Running head: EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION TOWARD FELONS

EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION TOWARD FELONS
AMELIA WOODEN
EVEREST ONLINE UNIVERSITY According to one estimate, there are currently over 12 million felons in the United States. The Civil Rights Act requires that, where an employment policy of a state, municipal, or private employer that discriminates against criminals will have a disparate racial impact, employers must show a business necessity before automatically disqualifying criminals.

Employment Discrimination Toward Felons

In today’s society we have over 12 million felons in our employment epidemic. Where do we draw the line when it comes to our economy, our fellow Americans living and job opportunities for those who have criminal backgrounds wanting to make positive changes in their lives? Do we continue to use a past life against the possibility of change and let them suffer because of the choices made or do we give that chance of a life time and let them transition into a more positive life? How do we determine who is fit for employment today?, we the people of today’s workforce should be helping those ex-felons or one’s with a criminal background to transition without judgment giving them a chance to make better choices without falling back into their old habits of criminal activities.
According to one estimate there are currently 12 million felons in the United States, which cannot even apply for simple jobs nor certain licenses in many states, as of 1998, seven states absolutely barred felons from public employment. (Thompson and Manza 2000). Other states had more narrow restrictions, for instance, only covering infamous crimes or felonies involving moral turpitude. Some laws have been criticized for being over inclusive;(Ben Geiger July 2006) for instance, a law banning all criminals from working in health care jobs could prevent a person convicted of bribery or shoplifting from sweeping the halls of a hospital. California law provides that a criminal record can affect one's application for a professional license only if "the crime or act is substantially related to the qualifications, functions and duties of the business or profession for which the application is made. Texas law requires that a variety of factors, such as the nature and seriousness of the crime, the relationship of the crime to the purposes for requiring a license to engage in the occupation, the amount of time since the person's last criminal activity, and letters of recommendation, be taken into account even when the applicant has a felony. (Saxhouse May 2004) While there are blanket restrictions that prohibit ex-felons from obtaining a number of different licenses, “character component” or “good moral character” statutes also affect the employment prospects of felons (May 1995). These regulations do not target ex-felons per se, but instead disqualify individuals under the assumption that if he or she has been convicted of a felony, then issuing an occupational license could pose a public safety issue. Many states and municipalities disqualify ex-felons from professional licenses that are unrelated to the offense for which an ex-felon was originally convicted. Occupational restrictions are expansive and cover a multitude of different jobs and positions, professions under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Health specifically including healing arts, medicine and surgery, nursing, nurse's aides, dentistry, optometry, opticians, psychologists, marital and family therapists, clinical social workers, professional counselors, veterinary medicine, massage therapists, dietician-nutritionists, acupuncturists, paramedics, embalmers and funeral directors, barbers, hairdressers and cosmeticians, and hypertrichologists (CGS § 19-17 and various other statutes), Licensed: electricians; plumbers; heating, piping, and cooling contractors and journeymen; elevator contractors and craftsmen; solar contractors and journeymen; fire protection sprinkler contractors and journeymen; irrigation contractors and journeymen; sheet metal contractors and journeymen; and automotive and flat glass contractors and journeymen (Coppolo,Reinhart and Nelson,2005), these are just many of the jobs that’s ex-felons or one’s with a criminal background cannot even think about applying for, no matter what the nature of their crimes might have been. Researches show findings where more people are incarcerated and more non-incarcerated felons are serving sentences now than at any other time in U.S. history. These trends in correctional supervision have led to a large criminal class that recent estimates place at over 15 million individuals. All of these individuals are now susceptible to the deleterious effects of possessing a criminal record in the labor market. Evidence also indicates that African Americans and the poor comprise a disproportionate share of prisoners and ex-felons. Thus, social groups that already have the lowest rates of labor force participation also have the highest risk of receiving a felony conviction. The labor market consequences of criminal punishment highlights the incapacitated effect of reduced human capital relative to peers in the labor market, deteriorating skills due to time spent incarcerated, and stigma and discrimination post-release and in the job search process. A long list of federal and state-specific restrictions related to work, family, and civic activities are imposed on people who have been convicted of crime, or in some cases, merely arrested or charged. Because they are typically located outside the penal code, implemented by non-criminal justice institutions, and interpreted by the courts as civil regulations rather than criminal penalties, these restrictions are called “collateral consequences” or “collateral sanctions” (see, e.g., Ewald and Uggen 2011). These consequences restrict, and sometimes ban outright, felons and ex-felons from voting, serving as jurors, receiving public assistance, and seeking employment opportunities.

