Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 402 posts

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#241

Post by [deleted] »

yieldcrv wrote: post #227
chihuahua wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was looking for a job a few months ago, every single application required answering multiple questions about whether I'm Hispanic, and if not, which race I am. Additionally, some employers demand to know my sexual identity AND orientation, which I consider ludicrous and obscene. "Before we can consider your application, we must know who you like to have sex with!" Ostensibly this is for some kind of reporting…

I've seen so much vitriol from the pronoun army - the ones that don't need them but want to make it inclusive for the people that do need them - that I really wonder if its optional in the organizations/applications that ask like "oh he didn't write a pronoun at all! he's not a culture fit!" we've decided to move forward with other candidates that more closely align with our qualifications

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#242

Post by d0gsg0w00f »

chihuahua wrote: post #211
al_borland wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was involved in hiring I was told we couldn’t do any online research on potential candidates, like LinkedIn or Facebook, as it might give us information on them being part of a protected class. It’s easier to justify not picking someone based on merit when there is no knowledge of those things.

When I was looking for a job a few months ago, every single application required answering multiple questions about whether I'm Hispanic, and if not, which race I am. Additionally, some employers demand to know my sexual identity AND orientation, which I consider ludicrous and obscene. "Before we can consider your application, we must know who you like to have sex with!" Ostensibly this is for some kind of reporting…

I wonder if anyone has gamed this system yet. Accidentally click "gay latino" to get through the HR filters. AFAIK HR won't send that metric down to the interviewers. So if you crush the interview loop then HR's hands may be tied.

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#243

Post by smsm42 »

technick wrote: post #202
kypro wrote: post #147

I know this is a controversial view, but I think employers should not be allowed to run background checks unless important for the role (government work, access to children, etc) and where it is important for the role it should only return the criminal convictions that might be relevant to the role. If you were arrested for robbery when you were younger perhaps because you had a drug addiction then that person should…

I'm mostly on board with your proposal as I've seen a felony speeding conviction stop a friend from getting tech jobs over 5 years after it happened. His situation would have been totally different if he was caught 2 weeks before, it wouldn't have been a felony but the state arbitrarily changed the law. He didn't wreck, cause a wreck, or wasn't participating in street racing.

Wow, a felony? I know in a number of states you can get a misdemeanor for bad speeding, but a felony without harm, or endangering or dui or anything likd that sohnds extremely heavy. Which state is that?

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#244

Post by jdksmdbtbdnmsm »

bombcar wrote: post #218
technick wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm mostly on board with your proposal as I've seen a felony speeding conviction stop a friend from getting tech jobs over 5 years after it happened. His situation would have been totally different if he was caught 2 weeks before, it wouldn't have been a felony but the state arbitrarily changed the law. He didn't wreck, cause a wreck, or wasn't participating in street racing.

In a case like that it may be worth the cost of the legal fight to get it expunged.

>In a case like that it may be worth the cost of the legal fight to get it expunged.

That is presuming they could afford that cost. The effective purposes of the system are to keep the lucrative private prison industry flush and to maintain what Karl Marx called an "army of surplus labor" to keep wages low.

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#245

Post by nytesky »

There is hope that things will change for folks like you who have “paid your debt”, this was on NPR today. It sounds like your best bet is to be incarcerated adjacent jobs, maybe the Innocence project has tech work? Something like that to build recent relevant experience.

https://www.marketplace.org/shows/marketplace/

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#246

Post by HideousKojima »

yieldcrv wrote: post #159
ericpauley wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue with this is that, if you ban employers from getting signal about employees, they will attempt to infer the same information by other means. This inference can often be unfairly biased. See related issues with racial discrimination caused by Ban the Box initiatives: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/upshot/ban-the-box-an-eff...

> Before the regulations took effect, candidates with criminal histories were far less likely to be called back, irrespective of race. > After the regulations, lacking the ability to discern criminal history, employers became much less likely to call back any apparently black applicant. They seemed to treat all black applicants now as if they might have a criminal past. “show us your linkedin”

Black people commit and are convicted of commiting significantly crime more than white people per capita. Whether this is due to racism, economics, or whatever is irrelevant, but when you can't check specifically for criminal records race becomes an excellent proxy. ~4% of white men will go to jail at some point in their life vs about 28% of black men. https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/pdf/Llgsfp.pdf

That said, sex is also an excellent proxy since men commit far more crime than women. I wonder if women are more likely to get hired when criminal background checks are forbidden?

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#247

Post by conductr »

JCharante wrote: post #233
chihuahua wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was looking for a job a few months ago, every single application required answering multiple questions about whether I'm Hispanic, and if not, which race I am. Additionally, some employers demand to know my sexual identity AND orientation, which I consider ludicrous and obscene. "Before we can consider your application, we must know who you like to have sex with!" Ostensibly this is for some kind of reporting…

Yeah I find it very obscene that they ask so so many obtrusive questions for "statistics"

I believe it’s compulsory or at minimum a way to protect themselves. I always choose the “rather not answer” option to every question that specifies it. The hiring managers rarely get to see the answers.

