Anthony Samad
Wrong. We all know that’s not true. Those who have been convicted of breaking the law at some point of their life, whether they did it or not, no matter how long ago it was—walk around with a scarlet letter, an X branded on their foreheads forever. Convicts become ex-convicts. Felons become ex-felons. Sex offenders become ex-sexual offenders, drug offender become ex-drug offenders, and the list goes on. The fresh start that society talks about, in reality, rarely occurs when an ex-offender has to disclose a past conviction. The scar is re-opened, and in most instances, the disclosure becomes a barrier to moving ahead with one’s life. It’s the proverbial f“catch 22,” where you disclose it—you’re not hired—you don’t and you get the job—you’re fired for lying on your application. For many, it’s a wall to high to claim over, and for some, they just turnaround and go back the other way, to a life of crime and the pathway back to jail. Why? Because we know ex-offenders are rarely hired, and if they are—it’s the exception and not the rule. And if there is a rule of law for hiring the talented one that can explain away their conviction, it is to use that conviction to under pay (underemploy) them because they know the ex-offenders options are limited. Take less money or no job at all. Second chancers have it hard. That’s why many take more chances outside the system than to try to work within the system. They know the system is not going to treat them fairly, so they get caught up, again, and their lives become revolving door in the prison industrial complex set up just for them—the recidivists who will be back. And it all starts with a simple little box on most job applicants, Have you ever been convicted of a crime? If so, check yes. More times than not—it’s stone wall.
Last week, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors sought to bring forth a resolution to remove (relocate) the conviction check box from County employment applications. If adopted, the Los Angeles County would become the largest municipal employer in the nation to adopt such a policy. Cities like Chicago, Boston, San Francisco, Grand Rapids (MI), Alameda County (CA), East Palo Alta all have adopted similar type exclusions to discontinue discrimination against second chancers. The motion introduced by Supervisor Yvonne Braithwaite Burke, would put the question of a conviction at the end of the job interview process, versus at the beginning where ex-offenders can be unjustly discriminated against. This is brave and landmark legislation. Kudos to Supervisor Burke, who really is a pretty progressive minded elected official, for doing so—but in the cause of responsible government, it makes all the sense in the world when you consider this; Los Angeles County is the number one area in the nation for returning parolees released from correction facilities—some 45,000 per year. Where do these parolees go? Back to our communities. So, again, Los Angeles is behind the curve instead being ahead of it.
Several studies were cited, that parolees have a 70% to 90% unemployment rate; that 60% to 80% of employers (depending on the study you cite) indicated that they definitely, or would not likely, hire an ex-offender; 70% of ex-offenders go back to prison within the first 18 months of their release (largely due to the inability to find work). When you add race to the equations, these numbers get even more skewed. I remember reading a study last year that stated a white male with a conviction had a better chance of getting a job than a black male with a college degree. So, you know how difficult it would be for a black male with a conviction to get a job (impacts Latino males at almost the same levels). Some of the Supervisors asked how was it determined that the conviction was a deterrent? It’s easy. Just look at the facts within the County alone. The County of Los Angeles reviews 50,000 job applications for 11,000 new hires a year. Of the 38 departments in the County, eight (8) use conviction data on the front end of the process. Others use it throughout the process. Like racism, sexism and homophob-ism, convict-ism is a subjective process society acts like it never occurs until we look at the outcomes years later. Wealth and income disparities, work disparities and recidivism rates are all indicators (plus public survey polls). No is no public opinion poll nowhere that favors hiring ex-offenders. Public attitudes, like in the case of sex offenders, drug offenders and HIV/AIDs carriers, fall in favor of the stigma—not in favor of the solution to perpetuation of the problem. The “facts” are all there, and we wonder why crime never drops in some communities. Crime stops where work begins. And work can never begin if people aren’t given the chance. I know. I’m a second-chancer and know, firsthand, the difficulties they face. I’m one of the blessed ones because I had a network of folk—who knew me, my talents and demonstrated benefits—that could get them past the scarlet letter. As many opportunities as I’ve been provided (and there have been many), I know I’ve been denied twice as many opportunities as haters choose to conveniently bring up my past to people who don’t know me and don’t bother go any further. Most ex-offenders have no such network, and just need a chance to sell themselves and demonstrate their skills sets. All things being equal, the conviction is a demerit. Most are stopped cold at the door. Just a checked box nobody wants to take a chance on and most are excluded before the process even starts. It’s time to stop the hypocrisy with people who have paid their debt.
Telling people to get their lives together on one side but not letting do so because of their past is the ultimate contradiction. If President George W. Bush had to check the box for his DUI, he might never been Governor of Texas, or President of the United States. He wasn’t forced to disclose it…and the rest is history. So it should be for every other person seeking a second chance in life. People make mistakes, and their lives shouldn’t be thrown away because of it. Everyone deserves a fresh start after their pay their debt to society. The L.A. Supervisors continued this motion for 60 days, but track this piece closely. One never knows when they might need a fresh start in life. That person seeking a second chance in life might one day be a relative, or be YOU.
For a true “fresh start” in a person’s life, let’s start by not forcing them to check the conviction box on job applications—unless it really matters.
- Anthony Asadullah Samad is a national columnist, managing director of the Urban Issues Forum and author of 50 Years After Brown: The State of Black Equality In America.
- He can be reached at www.AnthonySamad.com
BLOG COMMENTS POWERED BY DISQUS
