6 ms·

Theft, fraud and violence are applicable for all jobs surely.

LeifCarrotson 6y ago
Surely not, if by "applicable" you mean to suggest that employers would never want to hire such a person for any job. Should a person convicted of theft, who's served their time, paid the fine, made the victims whole, and learned not to steal, be discarded from consideration as a useful member of society? In case it's not clear, I think they should have the same rights as any other human being. No one seriously advocates the death penalty or life imprisonment for petty crimes. But depending on the ability of a society to forget (which the information age is rapidly making very difficult) and the ability of a society to forgive (which the climate of fear is also making difficult), a conviction in your record can ruin a life.
- deathgrips 6y ago
  >and learned not to steal That's the issue at hand. Serving a prison sentence doesn't mean that you have learned not to steal. It's difficult for the company to verify that you have "learned your lesson".
  - dj_mc_merlin 6y ago
    What will satisfy you then? Should people who come out from prison for stealing sit around jobless since nobody trusts them? That's bound to get them back into prison.
    - waterhouse 6y ago
      How about: an insurance policy such that, if the employee does end up stealing, then the employer is made whole. The former-thief employee could pay for such a policy, and then it would seem the employer would be indifferent between the former thief and the average applicant. The policy could be paid for out of the thief's salary; he would effectively be accepting a lower wage. If the job is minimum wage, of course, then it's not possible to lower the wage further. Also, discovering the theft and proving it was that employee might be difficult.
    - Aeolun 6y ago
      It’s interesting that the very people that say ‘they haven’t learned their lesson’ perpetuate that exact thing. There was an article a little while back about a company tracking the employees behavior on the computer, and a lot of people mentioned that ‘if you are not trusted regardless, what incentive do you have to be trustworthy’. This is the exact same thing.
    - crowf 6y ago
      I would be satisfied if there was a proper criminal justice system. Unfortunately, in the US (and most of the world) that is not the case, and former prisoners are more likely to commit crime than people who have never been in prison. I know that is "unfair", but I chose to live in a safe neighborhood and work with safe people. It is not my job to put my safety on the line in order to try to rehabilitate a criminal.
    - deathgrips 6y ago
      I'm not responsible for strangers. If I'm a hiring manager, I'm responsible for my company and the safety of my employees. I owe nothing to a stranger. Take your problem to someone else.
    - csdffsdfsdfsdfs 6y ago
      No they should find jobs where they have less opportunity to cause harm.
- rorykoehler 6y ago
  If that is the case their record should be wiped at the end of their sentence. What's the point of a record if it can't be used to warn people of your past?
- csdffsdfsdfsdfs 6y ago
  "Same rights" - no sorry, somebody who stole before will be regarded with higher suspicion than other people, and that's OK. How do you know they "learned not to steal"? Can you look inside of their heads? There are jobs with less opportunities to steal, for example. Trust has to be regained, simply "having been in prison" is not really worth much in that respect. You would stay in prison, regardless of your mindset, because you are forced to be there.
  - josephg 6y ago
