With our current system, past mistakes can decide a person's entire future without even looking at other factors. The carceral system goes beyond the physical prison space to continue punishing people even after they've served their sentence.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Ethan Clay
This is an absurdly difficult question to ask, as are most questions when it comes to liberty. The question I think we really need to grapple with is: Is it a larger infringement on an individual's liberty if they cannot ask a question to know an employee's background or if someone can never get a job to live and support themselves and their families? I definitively say the latter is a larger infringement of liberty and we need to do everything we can to overcome that inconsistency in American values.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Raquel
I think in the initial application it should not be asked. It is a way to quickly dismiss someone. I think that in an interview process the question can be asked, but at that point the employer then has some face to face contact and thus can judge them more so on their interaction than on a checked box in an application. If people don't get a second chance than what motivation should they have for bettering themselves?
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Katelyn naum
B/c employers need to know that's person has a past and that they want to work and make lives better.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
Only in job applications when directly related to the job. For instance child abuse and teachers. Otherwise very rarely.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
I think the degree to which they are able to ask, and about which level of conviction, should vary by job type (ie, ok to ask about crimes against minors in job involving working with kids, but not ok to ask about minor drug charges for general employment)
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
I think asking/knowing is okay, especially because gaps in work experience etc are usually a point of interest. I do think that in a perfect world knowing wouldn't mean job discrimination or workplace alienation.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
Cause
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
Only applicable ones like murder or armed robbery but even then there should be a fair opportunity to explain the situation.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Meg Osborn
"The box" effectively extends punishment indefinitely, long after a person has completed a prison sentence. Makes it exponentially more difficult to gain employment, housing, financial stability.
Emma
With our current system, past mistakes can decide a person's entire future without even looking at other factors. The carceral system goes beyond the physical prison space to continue punishing people even after they've served their sentence.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Ethan Clay
This is an absurdly difficult question to ask, as are most questions when it comes to liberty. The question I think we really need to grapple with is: Is it a larger infringement on an individual's liberty if they cannot ask a question to know an employee's background or if someone can never get a job to live and support themselves and their families? I definitively say the latter is a larger infringement of liberty and we need to do everything we can to overcome that inconsistency in American values.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Raquel
I think in the initial application it should not be asked. It is a way to quickly dismiss someone. I think that in an interview process the question can be asked, but at that point the employer then has some face to face contact and thus can judge them more so on their interaction than on a checked box in an application. If people don't get a second chance than what motivation should they have for bettering themselves?
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Katelyn naum
B/c employers need to know that's person has a past and that they want to work and make lives better.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
Only in job applications when directly related to the job. For instance child abuse and teachers. Otherwise very rarely.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
I think the degree to which they are able to ask, and about which level of conviction, should vary by job type (ie, ok to ask about crimes against minors in job involving working with kids, but not ok to ask about minor drug charges for general employment)
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
I think asking/knowing is okay, especially because gaps in work experience etc are usually a point of interest. I do think that in a perfect world knowing wouldn't mean job discrimination or workplace alienation.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
Cause
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Anonymous
Only applicable ones like murder or armed robbery but even then there should be a fair opportunity to explain the situation.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Meg Osborn
"The box" effectively extends punishment indefinitely, long after a person has completed a prison sentence. Makes it exponentially more difficult to gain employment, housing, financial stability.
10:10 AM | April 16, 2016
Pages