Conviction of a felony

Ethel · February 2004

Can the conviction of a felony be cause for automatic termination of an employee?

marc · February 2004

Felons are not a protected class, but I would not use the word automatic unless you have a company policy that states that.

In some situations, like a person handling cash getting convicted for embezzlement, you would be on solid ground. In other cases, you could terminate if the conviction was something directly related to the job or significantly hurt the company's business or reputation. The point is, there are lots of reasons a company could come up with to justify a termination if you do not just want to rely on the 'At-Will Doctrine.'

Ethel · February 2004

Am updating handbook and it presently states that "conviction of a felony are grounds for termination". The reason I said "automatic" is that we terminate for reasons listed in the "Grounds for Termination" column. I was wondering if this could remain in the book or needed to be updated in any way.

Don D · February 2004

If you aren't going to further define the issue, then I'd leave it out. The sentence is meaningless in a handbook. It does not require termination, it does not define which felonies, nor does it mandate termination. Thus, it serves no real purpose. You don't need it there to act on a felony if your business analysis is that the felony conviction would negatively impact your operations or put the company, its employees or customers at risk.

If you decide to leave it in, here's another one to add that makes just as much sense: We may on occasion terminate people.

Ethel · February 2004

OUCH!

But thanks for the advice.

Anita · February 2004

Don,

You are in fine form this morning, thanks for the chuckle it made my day x:-)

Don D · February 2004

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 02-19-04 AT 06:32PM (CST)[/font][br][br]I'm as serious as cancer. We should resist the urge to litter our handbooks with vacuous policies, statements and references. A policy statement like this can very easily trap the employer into an OBLIGATION to terminate when the employer does not have that intention at all. I'd be very careful about putting a statement like this in a handbook. Handbooks serve multiple purposes and one is to allow the employer maximum latitude and flexibility, never to strap an employer into an obligation they didn't intend. Just my thoughts. Didn't mean to 'OUCH' you. Unless you have a union, always control what goes in the handbook. It's better to have no handbook at all than to have one that paints the employer into a corner. x:-)

Ethel · February 2004

That's ok on the "ouching"it was worth it for the laugh and sage advice. This statement was put in by a labor attorney. I think that the vacuousity (did I make up a new word?!) was an attempt to give the company some wiggle room. Guessing -- don't really know it was before my time.

However, now that it is my time I had a problem with the statement. Do we have people working for us that have a felony on their record yes (many years ago and not job related). Do we consistently turn down applicants that have a record of writing bad checks, fraud, etc. YES -- even though we have to go through the whole "adverse employment action bit".

Oh well, enough for today. Thanks to all for your comments and assistance.

Ethel · February 2004

OOOOOOOOOOOPPPPS! Forgot to say that the turndowns are cashiers, personnel who will handle cash and merchandise at remote locations.

Conviction of a felony

Comments