Posted on 01/15/2019 6:55:26 PM PST by NohSpinZone
Vericool is a local company that is not only completely green, but it was founded by a former East Bay gang member who now hires ex-felons who are getting out of jail.
Darrell Jobe launched the company in a factory in Livermore. There, workers make packing boxes and shipping containers, but they are also helping the environment.
Half the people who work in the factory have been in jail or prison. When Kyil Parker got out of jail for dealing drugs, no one would hire him.
(Excerpt) Read more at ktvu.com ...
Hopefully it works out, and is a success.
It’s better for ex-cons to be employed than to revert back to crime.
Reminiscent of the Black Panther bakeries.
It’s better for ex-cons to be employed than to revert back to crime.
Agree to a point.
I support giving some ex-cons a chance. Of course, many of these ex-cons are not able to make good choices, no matter what helps or hurts them.
That said, the probabilities are against the company.
Also, regarding the title of the article...there is no such thing as an "ex-felon". Once a felon, always a felon.
.
I’m am in agreement with you.
I will pray for their success.
And ex-felon is odd, unless they are getting pardons.
Of course, but once when ex-con with a documented record assaults a customer/client or co-worker, the business is sued into oblivion. That is the flaw in these re-integration programs; employers are supposed to do background checks on employees, and if one commits a crime and it is determined that the employer “should have known”, the company is completely exposed legally.
Many years ago a friend was interviewing a man. When asked about his past and work history he admitted to being in prison.
My friend thought his bosses would crucify him if he hired him but the man was so forthright and honest that my friend hired him.
The man was extremely grateful and was one of his best employes and had a great worth ethic. He took his second change seriously.
You never know.
I agree. If we’re going to let people out of prison, we need to offer them a path to succeed as a law-abiding member of society. Otherwise, what’s the point?
Forcing companies to hire any xcon who applies leads to trouble.
If the actual business model is to hire xcons it's different work environment.
If we don't offer them a second chance what options do they have?
If a business wants to help these people I wish everyone the best of luck.
Green is the new Orange?
I understand the dilemma; if the state wants to push these re-entry programs, then the state should insure the employer willing to take the chance. Otherwise, the model doesn’t work.
“Of course, many of these ex-cons are not able to make good choices, no matter what helps or hurts them.”
My experience as a landlord to former convicts has been uniformly bad. I have evicted two families with thousands of dollars in loss and damages to my property. A third couple was raided by SWAT, which also damaged my property. I later had to evict them, but they were already gone, leaving $100 worth of EBT bought steaks in the refrigerator with the power off. (They took the three cases of beer, though. You would have thought they could have at least taken the steaks outside and left them there.) My experience is that former convicts make bad decisions and are thoughtless of others, including their kids.
Probably went for a fed small business loan grant starting at 50G’s (fifty grand) that’s $50,000 to those in Rio Linda. That program along with other similar agencies should be getting a serious look at by the Executive branch (that’s Trump to those in Rio Linda)
I would imagine that he's aware of this, and has structured the company so as to be effectively judgement-proof. No assets in company name, all equipment rented, no retained earnings, etc, and company CEO having no assets in his name.
Lawyers won't waste their time for no payoff.
Translation: Lots and lots of public money is going to be poured into this company. Nice scam, if you can get away with it.
I don’t think that works so well anymore; they start going after the officers personally.
That's why I added "...and company CEO having no assets in his name".
This would only work when the CEO truly had little in the way of assets worth suing over, and was doing this because he wanted to do a good deed for others who had been in his position.
I understand that, but is the CEO the only one exposed?
I wish this company well since the felons he hires have very little chance of transitioning back into society if they can't find jobs.....
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.