Best and worst crimes for employment?

[crazy canuck]

How do employers in the US find out about criminal records?  Here employers have to be careful about such things because if the obtain the criminal record and do not hire the person they then have the onus of establishing the there is a nexus between the crime commited and the employment.

Most jobs, but not all, have a nexus with crimes involving fraud or theft.  But it is pretty hard to demonstrate a nexus between most other crimes and employment functions. 

[Ed Anger]

How do employers in the US find out about criminal records?  Here employers have to be careful about such things because if the obtain the criminal record and do not hire the person they then have the onus of establishing the there is a nexus between the crime commited and the employment.

Most jobs, but not all, have a nexus with crimes involving fraud or theft.  But it is pretty hard to demonstrate a nexus between most other crimes and employment functions.

Start with something like this...

https://www.intelius.com/criminal-check.html

[crazy canuck]

Ok now go on to answer the next part of the query.

[DGuller]

How do employers in the US find out about criminal records?

They ask you for it (or for executive summary of it, in cases like Ide's).

[Ed Anger]

Another potential ha-ha:

Employers can't ask how a Veteran was discharged. So no asking if they were dishonorably discharged. However, I've noticed Vets will mention their discharge status in a resume (HONORABLY DISCHARGED! SEMPER FI! or medically discharged) so if don't see a hint of that in the resume, I get leery.

Just me though. I'll gladly hire a vet. Just not a nut.

[DGuller]

Another potential ha-ha:

Employers can't ask how a Veteran was discharged. So no asking if they were dishonorably discharged. However, I've noticed Vets will mention their discharge status in a resume (HONORABLY DISCHARGED! SEMPER FI! or medically discharged) so if don't see a hint of that in the resume, I get leery.

Just me though. I'll gladly hire a vet. Just not a nut.

I really hate these kinds of loopholes.  The spirit of the law establishing protected classes is that some information just shouldn't be available, it's not just that employers shouldn't be allowed to ask for it.

[Malthus]

Just me though. I'll gladly hire a vet. Just not a nut.

I guess siegebreaker is out of luck. 

[garbon]

Another potential ha-ha:

Employers can't ask how a Veteran was discharged. So no asking if they were dishonorably discharged. However, I've noticed Vets will mention their discharge status in a resume (HONORABLY DISCHARGED! SEMPER FI! or medically discharged) so if don't see a hint of that in the resume, I get leery.

Just me though. I'll gladly hire a vet. Just not a nut.

I really hate these kinds of loopholes.  The spirit of the law establishing protected classes is that some information just shouldn't be available, it's not just that employers shouldn't be allowed to ask for it.

Isn't this loop whole created by the applicants?

[DGuller]

Isn't this loop whole created by the applicants?

It's created by some of the applicants that want to get an unfair advantage.  It's enabled by employers who consciously or subconsciously act on such information.  After a while, it can create a situation where you have to make use of that loophole as an applicant in order to avoid the assumption that you belong to the legally protected undesirable class, which then completely negates the law.

[Ed Anger]

Another potential ha-ha:

Employers can't ask how a Veteran was discharged. So no asking if they were dishonorably discharged. However, I've noticed Vets will mention their discharge status in a resume (HONORABLY DISCHARGED! SEMPER FI! or medically discharged) so if don't see a hint of that in the resume, I get leery.

Just me though. I'll gladly hire a vet. Just not a nut.

I really hate these kinds of loopholes.  The spirit of the law establishing protected classes is that some information just shouldn't be available, it's not just that employers shouldn't be allowed to ask for it.

There is no loophole. I'm not a robot. I'm going to use my years of experience and my gut to guide my hires. That can't be eliminated from the hiring process.

I'll follow the law. But dammit, if I don't want somebody, I'll find a legal excuse.

[DGuller]

There is no loophole. I'm not a robot. I'm going to use my years of experience and my gut to guide my hires. That can't be eliminated from the hiring process.

I'll follow the law. But dammit, if I don't want somebody, I'll find a legal excuse.

Finding a legal excuse to do something the spirit of which is proscribed is exactly the definition of a loophole.

[Ed Anger]

I disagree. It is smart business practices. 

I'm not going to hire the tattoo freak, the mutant and the heretic.

[garbon]

Isn't this loop whole created by the applicants?

It's created by some of the applicants that want to get an unfair advantage.  It's enabled by employers who consciously or subconsciously act on such information.  After a while, it can create a situation where you have to make use of that loophole as an applicant in order to avoid the assumption that you belong to the legally protected undesirable class, which then completely negates the law.

So an employer should ignore evidence in front of them?

[Admiral Yi]

It's a stupid law.  Why shouldn't employers be allowed to know some fuckup was dishonorably discharged?

[DGuller]

Isn't this loop whole created by the applicants?

It's created by some of the applicants that want to get an unfair advantage.  It's enabled by employers who consciously or subconsciously act on such information.  After a while, it can create a situation where you have to make use of that loophole as an applicant in order to avoid the assumption that you belong to the legally protected undesirable class, which then completely negates the law.

So an employer should ignore evidence in front of them?

No, you can't blame participants of the flawed system for taking advantage of the system, unless they had a hand in making the system flawed in the first place.  Ultimately the fault for the loopholes lies with those who created them, not exploited them.  It doesn't mean that you should just live with it either, though.