiveness is not altruistic.

So will you let a convicted child rapist babysit for you after they did their time?



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04


Of all the criminals in jail it is my opinion the majority of crimes against children should never be released EVER.

Obviously with anything there are some outliers but those can be dealt with on a case by case basis. There are also some violent repeat criminals that should never seen the light of day. Unfortunately the for profit prisons have tainted the system and it has become big business and lost its way. There are way to many people in prisons and the lifestyle once you get to prison creates criminals or makes them even more dangerous.

Does everyone deserve a second chance? Bottom line is no because some people are just too dangerous and the chances of repeating are too high so the risk reward is not worth it from a society point of view



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Charliebrowndog

People with an unacceptably low chance of rehabilitation should be sentenced to death. It's the only way to create a system that can achieve rehabilitation. Otherwise it will continue to be as you say, they will be forced to become even harder in order to survive an environment populated by animals.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: one4all
Once you have repaid your debt the Slate must be clean or forgiveness is not altruistic.

So will you let a convicted child rapist babysit for you after they did their time?


I said clean not erased.

Employers have no right to that data....People have a right to do due diligence.The record stays.Acess becomes narrowed.

Just like Credit Companies have no right to their data....but lenders have the right to do due diligence.The record stays. Acess becomes narrowed.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 10:40 AM
link   
That's a tough one, on the one hand someone who makes a mistake and legit wants to turn their life around deserves to be able to shake their past.

But how do you separate the truly reformed from the monsters that get out as well.



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Irishhaf
That's a tough one, on the one hand someone who makes a mistake and legit wants to turn their life around deserves to be able to shake their past.

But how do you separate the truly reformed from the monsters that get out as well.


Its really easy to solve.

You stop making people criminals over Civil issues around money....thieves are not committing crimes against people....separate money /property crimes from Crimes Against Humanity...simple....People who steal can be reformed...People who commit crimes against People have no conscience or a lack of filters or controls and cannot be reformed.Crimes against humans gives you a lifetime tag.....anything else and you can be forgiven....even stealing 100 million dollars is forgivable but harming a child is not...….simple...stop doing the bidding of the Money Mongers stop protecting their money and start protecting The People.
edit on 31-5-2020 by one4all because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Good OP;

I wonder how you feel about spelling mistakes on job applications and resumes?



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: DanDanDat
Good OP;

I wonder how you feel about spelling mistakes on job applications and resumes?

Whoo boy, I've seen some doozies, but I'm not a grammar nazi, so unless it was just so illegible that I couldn't read it I would consider them.

The best one I ever had at subway, subway puts a basic math test on there for cash register such as "the total is $11.19, the customer pays with a $20, how much change do you give them."

The guy actually wrote as an answer, "I'm applying for a job, not college"



posted on May, 31 2020 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

a reply to: Nyiah

Ok, I get it, there are serious felonies to worry about that should automatically disqualify any applicant.

So, maybe we work together on a compromise, instead of banning the box, refine it. There are 6 classes of felony charges, with 6 being the lowest. That's what mine is. So maybe instead of asking "have you ever been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor" we change it to be more specific to pertain to the seriousness and nature of the crime.

You keep mentioning the sex offender thing, and yes ALL cases of molestation, rape, or assault should be deemed ineligible for history protection. Though, did you know that urinating in public can and will land you a class 6 sex offender felony? You know, the road trip with the family and one of the kids didn't go before so you have to stop on the side of the highway in the middle of nowhere for them to pee. That's actually a class 6 felony, and a sexual offense. Would you be ok with your child having a sexual offense on their record for having to pee in the middle of nowhere? Because that literally can happen.

I'm not advocating in any way, shape, or form that sick and evil individuals get their shot, but there are many people out there with simple felonies that have to check that box, and because they do they get passed over.

Let's take marijuana for an easy example. In the 90's in several states it was a felony to possess ANY amount of marijuana. Now it's legal in half the country, should the person with a 20 year old conviction for possession of something that's now legal face scrutiny over it? Well they do, because they have to check that box.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join