Best and worst crimes for employment?

[OttoVonBismarck]

The way we do it in HK is that the applicant has to go to the police for a "certificate of no criminal record".  The police will do the background check.

Wouldn't work in the United States.

Take your average city with 80,000 residents. In that city someone who commits a crime may be arrested by municipal police, county police, state police, or a federal law enforcement agency. They might end up tried in municipal, county, state, or federal court. If they got nabbed by a Federal agency and tried in the Federal court system the records search isn't too hard.

Everything else? Not exactly easy. Municipal governments don't necessarily share court and criminal records with county / state / federal government, and county doesn't necessarily share with municipal, state, federal (you get the picture.) About the only thing we have is the national fingerprint system that CdM mentioned. In theory the way it works is if you get fingerprinted by police you prints go into the local system which periodically gets "rolled into" the national fingerprint database. This is actually pretty reliable, I've read a few stories of it breaking down, but it's relatively rare. (For example in some States smaller police departments send their records in to the State police in batches, the State police then get the prints processed into the national system...occasionally due to poor recordkeeping the smaller agencies might have records fall through the cracks that never get logged, but it's rare.) However, unless you're applying for a LEO job or a high security job employers here (including my agency for non-LEO positions) don't run any sort of fingerprint check.

I don't know that private employers even have the ability to access the fingerprint system.

Individual police departments or court houses can usually provide criminal records for a fee, but they'll only have records pertaining to their jurisdiction. So let's say I have an applicant who has lived in Fredericksburg, VA, Winston-Salem, NC, and Sacramento, CA. I could go to each of those places and to their municipal court house and ask for information on the applicant and get nothing. Because maybe he committed a crime in all three places he lived, but not with the city courts, maybe it was with the nearby county court or even State court. Maybe he lived in Fredericksburg but got arrested in Roanoke, VA (a city a good three hours drive away) for something.

Plus, what if he lived somewhere other than those three cities and just failed to mention it?

Now, some States have their shit together such that local government does share criminal records with higher levels of State government and you can get a quasi-reliable "State records search" out of those State that is quasi-reliable, but only about as reliable as you'd expect for a hodge podge, slapped together shit government records system.

There's a reason most of the background check firms here that charge $50 will miss just about everything that requires any leg work, anything that would require an actual direct call to some municipal court to even hear about it's questionable if any of the big national $50 background check firms will even come close to bothering with that.

[Capetan Mihali]

If I were hiring someone to drive a forklift I wouldn't give a rat's ass if he had been busted at a rub and tug.

Keep in mind that I would probably be a hell of a lot more lenient if I was hiring for a fast food job or something.

For most of my clients, the future employers (at least in the short term) are ones that will hire somebody with just a G.E.D.  So I expect a fair amount of their applicant pool will have had brushes with the law, child support garnishment, bad credit, etc.

I'm trying to figure out which convictions are seen as more or less harmful to general employment prospects.  The goal being to work out better deals where the clients can plead to the less damaging charges.

[Caliga]

The worst misdemeanors are generally assault and theft.  When I worked for a staffing agency, we could NOT hire anyone with these convictions under any circumstances.  For the others, it was sometimes possible to do so if the person was a strong candidate generally, though we had to have it cleared by Legal.  It was pretty tough to get anyone cleared who had drug possession convictions, but I was able to a few times (one guy just had a paraphernalia conviction, the other a pot conviction and a paraphernalia conviction both).  In both cases the candidates were otherwise very placeable... otherwise I wouldn't have bothered.

It's probably worth mentioning too that a lot of the people with criminal records tended to be very marginal candidates anyway, so it usually wasn't worth the trouble to mess with them.  That's why I'd have to view this in a different light if I was hiring for crap jobs, since I would imagine the candidate pool is tougher and you'll have more criminals in the mix in that case.

