Posted on 06/30/2015 7:18:25 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I’m guessing this is the new face of equality. Or at least a redefinition of sanity. In any case, welcome to the Big Apple, employers! (From the NY Daily News)
In front of emotional supporters, Mayor de Blasio signed legislation Monday that will prohibit employers from inquiring about a candidate’s criminal record prior to a job offer.
“Today I see hope for people like me,” said Marilyn Scales, 52, of the Bronx, who said she never has had a full-time job because of her record for dealing heroin.
As crazy as this may sound, there’s actually a bit more to this law than meets the eye from the brief Daily News account. That’s not to say that there’s some revelation coming here which makes this a good idea, but it’s a bit more nuanced. To begin with, it was already illegal to deny someone employment based solely on their having a record of criminal convictions unless that record poses a clear threat to persons or property. (Ostensibly, you didn’t have to hire somebody as your accountant who had already been convicted of embezzlement multiple times.) Also, employers couldn’t legally ask about arrests if those arrests were not part of a currently open case or had not led to a conviction.
But as with many regulations regarding the hiring process, that wasn’t too hard for employers to get around since there are so many factors which go into hiring decisions. This new law, however, adds a wrinkle to the process which will be problematic for employers. As the New York Association for Community Living explains, employment application questions will now fall into a complicated, multi-step process which could lead to all sorts of new legal entanglements. (They are speaking specifically to the concerns of non-profits, but this applies to pretty much everyone.)
The law takes effect 120 days from Mayor Bill de Blasio’s signature of approval, which by all accounts the Mayor is expected to provide very soon. Beginning on that date, covered employers must follow a three-step procedure for inquiries about an applicant’s criminal history:
1. First, the employer must issue a written copy of the inquiry in a manner to be determined by the New York City Commission on Human Rights (the “Commission”). Although the law is silent about whether the Commission will issue a mandatory inquiry form or simply prescribe requirements for such inquiries, employers will at least need to tailor their criminal history inquiries accordingly.
2. Second, before a conditional offer of employment is revoked, employers must provide the applicant a written copy of its analysis of the criminal history, including the reason(s) it revoked the conditional job offer and the supporting documents that formed the basis of the employer’s decision, e.g., the criminal history results.
3. Finally, the employer must allow the applicant a reasonable amount of time—no less than three business days—to respond to the revocation of the job offer, during which time the employer must hold the position open for the applicant.
In other words, if you were previously disinclined to hire somebody who spent a large part of their previous summers at the crowbar motel for slinging heroin, you could probably just fail to schedule them for an interview. But under this system, you don’t get to find out about the record unless they make it through the interview process and you tender an initial, conditional offer of employment to them. Only then can you dig into their criminal history. And if it turns out that they have the sort of record which would lead you to not want them as an employee, you have to send them a letter explaining why you were pulling the offer. That opens up you, as the employer, to charges under the aforementioned law against refusing to hire based on criminal background and…
Law Suits! (DING DING DING DING)
The sad part is, even if somebody challenges it, this law will probably hold up in court. Between the taxes, the fees and the massive regulatory burden it’s already hard enough to do business in New York. I wonder how many more employers will simply flee to a more business friendly climate after this?
Hey, at least DiBlahblah is consistent. As sure as the sun rises, he will do something else completely lacking logic or intelligence. Ends ban on cell phones in schools, so students can yak and text all day instead of paying attention in class. Supports end to voter ID so his illegal friends can vote with fewer impediments. And now, no criminal background checks, so you can end up with a thief or druggie or worse in your place of employment. Next, he’ll be selling 1 acre lots of NYC public parks to developers. Oh wait—he already did something along those lines.
Exponentially so.
Thats why they are winning.
There is SO MUCH STUPID.
> This idea to not ask job applicants about criminal history is being pushed by non-profits funded by the CCHD (Catholic Campaign For Human Development) Its one of many crazy leftist social justice ideas that Catholics should reject.
Never EVER donate to the CCHD collection!
That sounds like a Soros funded faux named charity much like the rest that have surfaced under 0’s watch. Its like having a foundation with the name, Senior Citizens Nutrition Foundation, and finding out later its funded by Soros to ensure that It signs up seniors citizens to ensure that they are well fed and healthy before being ground up to make soylent green products.
I have two felons working for me. But they came in and told me right up front. It’s hard to find good tool and die makers. I have no problem. They paid their debts.
Would I go hire a felon to run my books? NOPE!
The BATF will take exception to this in any shop that has an FFL.
Law of the Land, and all that.
The resume is hard to check these days. Nobody is willing to say anything about former employees except the dates of employment. Companies that went out of business do not provide even that. The applicant can also claim to be self-employed, and that cannot be checked at all (except by a test of his skills.) HR people are not professional investigators. If an applicant gives a certain phone number as a reference, there is no guarantee that it's not the applicant's friend or a relative on the line - who will say whatever, as there is no duty to tell the truth. For that reason the value of unchecked references today is near zero.
But if a criminal commits a crime while on the job, the company will be held liable, right? I mean, nothing progressives do makes any sense.
Two to one.
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.