Db 8 mgt 3210

Case 8: Is Hiring Candidates with Criminal Records Wise or Risky?

Let’s start with some perspective: 33 percent. That is the proportion of working-age Americans with a criminal record. Each year approximately 650,000 people are released from prison, which is about the same as the population of Memphis, TN, or Portland, OR. All of their offenses are not equal of course, but before hastily deciding whether you would hire somebody with a record or not it helps to consider just how many people have this label.

Many hiring managers and companies have knee-jerk reactions to exclude such candidates, as reflected on many applications with the infamous box, “Have you ever been convicted of a crime? Yes or No.” When job markets are flush with candidates, excluding these candidates may not be such a problem. However, when the job market is hot and labor is tight, many companies across industries might think differently. And of course, some companies, industries, and geographies are confronted with seemingly eternal talent shortages regardless of the economy. This means such exclusionary policies may shrink an already small talent pool.

Putting the economy and labor market aside, individuals and companies excluding those with records typically do so on the grounds of limiting their liability and/or ensuring employee and customer safety. On the other side of this argument are those who feel people should be given a second chance: they’ve paid their debt to society. Research done by the Society of Human Resource Management found the three top reasons reported for hiring candidates with criminal records were: (1) desire to hire the best available candidate, (2) give workers a second chance, and (3) improve the community.

Many have argued it is unfair for criminals to be forever handicapped in the job market because of a past offense. This has led many states and cities to “ban the box” and require companies to wait until a hiring decision has been made before doing a criminal record check. On the other side of this argument is that waiting until late in the hiring process costs companies and individuals time and money, and therefore they should be allowed to gather and consider that information at the beginning.

Once you make your initial post, you will be able to see what your teammates posted. Make sure to respond to at LEAST TWO of the posts made by your teammates.

1. What is the problem? (or dilemma!)
2. What are the causes behind the problem? (You will have a look a little deeper into the case to see what problems firms are facing and why)
3. What solutions do you propose? (The case suggests a course of action- what more can you do as a HR manager?)