Wells Fargo fires employee for '72 shoplifting conviction

[Ed Anger]

No, they are just uninterested in women who aspire to be the "Painted lady" in the carnival freak show.

CORRECT!

[CountDeMoney]

Ah, they just aint into freaky ladies. Gotya

Not when they look like sailors, bikers or convicts, no.

[Grey Fox]

They are just old conservative in denial.

[Camerus]

Some of those chicks might be hot if not for the tats.  A chick getting a tat - now there's a sin that doesn't go away.   

[The Brain]

Jesus pogo dancing Christ, what a nightmare of a system. I guess that background checking has grown into such a multi million industry that it can't be erradicated anymore.

It's not a problem for most people, since most people are not convicted felons.  It also seems to me like it's a good way to encourage people to not commit felonies, if the word on the street is that employers do not like to hire criminals and all that.

But just so you whiny Euros feel better: I do know of cases where convicted felons have been (knowingly) hired.  I can't say I know of any cases where a convicted thief has been hired, but I know of hirings where the candidate was a convicted DUI or drug offender.

Further, as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, most states do have rehabilitation programs where the state partners with workforce development programs in order to actively help felons find jobs.  The company I worked for prior to my current employer actually did exactly that (among several other services that it provided).

You say convicted felons and it seems that we're talking about violent criminals that have been doing years and years in jail, but in this particular case it's a 40 yo shoplifting case, so here we have a middle aged woman getting fired for something she did when she was a teenager. Fucked up.

Not fucked up

Did she disclose it on her app? Apparently not. Did she forget? Did she purposely deceive WF? Who cares and neither should WF. There is someone else out there to take her place.

It's still fucked up. Once you've done your time/punishment then it's nobody's business, just between the justice department and the convicted person. We are talking about a damn shoplifter, not a convicted murderer.

[Ideologue]

Some nice looking backs in that tatoo array. 

Concur.

[Razgovory]

Ah, they just aint into freaky ladies. Gotya

Not when they look like sailors, bikers or convicts, no.

[dps]

Maybe, maybe not. At any rate, she was dishonset and on her way back to the Filipino "Boom, Boom" house.

There is no maybe about it.  It was a federal law, not an employment policy.  Did you follow this discussion at all?

Hmm.  There's a word in that that makes me question whether or not thay had any discretion in the matter.

"We are bound by federal law that generally prohibits us from hiring or continuing the employment of any person who we know has a criminal record involving dishonesty or breach of trust

[11B4V]

  Yea.

[Camerus]

Too bad for her she didn't just do some gay bashing back in '72 instead. 

[The Larch]

Jesus pogo dancing Christ, what a nightmare of a system. I guess that background checking has grown into such a multi million industry that it can't be erradicated anymore.

It's not a problem for most people, since most people are not convicted felons.  It also seems to me like it's a good way to encourage people to not commit felonies, if the word on the street is that employers do not like to hire criminals and all that.

But just so you whiny Euros feel better: I do know of cases where convicted felons have been (knowingly) hired.  I can't say I know of any cases where a convicted thief has been hired, but I know of hirings where the candidate was a convicted DUI or drug offender.

Further, as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, most states do have rehabilitation programs where the state partners with workforce development programs in order to actively help felons find jobs.  The company I worked for prior to my current employer actually did exactly that (among several other services that it provided).

You say convicted felons and it seems that we're talking about violent criminals that have been doing years and years in jail, but in this particular case it's a 40 yo shoplifting case, so here we have a middle aged woman getting fired for something she did when she was a teenager. Fucked up.

Being 40 years ago she had every opportunity to have it pardoned/expunged from her record.  She didn't.

Then when facing an employment application she chose not to disclose it.  Her choice.

She's not being fired for something she did as a teenager.  She's being fired for choices she made much later in life: not getting the convcition expunged, and not disclosing it.

Did she know that? Is it really logical to make people jump through so many bullshit hoops for that? Do you even get a record for something as petty as shoplifting? Still broken.

[11B4V]

Did she know that?

It asked her on the app

[Caliga]

Given what's happening with the EU economy right now I guess I am not surprised that y'all think stealing is "petty".

[The Larch]

Did she know that?

It asked her on the app

I mean the opportunity to get it removed from record.

[11B4V]

Did she know that?

It asked her on the app

I mean the opportunity to get it removed from record.

I'm sure all she had to do was put forth a little effort.

If she didnt know how...google it.

Dishonest AND lazy