Editor’s note: This commentary is by Angela Earle-Gray, who is human resources director at Chroma Technology in Bellows Falls.
[M]any different laws exist that prevent discrimination in hiring. They limit potential employers from asking questions about things such as race, religion, age and disabilities. They do this because those items aren’t relevant to whether or not one can do a job. Employers can ask questions to confirm that essential duties can be performed. For example, we can ask if you are available to work on Saturday mornings. We can’t, however, ask if you are Jewish and then make an assumption on how that limits your availability on the Sabbath.
At this point, however, it is common practice for employers to include the question, “In the last seven years have you been convicted of a crime other than a traffic violation?” on their job applications and make assumptions based on the answers. Often, applications are put on the “no” pile instantly when this box checked is “yes,” despite the fact that the Equal Opportunity Commission has said that excluding all applicants with a criminal record could discriminate against certain racial and ethnic groups. The fact remains that often these applications are screened out without thought going into what the crime was or how long ago it was committed, without learning the circumstances, without making other inquiries into the qualities the person possesses, without considering what they’ve done to make amends and change their life and without considering if there is any relevance in relation to the duties of the job.
From what I’ve seen, those that made poor choices that resulted in criminal backgrounds, that reflected on their actions and opted to reform, often live by a stronger personal moral code.
It’s also often the case that many small or mid-sized companies ask for cover letters and resumes. We, for example, prefer them but offer the option of paper applications for those that don’t have a resume or don’t have computer access. That means that having a question about criminal background on an application but not asking the same of those that submit resumes disproportionately impacts those who are resource or education poor.
As director of human resources at Chroma Technology, I am aware we have multiple employees who would have to answer “yes” to that question, employees who are dedicated and bring a great deal of value to the company. In fact, from what I’ve seen, those that made poor choices that resulted in criminal backgrounds, that reflected on their actions and opted to reform, often live by a stronger personal moral code. I also question what impact the lack of opportunities and inability to escape from stigma has had when that isn’t the path taken and there is recidivism.
While I agree that there are times that it is very appropriate to take criminal background into consideration (and generally criminal record checks are able to be run in those cases), it makes no sense to me why we would ask this of every person applying for every single job. H.261, up for consideration in the Legislature, does not prevent employers from asking about convictions, but it does take the question off the initial application, assuring that a candidate will be considered based on more than just one moment in their life. I am happy to see this issue being considered in the Legislature and hope to see it move forward.
