“IS IT POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE EMPIRICALLY WHEN IT IS NO LONGER NECESSARY FOR AN EMPLOYER TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT A CRIMINAL OFFENSE IN A PROSPECTIVE EMPLOYEE’S PAST?”

Redemption in the Presence of Widespread Criminal Background Checks

Yes, I read Criminology from 2009. Actually, a mentor of mine and I were talking about recidivism, and he mentioned this article.

I think the business world may finally be ready for what academia was into over ten years ago.

However, it would be neat to see some updated statistics. I did a quick Google search and did not find any.

With the labor pool getting tight, employers are looking at candidates with a criminal past differently. But they still need to weigh the risks to their businesses.

As an employer, would you be comfortable using such statistics?

Would you be more likely to if there was protection under the law if you did and something went bad after you hired the person?

In one sense, the New York State Office of Court Administration took it upon themselves to not pass along misdemeanor records older than ten years if the person was not convicted of a subsequent offense.

Do employers want to not see that information? Are employers not able to make wise decisions themselves when paying $95 plus per name searched? Why should they not get all the records?

I find myself in a bit of a quandary today.

Written by Michelle Pyan