[CountDeMoney]

And, some arrests don't even result in "arrests";  they're merely citation offenses.  I don't have to book you on an open container;  that's a citation.  Hell, some departments you'd get yelled at for booking a citable offense, if that's all that's involved.  Some towns, like Ocean City where you can lock up a half dozen teeyboppers on open containers, pfft...waste of the commissioner's time.

Same goes with DUI and other traffic-related charges.  Not all agencies bother with the time to fingerprint you, or even have you see a commissioner.  Write up your citations, wait for you to sober up, and give you a quarter to call for a ride.

[Martim Silva]

So: how would you rank various crimes for employability?  Especially people who have been in hiring positions.

Seems to me you people arrest innocent people for whatever.

Don't take it as an offence, but most of what you describe is a borderline Police State.

Over here:

Sex: Solicit prostitution, solicit crimes against nature (blowjobs), sexual battery, indecent exposure

Technically hookers should pay taxes, otherwise they can get fined. Blowjobs (and soliciting them) is NOT a crime. Even less one against nature.

Sexual battery is indeed bad, though people usually let it pass. Indecent exposure often gets giggles from people. Sure, police would detain (temporarily) someone if he/she is walking naked by the street, but they'll be let out soon enough if they're not dangerous to others.

Drugs: Marijuana <half ounce, drug paraphernalia, small amounts of narcotic pills

Those are crimes? Apart from heavy drugs (heroine, cocaine...) all others are OK. That said... you can pretty much sniff the others anywhere, really. The police doesn't do anything about it.

Booze: Open container in public, open container in car, < 21 y.o.

Ok, that're religious totalitarian numbskullness. Pure and simple.

Over here, in 2004 the law was changed to state that you need to be 16 or higher to buy alcohol in a store. Not that the barkeepers/storeowners care anyway. Before that, it was not uncommon to see 12-year-olds order wine at the liquor stores... and many still do, really. I mean, we ALL did it at their age, why on Earth would we not prevent kids from doing the same thing. It's not like we turned out wrong or anything.

Money: Larceny, unlawful concealment (= shoplifting lite), worthless checks, possession of stolen goods, larceny by employee

Larceny is a crime (though you'll get out with a warning). Ditto for shoplifting, you're more in trouble if the store gets you. Worthless checks are acceptable if under $50 (the bank if forced to pay regardless of weather you have the funds or not. It may cancel your card, but that's it. For over $50, you'd just get a warning not to do it and give the stuff back (but you wouldn't really have to. Which is why most stores only accept cheques by known customers. For what it's worth, cheques are now quite rare over here - people do everything with either cash or plastic money)

Cars: DWI, driving while license revoked, driving without a valid license, speeding >15 or >30

All those just get you a fine. And not a very expensive one at that. Almost everybody who drives has them. Heck, if those were crimes, 90% of our adult population would be criminals! (the other 10% don't drive)

Weapons: Carrying a concealed weapon - gun, carrying a concealed weapon - non-gun (knife, taser, etc.)

In 2009, the regime got VERY worried about getting overthrown, what with having to tax everybody to the bone to pay foreign banks while keeping all priviledges that the highborn have. So they made new laws - now everything is illegal and needs a license (which can only be obtained if you can prove you need those weapons. Although now 'weapons' means ANYTHING that remotely resembles something martial... like a kid's little toy gun. Those are also illegal now. And so are large kitchen knives. Airsofters are fuming, they not only need to be registered in the states' archives, undergo medical evaluation, but also paint their 'guns' in bright, flourescent colours... which kinda ruins an activity where much of the time you're trying to be unseen by the opponents)

Gettin rowdy: Communicating threats, disorderly conduct, intoxicated and disorderly, 2nd degree trespass, breaking and entering (a vacant building)

None of these are crimes. People deal with this on their own, unless it develops into a very serious brawl (light fisticuffs are OK). Will you people just grow up and handle the world!