    As an Australian, I find that perspective awful. Going to jail is the punishment society has chosen for the crime. Once you've served your time, you rejoin society on an equal footing. Denying jobs to ex-cons makes it much harder for them to integrate back into society, and increases the recidivism rate. (Which you pay for via taxes.) The equation isn't "bad person -> steals". Its "person maladapted to society / with unhealthy community -> steals". Why would someone be a thief if they have a stable job and community? And how do you expect someone fresh out of jail, with no connections and community, to make a stable life for themselves if nobody will give them a job?
    - csdffsdfsdfsdfs 6y ago
      Not "nobody should give them a job", just not a job with ability to do harm. But that's for every employer to decide for themselves. If you don't think somebody having done X before makes them more likely to do it again than normal people, I don't know. (More accurately, people who did X are more likely to be people who would do X again). We just have to disagree - but you can not enshrine such beliefs in law. As I said, trust has to be regained, merely doing something you are forced to do anyways does not prove anything about your real attitudes. In "How To Change Your Life In 7 Steps", the founder of the homeless magazine "The Big Issue" John Bird describes what he had to do to be able to have homeless people work for him. I have high respect for people like him.
    - chongli 6y ago
      The issue is risk. Hiring someone with a criminal record is riskier than hiring someone with a clean record. There is no upside to mitigate that risk either. So it shouldn't be surprising that hiring managers discriminate on anything they can legally get away with.
lostcolony 6y ago
I'm super curious - do you feel that all those crimes you mentioned should have life sentences? 'cause I mean...if not, what was the point of the jail term? Depending on perspective, it might be rehabilitative, or it might be punitive, but either way, time served should equate to a clear record, no? If not, you're either saying they need further punishment, or you don't believe that they've been rehabilitated, in which case why were they let out?
- tomjen3 6y ago
  If you beat a man up such that he suffers lifelong injuries, it seems only fair to me that your punishment should also be life long. I don't think you should necessarily spend all that time in prison, but not having access to trusted jobs is not comparable to being in pain every day for the rest of your life. On the other hand, I wouldn't mind if more punishments were metered out in the form of community service.
  - ajmurmann 6y ago
    This points to a cultural difference there that might be at the core the argument. In Europe prison has rehabilitation as one of it's goals. In the US it's almost entirely about punishment.
  - larrywright 6y ago
    Your attitude towards someone convicted of a criminal act isn’t uncommon, but it’s short-sighted. If the judicial system determines that the appropriate punishment for a crime is X years, then at the end of that time they should be given a chance at a fresh start. There are limits, of course, perhaps you don’t want to give them a security clearance, or a job that requires carrying a gun. Someone convicted of molesting children should probably never hold a job that gives them contact with children. In the US at least, having a felony conviction (and the bar for that is not that high) is effectively a lifetime punishment. It’s incredibly difficult for someone with a felony conviction on their record to get a job with potential. That’s a big part of why the recidivism rate for felons is so high. They often don’t have many options to make a living.

