Live data from Hacker News

This bakery will hire anyone

grist.org

121–130 of 171 posts

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#121
post #14

The lack of second chances we give in America to some of our most unfortunate means that even non-violent offenses can have lifelong consequences. It's shameful.

I think the cost has some influence over employers making a decision to hire an ex-con. If a store can hire someone for minimum wage without any conviction records, why would they hire someone with conviction records when they can't pay any lower than the minimum wage?

>why would they hire someone with conviction records when they can't pay any lower than the minimum wage?

Even at the lowest level, not all employees are equally productive. And even at the lowest level, there's something to be said for "loyalty" - for the employee genuinely trying to act in the best interest of the company.

Money is just one way these sorts of behaviors can be incented.

I like to give the example of the choice of hiring a citizen vs. hiring a H1B worker.

Even if the company does pay them the same as a citizen, the employer has rather more leverage over the H1B, as if the H1B gets fired, they've got two weeks to find another employer that can sponsor their visa, or to get their shit together and get out of the country.

There's the positive side of that, too; If you take a person that has never been given a chance and give them a chance, well, there's a chance they will feel grateful, and attempt to return the favor... whereas if you hire someone who gets five or six phone calls from recruiters every day? You probably aren't going to get as much gratitude from that person.

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting article, thanks. As a Portuguese, and having been close to someone who was addicted to heroin, I know that besides clinics, we also had houses in the countryside where there were small communities where people trying to recover could stay for a few months, with very regular visits by specialist psychologists helping them. I don't know how effective they were or if they still exist, but it seems to jive wi…

Change of scenery is an important thing when trying to break out of a bad pattern. Novelty is actually processed by a different part of the brain than whatever rut we may be in is. The book Iconoclast explains that even moving furniture around can put us into a more creative state, because our creativity is activated by novelty.

And getting them out of their "social" situation of hanging out with other addicts. Addicts reinforce each other's habits.

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#123

Why did the moderators change the title from "Felons, addicts, immigrants: This bakery will hire anyone"?

I would assume the moderator disagreed with the premise of lumping those three categories of people together, or that somehow being an addict is as bad as a felon, or vice versa. Really the offensive part is lumping immigrants in there. Additionally, it's sort of a click-bait title because they hire anyone regardless of their background, they aren't specifically seeking these people out.

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#124
post #97
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if a Silicon Valley tech company would care about drug related convictions. I don't think possession/distribution/etc. alone would really be an issue (except if it were extremely recent and potentially ongoing), but clearly "I was high and raped/killed my neighbor" would, and either could arguably be "drug related". "Was an addict and broken into cars to get money for drugs" would be a more interesting corne…

When I still worked for a company and not myself, and was assisting in the hiring process, I was much more inclined to overlook drug-related crimes as I felt then - as now - that these very often should be crimes in the first place. On the other hand, I remember once we had a job application from a recently-released convict (jailed for kidnapping, resisting arrest and assault of the arresting officers). The nature of…

* oops, that should read "... very often SHOULD NOT be crimes...".

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#125
post #97
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if a Silicon Valley tech company would care about drug related convictions. I don't think possession/distribution/etc. alone would really be an issue (except if it were extremely recent and potentially ongoing), but clearly "I was high and raped/killed my neighbor" would, and either could arguably be "drug related". "Was an addict and broken into cars to get money for drugs" would be a more interesting corne…

When I still worked for a company and not myself, and was assisting in the hiring process, I was much more inclined to overlook drug-related crimes as I felt then - as now - that these very often should be crimes in the first place. On the other hand, I remember once we had a job application from a recently-released convict (jailed for kidnapping, resisting arrest and assault of the arresting officers). The nature of…

* oops, that should read "... very often SHOULD NOT be crimes...".

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#126
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if a Silicon Valley tech company would care about drug related convictions. I don't think possession/distribution/etc. alone would really be an issue (except if it were extremely recent and potentially ongoing), but clearly "I was high and raped/killed my neighbor" would, and either could arguably be "drug related". "Was an addict and broken into cars to get money for drugs" would be a more interesting corne…

Taking "drug convictions" into account is a form of discrimination. If the FDA revoked the licensing of Prozac or the DEA scheduled it tomorrow, suddenly tons of people would be guilty of drug-crimes. It'd criminalize being depressed. The same is true for the current state of drug laws. We're criminalizing people with anxiety, with existential pain, stress, curiosity, etc. What's different about stealing cars for mon…

Discrimination in job applications is perfectly legal outside specifically protected classes in the United States, including under various state laws.