Fightin: Simple assault, assault on a female, assault by pointing a gun,

Fighting is an offence if done to REALLY hurt others. We don't differentiate between genders.

[

Police problems: Resist/obstruct/delay a public official, fictitious info to police, assault on a government official

Annoying a cop is a sure way to get beaten up. Not a smart move (our officers don't have the same restrictions yours have). Fictitious info will get you into trouble if the cops find out you knew you were lying - then you get a rather rough treatment by them.

Assault on a goverment official (an important one) will pretty much get you killed. Probably by the official itself, as they are exceptions in the law and are allowed to use military-grade weapons concealed on their persons.

(the highborn politicians are REALLY scared of the People (they know that they're not serving the nations' best interests, only their own). Self-defence classes and bodyguards are now compulsory for all cabinet ministers and secretaries of State, for example).

Obviously, larceny by employee has got to look pretty bad, but what about the rest?

Over here, most employees take stuff from the company. As long as it isn't TOO much, it's common practice. Just try not to get caught.


Frankly, most of your "offences" wouldn't even appear in anybody's criminal record.

Not that companies ask/check for those, anyway.

[garbon]

That's really all I have MSil.

[CountDeMoney]

I can't even look at applicants until after they have been distilled from many into a relatively smaller number, and I have absolutely no say whatsoever in how a list of 2,000+ applicants gets wittled down into a more reasonable number.

I don't think I'd be able to handle 2,000+ poorly written KSAs anyhow.  Be glad that's some other sucker's job.

[Caliga]

Martim, I'm not sure how relevant your information is to CM since I don't believe he is working with Portguese hoodlums... just American ones.

[CountDeMoney]

There's a reason most of the background check firms here that charge $50 will miss just about everything that requires any leg work, anything that would require an actual direct call to some municipal court to even hear about it's questionable if any of the big national $50 background check firms will even come close to bothering with that.

Yup.  If we're interested in finding out the details, police reports, etc., we'd just bird dog it the hard way ourselves.  But it would have to be a compelling case.

[Martim Silva]

Martim, I'm not sure how relevant your information is to CM since I don't believe he is working with Portguese hoodlums... just American ones.

Sorry, I've just got a litte pissed by the fact that he classifies as "hoodlums" people that we don't even see as criminals.

You know, kind of how people here at Languish might get annoyed when they see someone in the Middle East jailed for adultery, or an adult being whiplashed for having drank beer. He now seems to me very much like one of those religious freaks.

[CountDeMoney]

   Classic Silva.  Don't ever change.

[Caliga]

It might be worth mentioning that, for my part, I don't agree with many of our laws here (e.g. anti-prostitution laws, most anti-drug laws), but I think it's important to not hire people who think they don't have to follow the law, even if I may not agree with said law.  I don't trust such people to obey the company's policies and represent the company well, and I don't think I have a right to nullify the law just because I don't happen to like it.

It's kind of like how I feel on illegal immigration: I think our current immigration laws are too strict, but as long as they're in place I don't agree with the federal government choosing to selectively enforce them.  If we agree the law doesn't work, then we should work to change it as opposed to just ignoring it when it's convenient to do so.

[garbon]

  Classic Silva.  Don't ever change.

An institution of sorts.

[Capetan Mihali]

Martim, I'm not sure how relevant your information is to CM since I don't believe he is working with Portguese hoodlums... just American ones.

Sorry, I've just got a litte pissed by the fact that he classifies as "hoodlums" people that we don't even see as criminals.

You know, kind of how people here at Languish might get annoyed when they see someone in the Middle East jailed for adultery, or an adult being whiplashed for having drank beer. He now seems to me very much like one of those religious freaks.

To clarify, my role is to defend the people who have been charged with these criminal offenses -- to try to prevent them from being convicted or, if they are convicted, to get the best result possible for them.

[CountDeMoney]

Pfft, more fence straddling from Cal.  No wonder you have so many Ed Anger Disapproval Points.