Oddly enough, I’m a white male and the most protected class “abuses” I’ve ever witnessed is when I’ve been told I wasn’t allowed to hire white males. I’ve actually been told I could not hire any one except a women before. My team was shorthanded for a year. I work in a niche that is probably 90%+ male and probably 70% white.

What’s also weird is, I usually hire through recruiters so when I tell them “only send me female resumes” the search just goes radio silent and I don’t even see what kind of talent I’m missing out on.

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#248

Post by phpisthebest »

300bps wrote: post #196
kypro wrote: post #147

I know this is a controversial view, but I think employers should not be allowed to run background checks unless important for the role (government work, access to children, etc) and where it is important for the role it should only return the criminal convictions that might be relevant to the role. If you were arrested for robbery when you were younger perhaps because you had a drug addiction then that person should…

An assault charge is likely relevant for most positions. If I hire a convicted felon with a track record of assault and they end up assaulting another employee or customer, I’d feel responsible. The victim would probably hold me legally responsible. I’d feel more comfortable hiring someone with a 100% track record of never having been convicted of assault. If you disagree, is there any number of assault convictions t…

Based on your response you most likely are not using Assault in the legal sense but in the Common Sense, but given the topic is legal in nature we should be using legal definitions.

Assault act of causing someone to reasonably fear imminent harm, what most people think of Assault they actually mean what the law calls battery which is actually causing physical harm.

Further I am not sure why we are focusing on Assault or battery, the OP said that was not the charge they were convicted of, and a Felony by definition is any crime punishable by more than 1 year of imprisonment which given the "Tough on crime" provision starting in the 90 makes a HUGE number if non-violent offenses felonies, as something a simple a playing your music too loud could be in some circumstances classified as a felony (often charged as " Nuisances" which is many states is a low level felony)

Most people have "felon" associated with violent crime, or serious crime, but unfortunately in our over criminalized society most people commit as many as 3 felonies a day not even knowing it.

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#249

Post by halostatue »

RickJWagner wrote: post #216
sneak wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think crimes of violence are relevant to any/all roles. I don’t want to hire or work with anyone who has ever at any point in their life used violence to attempt to solve problems. I am fine with a percentage of human beings being blacklisted permanently from access to much of society. Violence has no place in our world. I won’t even hire former cops. It is, unfortunately, illegal in the US to explicitly avoid hiri…

That's crazy. Cops prevent violence. Remember when a few cities tried having 'police free zones'? I think it was Portland that had murders within a week. Better re-think that one.

[citation required]

"Police violence calls for measures beyond de-escalation training": https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/police-violence-c... — "The police department in Camden, N.J., for example, was disbanded and rebuilt with a new vision in 2013."

"What the data say about police brutality and racial bias — and which reforms might work": https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01846-z

"More Than Half of Police Killings Are Mislabeled, New Study Says": https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/30/us/police-killings-underc... — Researchers comparing information from death certificates with data from organizations that track police killings in the United States identified a startling discrepancy

"17,000 Killings by Police Have Gone Uncounted Since 1980": https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/how-many... — There have been twice as many deaths at the hands of cops than the federal government has reported, top medical journal finds

Search-fu is failing me, but ISTR there are studies with data indicating that when police are called for non-violent situations, there is a high chance (> 50%) of the aggressiveness of the cops making the situation violent, especially if disadvantaged populations (ethnic or gender minorities) are involved. This is especially true for property crimes (there was a rather visible case of someone murdered by a now former police officer — on camera no less — because he was accused of using a counterfeit $20 bill for a pack of cigarettes, perhaps you remember it?)

Remember, the police do not exist to prevent violence. Most of the time, they’re not even intended to fully and properly investigate violence perpetrated against others. No, they are there mostly to (poorly) investigate property crimes against the ownership class. That they occasionally manage to perform good investigations doesn't really help with the times that they make things worse, don't do anything, or make cases up from whole cloth (perhaps you’ve heard of the police misconduct in the Central Park 5 case, or do you just believe the cops all the time).

Re: Ask HN: Any felons successfully found IT work post-release?

#250

Post by PaulHoule »

akira2501 wrote: post #210
kypro wrote: post #147

I know this is a controversial view, but I think employers should not be allowed to run background checks unless important for the role (government work, access to children, etc) and where it is important for the role it should only return the criminal convictions that might be relevant to the role. If you were arrested for robbery when you were younger perhaps because you had a drug addiction then that person should…

It should be like a credit report. If it's been at least 7 years since your last public criminal record, they should then just fall off your "report," and no longer be visible except to the courts. It used to be that you could pay your debt, and unless your crime was infamous, the "memory" of it would fade from society rather quickly. The internet and private databases have definitely hampered this facility and perha…

Depends what the crime is.

I have a relative who spent time in prison because she tried to kill her mother with an insulin injection who got out and got a job as a nurse working at a nursing home. She lied on her job application about felony convictions but only got found out when her mentally retarded sister showed up at the emergency room with an insulin overdose. It said in the paper she was stealing meds from the controlled substance locker and I believe it because she was stealing her grandson’s ADHD meds too.

I believe we should give felons a chance but the above case is one where not doing a background check looks like malpractice.

Post reply on HN