Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So basically Daycare businesses across the nation will have to close down then. How can anyone be a Daycare owner and not do criminal background checks on all of their employees? They couldn't. They are responsible for children - they have to know who they are employing.
This should be alarming for any parent who uses daycare. It is opening the floodgates for paedophiles, child abusers, people who hate children, it is the worst idea I've ever heard of. - Jeri
Why couldn't a convicted felon care for children? Do you think they should be sterilized too?
I depends on what they were convicted of. An embezzler might be very good at child care. A sex offender not so much. A convicted embezzler wouldn't be much good as a cashier however. Companies that have close contact with the public are not likely to hire anyone with a past criminal record. If that criminal commits a crime against a customer, the company is automatically liable for hiring that criminal in the first place. Hence the words "presents a liability".
We've lost our minds at this point. A company is screening potential employees for criminal records because people with criminal records represent a liability. And the Obama Administration is now suing because, ta da, most of the people getting screened out are blacks.
EEOC sues over criminal background checks at Dollar General | Nashville City Paper
Then insurance companies, investment firm and banks who refuse to hire felons are all braking the law?
If Charles Manson ever gets out of prison will you hire him?That smells like narco libertarian bullshit. Recidivism is what it is because criminals are stupid and lazy and inclined to break laws. Same reason why people won't hire them. Same reason that people convicted of financial crimes are barred from working in finance. People convicted of sex crimes are barred from working in certain environments. Etc.
This smells like puritanical fingerpointing shit. If people can't earn honest money, what do you think they'll do, spend the rest of their lives unemployed bemoaning a moment of bad judgment?
The reason puritanical, self-righteous, totaltiarian-minded morons discrminate against people who have been in prison is because they are stupid and lazy and too limited to evaluate people on their strengths and skills.
Denying someone a job in daycare because they are a pedophile is common sense. That's no reason to discriminate against anyone who had done time. Denying someone a job in a store because they robbed a bank in 1983 is just wonderfully stupid.
We've lost our minds at this point. A company is screening potential employees for criminal records because people with criminal records represent a liability. And the Obama Administration is now suing because, ta da, most of the people getting screened out are blacks.
EEOC sues over criminal background checks at Dollar General | Nashville City Paper
I can understand why a retailer like Dollar General would not want to hire a shoplifter or thief. They need a criminal background check to discover that information. In fact, I can understand why every employer doesn't want to hire thief.
We've lost our minds at this point. A company is screening potential employees for criminal records because people with criminal records represent a liability. And the Obama Administration is now suing because, ta da, most of the people getting screened out are blacks.
EEOC sues over criminal background checks at Dollar General | Nashville City Paper
I can understand why a retailer like Dollar General would not want to hire a shoplifter or thief. They need a criminal background check to discover that information. In fact, I can understand why every employer doesn't want to hire thief.
Why do you think that someone who had been to prison for shoplifting will continue to be a shoplifter? It doesn't make a lick of sense.
We've lost our minds at this point. A company is screening potential employees for criminal records because people with criminal records represent a liability. And the Obama Administration is now suing because, ta da, most of the people getting screened out are blacks.
EEOC sues over criminal background checks at Dollar General | Nashville City Paper
We've lost our minds at this point. A company is screening potential employees for criminal records because people with criminal records represent a liability. And the Obama Administration is now suing because, ta da, most of the people getting screened out are blacks.
EEOC sues over criminal background checks at Dollar General | Nashville City Paper
I can understand why a retailer like Dollar General would not want to hire a shoplifter or thief. They need a criminal background check to discover that information. In fact, I can understand why every employer doesn't want to hire thief.
Why do you think that someone who had been to prison for shoplifting will continue to be a shoplifter? It doesn't make a lick of sense.
We've lost our minds at this point. A company is screening potential employees for criminal records because people with criminal records represent a liability. And the Obama Administration is now suing because, ta da, most of the people getting screened out are blacks.
EEOC sues over criminal background checks at Dollar General | Nashville City Paper
If someone did not want to be discriminated against for being a convicted felon they could always decide not to be a criminal in the first place.
I can understand why a retailer like Dollar General would not want to hire a shoplifter or thief. They need a criminal background check to discover that information. In fact, I can understand why every employer doesn't want to hire thief.
Why do you think that someone who had been to prison for shoplifting will continue to be a shoplifter? It doesn't make a lick of sense.
If it didn't make sense, then no criminal would ever repeat the crime that got them sent to prison in the first place. No one would ever have a second conviction for shoplifting. But they do, over and over again.
This guy had 19 convictions for shoplifting. Do you think that after his first conviction he was convinced never to do it again?
Detective: Shoplifting defendant has 19 earlier cases | CJOnline.com
Since 2008, Topeka police have investigated 20 thefts in which Lucas is the suspect, Detective Kristi Powell, testified, adding she has worked on 17 or 18 of the cases.
If someone did not want to be discriminated against for being a convicted felon they could always decide not to be a criminal in the first place.
Why do you think that someone who had been to prison for shoplifting will continue to be a shoplifter? It doesn't make a lick of sense.
If it didn't make sense, then no criminal would ever repeat the crime that got them sent to prison in the first place. No one would ever have a second conviction for shoplifting. But they do, over and over again.
This guy had 19 convictions for shoplifting. Do you think that after his first conviction he was convinced never to do it again?