The nationally protected classes are race, sex, pregnancy, religion, national origin, age, veterans status / military service, bankruptcy or bad debts, genetic information, and citizenship status (exclusive of work eligibility).

Under various state laws, there may or may not be additional protections for sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, medical condition, political affiliation or activities, military status, different age limits, familial status, public assistance status, and/or use of "lawful products" (e.g., tobacco, alcohol).

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination_law_...

Outside of these classes (or within them where the state doesn't recognize the class) it's generally legal to make hire/fire decisions with few limitations.

Given "at will" employment conditions in many states, proving discrimination is generally a case of showing specific evidence that a protected class was material and specifically related to the action. That can be difficult, though not impossible.

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#127
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's no wonder recidivism is so high in the US. To those who make very comfortable livings in the US legal system, that is not a bug, it's a designed feature. Oh, and oddly enough, they happen to be the same people whom make the sentencing laws.

I realize it's fun to paint lawyers with the same brush, but let's be clear here: prosecutors are the ones gunning after constant guilty convictions, and the Roberts Supreme Court has stripped even the most basic ways to challenge their abuses.

Cite on Roberts?

See also: Judge Alex Kozinski, 9th Circuit Appeals.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/05/opinion/sunday/rampant-pro...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Kozinski

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#128
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What's different about stealing cars for money for medications, versus stealing cars for money for bread They are totally different! Someone stealing for bread, i.e. to survive, will never consider crime if they don't absolutely have to. So they may have committed a crime, but they are not a criminal. But someone stealing for drugs demonstrate a level of selfishness that does make them a criminal, i.e. someone who…

What if it's necessary drugs, like anti-psychotics? What if they have a physical dependency? What if it's life critical, like a benzodiazepine addiction?

> necessary drugs

I would consider it like bread.

> a physical dependency

Was it their fault in the first place? i.e. did they start using it for a good reason and are now dependent? Or did they start using it because they like how it feels?

> What if it's life critical

Like bread.

You are being a bit too simplistic - the specific details don't matter, what matters is the person's state of mind. Is he stealing because he does not care about the other person, and only about his own enjoyment? Or is he stealing because he has truly no other choice and he feels bad about it?

It's impossible to really know someone else's mind, all you can do is judge based on behavior.

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#129

Interesting, quote that stood out:"Someone without an arrest may simply be a person who has never gotten caught". That only 40% of business owners would consider hiring a ex-criminal also makes one wonder how many employers in general tend to lump all ex-cons in the same basket when assessing potential business risk (e.g. serial murderer vs thief/drug dealer, 1x vs multiple offender, etc).

Or, quite likely: has been caught but given multiple chances.

Look at the news out of Ferguson, MO, and particularly Tanesi Coates story on systematic corruption and focused arrests and prosecution of minorities / poor:

"The Gangsters of Ferguson" http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/The-Gang...

The "focus on revenue" was almost wholly a focus on black people as revenue. Black people in Ferguson were twice as likely to be searched during a stop, twice as likely to receive a citation when stopped, and twice as likely to be arrested during the stop, and yet were 26 percent less likely to be found with contraband. Black people were more likely to see a single incident turn into multiple citations. The disparity in outcomes remained "even after regression analysis is used to control for non-race-based variables."

Re: This bakery will hire anyone

#130
post #115
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might help, but it's still completely bizarre that you can't fire someone for any reason. An employee does not have a "right" to a job. You do work you get paid, it's transactional. It's not "your" job - it belongs to your employer.

> An employee does not have a "right" to a job. ... says you. Someone else might say that a human being has the right to realize his potential in an activity and be allowed to sustain himself and his family out of such activity -- which in practice means there is such a thing as "the right to have a job". There is a lot of philosophic and economic literature on the subject; several nation states even wrote it in thei…

> Someone else might say that a human being has the right to realize his potential in an activity

You do realize that you saying "we should force this other person to hire someone so that he can realize his potential"?

Why is that other person (the employer) the sacrifice here?

Post reply on HN