Despite anecdotal evidence that the United States has made significant headway in addressing problems of racial equality, deep and persistent racial disparities continue to mark the landscape of race relations a decade into the second millennium. Almost every marker of social well-being places racial minorities, especially African Americans, behind Whites. Racial inequalities in the labor market provide a stark illustration of how persistent these trends have been. For example, the unemployment gap between African Americans and Whites has largely stagnated. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, rates of unemployment fluctuated considerably for both groups between 1972 and 2008. Despite within-group fluctuations over time, the unemployment rate for Africans Americans has hovered around twice the unemployment rate for Whites during this period. In 1972, the unemployment rate for White males aged sixteen and over was approximately five percent while the comparable rate for African American males was over ten percent. In 2008, the rates and the differences between the rates were almost identical—the unemployment rate for White males was 5.5 and for African American males 11.4. Furthermore, on average, African American men are unemployed for about five and a half weeks longer than White men. Some argue that the employment situation amongst African Americans in urban areas has actually worsened over the past twenty years.
Despite the potential importance of these laws for understanding criminal punishment and racial inequality in the labor market, the impact of felon employment restrictions has rarely been studied. (Ewald and Uggen 2011).
Although based on preliminary results, the process of reentry for released prisoners focusing specifically on felon employment restrictions and their impact on racial inequality in the labor market. Upon release from prison, individuals with a felony conviction are legally prohibited from holding a wide array of occupations and employment positions. The rationale for felon employment restrictions is that individuals with felony convictions compromise public safety when occupying certain types of positions. While concerns for public safety are legitimate and should not be taken lightly, the range of occupations covered in these laws surpasses pragmatic policy choices. For example, in some states individuals with a felony conviction are potentially restricted from holding positions as a barber, an electrician, or even a taxi driver. Therefore, exploring the impact of employment restrictions can illuminate the far-reaching impact of current penal policies in the United States. What can we as the people of the United states of America do to help those ex-felons and persons of criminal backgrounds?, after some research of resources for ex-felons there were some programs that stood out, programs that provide various forms of help and opportunities for ex-felons these programs are developed to try and keep the criminal minded and those with criminal backgrounds out of jails and prisons, they provide help such as getting them the proper identification, sponsoring job fairs that are specifically for ex-felons. There are also programs ran by the government that provide some incentives to employers in order for them to hire felons as well some programs that are apart of these government establishments are programs such as the work opportunity tax credit and federal bonding program, America Works, Salvation Army, and the H.I.R.E Network(Gebremichael, ehow contributor 2014) which provide ex-felons with jobs sources to get clothes for interviews, they teach them to write resumes, open workshops for on-hands training for certain skills giving prompt and in depth services to helping one with a criminal background to find and keep a job.
References
Uggen, Christopher, Melissa Thompson, and Jeff Manza (2000), Crime, Class, and Reintegration: The Socioeconomic, Familial, and Civic Lives of Offenders
Elena Saxonhouse (May 2004), Unequal Protection: Comparing Former Felons' Challenges to Disenfranchisement and Employment Discrimination 56 (6), Stanford Law Review, pp. 1597–1639
Ben Geiger (Jul 2006), The Case for Treating Ex-Offenders as a Suspect Class 94 (4), California Law Review, pp. 1191–1242
Ewald, Alec and Christopher Uggen. (2011). “The Collateral Effects of Imprisonment on Prisoners, Their Families, and Communities.” Forthcoming in Oxford Handbook Sentencing and Corrections, edited by Joan Petersilia and Kevin Reitz. New York: Oxford University Press.
May, Bruce E. (1995). “The Character Component of Occupational Licensing Laws: A Continuing Barrier to the Ex–Felon’s Employment Opportunities.” North Dakota Law Review 71: 187–210.
Coppolo, Reinhart and Nelson (2005). “Consequences of a Felon Conviction Regarding Employment.”
Driven by Demand Media (1999-2014).”Re-Entry Court Outcome Study” and “Work Opportunity Tax Credit”