Philadelphia To Ban Felon Question On Job Applications

Call it the "full employment for blacks" act.

And... when there's a lawsuit because a company hired a rapist who rapes a customer, will the City of Philadelphia pick up the tab? Or when a thief is hired and embezzles from the company, who will pay for that?

Oh, right. Whites.
 
Last edited:
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
The're taking Affirmative action a little to far.
 
Call it the "full employment for blacks" act.

And... when there's a lawsuit because a company hired a rapist who rapes a customer, will the City of Philadelphia pick up the tab? Or when a thief is hired and embezzles from the company, who will pay for that?

Oh, right. Whites.

Of course I don't agree with your racism here - but I do agree with you in principle. I think an employer at least has the right to know about a person's criminal record.
If there is concern about not treating convicted felons fairly - and let's remember, a convicted felon who has served his time, has paid his debt to society - perhaps a review procedure could be set up to cover situations where a convicted felon could appeal a non-hire and recover either damages if he was not treated fairly, or be given the position, reversing the non-hire.
 
Last edited:
So now a convicted child molester can get a job at a school.

Wrong.

Does this law prohibit employers from doing background checks? Oh wait, it doesnt! Its an attempt to give felons the opportunity to atleast sit down and have a interview with an employer. Also, if the felon lies on the application and the company never does a criminal background check and hires the felon, really whos fault is it?

One thing is for sure, if I was an HR person Im sure id be pissed that theres one less screening question on applications.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
Also, if the felon lies on the application and the company never does a criminal background check and hires the felon, really whos fault is it?
Why does the felon need to lie, the employer is not even allowed to ask if the person is a felon.

And how much longer till doing a background check on someone is considered discrimination?
 
They need to do a credit check and anyone that has a credit rating in the lower third should not be hired because these people have proven they cannot handle finances and may resort to theft. Might as well make it misdemeanors since they are law breakers, just dopers or stole a little less. Heck might as well include traffic offenses too since these people have shown a disregard for the law they can be expected to break rules and policies in the workplace.

Seriously I see no problem with this. There is no prohibition on a background check and if the job entails the need to prevent an ex offender from having that job a background check NEEDS TO BE DONE ANYWAY! If your hiring someone to stamp out a part on a press, what does a felony conviction have to do with that? These people need jobs too and if they do not get them, what do they do, return to crime. If most of these people were allowed to get a decent job they may have stayed clean. Of course you will have some who are incorrigible.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
Let the people who don't mind hire all the felons they want, but for the people that do mind don't make it illegal for them to find out whose a felon or not.
 
Why does the felon need to lie, the employer is not even allowed to ask if the person is a felon.

Not where I live.

Let the people who don't mind hire all the felons they want, but for the people that do mind don't make it illegal for them to find out whose a felon or not.

No ones making it illegal to find out if a potential hire is a felon or not. Your arguement isnt supported by any relevant fact.
 
It crazy how many different ways America is becoming a third world country
 

Forum List

Back
Top