Detective: Shoplifting defendant has 19 earlier cases | CJOnline.com
Since 2008, Topeka police have investigated 20 thefts in which Lucas is the suspect, Detective Kristi Powell, testified, adding she has worked on 17 or 18 of the cases.
That's one guy. So the kid who stole a tube of lipstick from Walgreen's 10 years ago shouldn't be hired because of that?
We have prisons so that people can pay their debt to society. After it's paid, the slate should be clean.
There's no reason to brand them and punish them further.
Why do you think that someone who had been to prison for shoplifting will continue to be a shoplifter? It doesn't make a lick of sense.
If it didn't make sense, then no criminal would ever repeat the crime that got them sent to prison in the first place. No one would ever have a second conviction for shoplifting. But they do, over and over again.
This guy had 19 convictions for shoplifting. Do you think that after his first conviction he was convinced never to do it again?
Detective: Shoplifting defendant has 19 earlier cases | CJOnline.com
Since 2008, Topeka police have investigated 20 thefts in which Lucas is the suspect, Detective Kristi Powell, testified, adding she has worked on 17 or 18 of the cases.
That's one guy. So the kid who stole a tube of lipstick from Walgreen's 10 years ago shouldn't be hired because of that?
We have prisons so that people can pay their debt to society. After it's paid, the slate should be clean.
There's no reason to brand them and punish them further.
Why do you think that someone who had been to prison for shoplifting will continue to be a shoplifter? It doesn't make a lick of sense.
If it didn't make sense, then no criminal would ever repeat the crime that got them sent to prison in the first place. No one would ever have a second conviction for shoplifting. But they do, over and over again.
This guy had 19 convictions for shoplifting. Do you think that after his first conviction he was convinced never to do it again?
Detective: Shoplifting defendant has 19 earlier cases | CJOnline.com
Since 2008, Topeka police have investigated 20 thefts in which Lucas is the suspect, Detective Kristi Powell, testified, adding she has worked on 17 or 18 of the cases.
That's one guy. So the kid who stole a tube of lipstick from Walgreen's 10 years ago shouldn't be hired because of that?
We have prisons so that people can pay their debt to society. After it's paid, the slate should be clean.
There's no reason to brand them and punish them further.
We've lost our minds at this point. A company is screening potential employees for criminal records because people with criminal records represent a liability. And the Obama Administration is now suing because, ta da, most of the people getting screened out are blacks.
EEOC sues over criminal background checks at Dollar General | Nashville City Paper
I can understand why a retailer like Dollar General would not want to hire a shoplifter or thief. They need a criminal background check to discover that information. In fact, I can understand why every employer doesn't want to hire thief.
Why do you think that someone who had been to prison for shoplifting will continue to be a shoplifter? It doesn't make a lick of sense.
The EEOC alleges that BMW's policy affected dozens of employees working for a contractor that staffed a BMW warehouse in Spartanburg, S.C. The contractor's policy was not to employ anyone with a criminal record within the past seven years. When a new contractor took over the company, BMW ordered a new round of criminal background checks and fired anyone with a criminal record from any year.
There is a much bigger problem than blanket rejection of job applicants with a felony conviction. Employers are always looking for a safe bet, someone that can do the work and won't cause a problem. Felonies, history of addiction, disabilities, past mental problems, disfigurement, and a host of different problems are red flags for employers. The easy safe thing to do is skip all applicants with red flags and stick to the safe bets.Ignoring the black angle, it's about time the discrimination against people who have been to prison ends. If someone does their time, they've paid their debt to society and the shit needs to end.
No wonder the recidivism rates are so high.
If it didn't make sense, then no criminal would ever repeat the crime that got them sent to prison in the first place. No one would ever have a second conviction for shoplifting. But they do, over and over again.
This guy had 19 convictions for shoplifting. Do you think that after his first conviction he was convinced never to do it again?
Detective: Shoplifting defendant has 19 earlier cases | CJOnline.com
Since 2008, Topeka police have investigated 20 thefts in which Lucas is the suspect, Detective Kristi Powell, testified, adding she has worked on 17 or 18 of the cases.
That's one guy. So the kid who stole a tube of lipstick from Walgreen's 10 years ago shouldn't be hired because of that?
We have prisons so that people can pay their debt to society. After it's paid, the slate should be clean.
There's no reason to brand them and punish them further.
Reductio ad absurdum at its best. We're talking about people with serious criminal records, shoplifting, theft, embezzlement, etc.
Besides, how can you as a narco libtard be in favor of the gov't telling private employers what standards theycan use?
That's one guy. So the kid who stole a tube of lipstick from Walgreen's 10 years ago shouldn't be hired because of that?
We have prisons so that people can pay their debt to society. After it's paid, the slate should be clean.
There's no reason to brand them and punish them further.
Reductio ad absurdum at its best. We're talking about people with serious criminal records, shoplifting, theft, embezzlement, etc.
Besides, how can you as a narco libtard be in favor of the gov't telling private employers what standards theycan use?
Nonsense. I'm talking about people who commited serious crimes, did their time and want to get on with their lives. I'm talking about people like you stopping them out of some kind of self-righteous tizzy.
...and what a retarded (yes, retarded) retort with the narco libtard bullshit. Employers can hire whom they please. It's not a government function to supply them with information, though.
Do you think at all?