Surely not, if by "applicable" you mean to suggest that employers would never want to hire such a person for any job. Should a person convicted of theft, who's served their time, paid the fine, made the victims whole, and learned not to steal, be discarded from consideration as a useful member of society? In case it's not clear, I think they should have the same rights as any other human being. No one seriously advocates the death penalty or life imprisonment for petty crimes. But depending on the ability of a society to forget (which the information age is rapidly making very difficult) and the ability of a society to forgive (which the climate of fear is also making difficult), a conviction in your record can ruin a life.

deathgrips 6y ago
>and learned not to steal That's the issue at hand. Serving a prison sentence doesn't mean that you have learned not to steal. It's difficult for the company to verify that you have "learned your lesson".
- dj_mc_merlin 6y ago
  What will satisfy you then? Should people who come out from prison for stealing sit around jobless since nobody trusts them? That's bound to get them back into prison.
  - waterhouse 6y ago
    How about: an insurance policy such that, if the employee does end up stealing, then the employer is made whole. The former-thief employee could pay for such a policy, and then it would seem the employer would be indifferent between the former thief and the average applicant. The policy could be paid for out of the thief's salary; he would effectively be accepting a lower wage. If the job is minimum wage, of course, then it's not possible to lower the wage further. Also, discovering the theft and proving it was that employee might be difficult.
  - Aeolun 6y ago
    It’s interesting that the very people that say ‘they haven’t learned their lesson’ perpetuate that exact thing. There was an article a little while back about a company tracking the employees behavior on the computer, and a lot of people mentioned that ‘if you are not trusted regardless, what incentive do you have to be trustworthy’. This is the exact same thing.
  - crowf 6y ago
    I would be satisfied if there was a proper criminal justice system. Unfortunately, in the US (and most of the world) that is not the case, and former prisoners are more likely to commit crime than people who have never been in prison. I know that is "unfair", but I chose to live in a safe neighborhood and work with safe people. It is not my job to put my safety on the line in order to try to rehabilitate a criminal.
  - deathgrips 6y ago
    I'm not responsible for strangers. If I'm a hiring manager, I'm responsible for my company and the safety of my employees. I owe nothing to a stranger. Take your problem to someone else.
  - csdffsdfsdfsdfs 6y ago
    No they should find jobs where they have less opportunity to cause harm.
rorykoehler 6y ago
If that is the case their record should be wiped at the end of their sentence. What's the point of a record if it can't be used to warn people of your past?
csdffsdfsdfsdfs 6y ago
"Same rights" - no sorry, somebody who stole before will be regarded with higher suspicion than other people, and that's OK. How do you know they "learned not to steal"? Can you look inside of their heads? There are jobs with less opportunities to steal, for example. Trust has to be regained, simply "having been in prison" is not really worth much in that respect. You would stay in prison, regardless of your mindset, because you are forced to be there.
- josephg 6y ago
  As an Australian, I find that perspective awful. Going to jail is the punishment society has chosen for the crime. Once you've served your time, you rejoin society on an equal footing. Denying jobs to ex-cons makes it much harder for them to integrate back into society, and increases the recidivism rate. (Which you pay for via taxes.) The equation isn't "bad person -> steals". Its "person maladapted to society / with unhealthy community -> steals". Why would someone be a thief if they have a stable job and community? And how do you expect someone fresh out of jail, with no connections and community, to make a stable life for themselves if nobody will give them a job?
  - csdffsdfsdfsdfs 6y ago
    Not "nobody should give them a job", just not a job with ability to do harm. But that's for every employer to decide for themselves. If you don't think somebody having done X before makes them more likely to do it again than normal people, I don't know. (More accurately, people who did X are more likely to be people who would do X again). We just have to disagree - but you can not enshrine such beliefs in law. As I said, trust has to be regained, merely doing something you are forced to do anyways does not prove anything about your real attitudes. In "How To Change Your Life In 7 Steps", the founder of the homeless magazine "The Big Issue" John Bird describes what he had to do to be able to have homeless people work for him. I have high respect for people like him.
  - chongli 6y ago
    The issue is risk. Hiring someone with a criminal record is riskier than hiring someone with a clean record. There is no upside to mitigate that risk either. So it shouldn't be surprising that hiring managers discriminate on anything they can legally get away with.

lostcolony 6y ago

I'm super curious - do you feel that all those crimes you mentioned should have life sentences? 'cause I mean...if not, what was the point of the jail term? Depending on perspective, it might be rehabilitative, or it might be punitive, but either way, time served should equate to a clear record, no? If not, you're either saying they need further punishment, or you don't believe that they've been rehabilitated, in which case why were they let out?

tomjen3 6y ago
If you beat a man up such that he suffers lifelong injuries, it seems only fair to me that your punishment should also be life long. I don't think you should necessarily spend all that time in prison, but not having access to trusted jobs is not comparable to being in pain every day for the rest of your life. On the other hand, I wouldn't mind if more punishments were metered out in the form of community service.
- ajmurmann 6y ago
  This points to a cultural difference there that might be at the core the argument. In Europe prison has rehabilitation as one of it's goals. In the US it's almost entirely about punishment.
- larrywright 6y ago
  Your attitude towards someone convicted of a criminal act isn’t uncommon, but it’s short-sighted. If the judicial system determines that the appropriate punishment for a crime is X years, then at the end of that time they should be given a chance at a fresh start. There are limits, of course, perhaps you don’t want to give them a security clearance, or a job that requires carrying a gun. Someone convicted of molesting children should probably never hold a job that gives them contact with children. In the US at least, having a felony conviction (and the bar for that is not that high) is effectively a lifetime punishment. It’s incredibly difficult for someone with a felony conviction on their record to get a job with potential. That’s a big part of why the recidivism rate for felons is so high. They often don’t have many options to make a living.