Conviction More Than 7 Yrs. Ago

Sunny

We recently began using background checks. I just hired a plant worker and my provider called me to say he was clean for the last 7 years but has a 3-count burglary conviction 8 years ago. He was convicted but served no time, only probation. She asked if I wanted to extend my search back further than 7 years. I am not sure if I can legally use this as a reason to term or if I should just let it alone. He will not be in contact with anything "valuable" and has been in no trouble for years. Any thoughts?

dchr9203

You cannot use it as the "sole" discriminator of an employment decision. Besides, people screw up and make stupid mistakes and shouldn't have it held against them forever. There may be extenuating circumstances. Maybe he was in the wrong place at the wrong time; guilty by association to friends who burglared and he was just along for the ride. Who knows. But after 8 years with no other apparent history or problems, I would let it alone.

lhill

I would also vote for leaving it alone. What does your hiring policy state? Do you go back only 7 years on everyone? If so, I'd stick with that.

Don D

You can do whatever you like with the results of the background check. I assume your offer was conditioned on an acceptable background check. But, whether or not it was, there is no law that prohibits your terminating the relationship based on what you learned from the investigation. Unless, perhaps you live in a state that has some law addressing your inability to seek or use such information in your process. I'm wondering, though, why you did not wait until the results were in before hiring the individual. In any event, I know of no reason you cannot terminate.

Rockie

I usually consider a couple of things. What job they will be performing, what the infraction was, how long ago, their conduct since then and finally, were they honest and up front with me about this and didn't lie on their application.

If I find out about the infraction via a background check, the individual is usually dismissed for falsification of the application.

HRinFL

I agree with Rockie. To me, if they are honest about it on the application, and the nature of the offense would not create a situation of negligent hiring (such as someone convicted of rape working in a department/facility with a large number of female ees), then I am more willing to give the applicant a chance. I have had mostly positive results with ees that have been in some trouble in the past. Typically, they are grateful that someone gave them a chance and turn out to be very loyal ees. Not always the case, but personally, it has been more positive than negative.

I had a situation where an applicant convicted of rape applied for a facility where we have a large number of female ees. The applicant also applied for available positions in facilities where there are very few female ees. The applicant was really interested in the position in the facilit where the female presence was greater (I do not believe during the hiring process he knew this, but I did). Instead of offering that position, I offered the same position in one of the other facilities. The ee has been very dependable and a good worker. Have not had any issues with him. The female ees that work in his facility are on a different shift, so I feel comfortable that there will not be any problems. He still attends meetings and appears to be committed to turning his life around.

Don D

I am confident that your employer knows you are the resident social worker and allows you the freedom and flexibility to carry out your sociologist and psychologist mission. Good luck and I hope your rapist behaves himself, for your sake if not for the sake of all your employees. I never undertook an HR assignment in 35 years with the intention of solving the ills of the world or importing my special brand of 'touchy-feely' into the worksite. I always assumed I was working for somebody else and had a job to do, not a social mission. Peace.

Sunny

Thanks everyone - we decided because of the nature of the work and the length of time ago to let him work through his probation while we make a judgement. I just thought there was some sort of prohibition about going back further than 7 years - guess I was wrong. Our application asks for felony convictions within the last 7 but it must just be corporate policy.

Whatever

Changing the topic slightly. If you are concerned about going back more than 7 years, why did the person who is doing the background check go back 8 years. What are your instructions to this person?

marc

It will come down to character assessment. If the individual was honest about the conviction and has proof of rehabilitation since - a track record of 7 years gives you plenty to look at - and can provide you solid references that are aware of his past - then you can gather all that information and decide whether or not to take a chance.

Some earlier threads - more than a year ago, I think, discussed the very high rate of recidivism. It is high enough to cause most to pause before taking this kind of risk. But if you find a person that has turned around, you might get a high return with loyalty and work ethic. It is a risk, but I believe in second chances when everything is lined up right.

Gillian3

I would hire the person, unless he was dishonest on his application, then it would be falsification and dismissed.

grannyhr

I try to follow the EEOC guidelines on convictions by considering each person and their criminal record on an individual basis. A felony or serious misdemeanor conviction is not an automatic bar to employment. We consider the position being applied for, the type and number of convictions, the amount of time that has passed since the conviction, and the employee's work record since the conviction or release from incarceration.
We do not hire repeat offenders, persons convicted of drug manufacture or sale, drug distribution, violent crimes of any type, crimes involving children, or burglary.

We do a criminal history check and if a person has not answered truthfully on their application they are rejected for falsification.