General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2257306

    dealing with a past felony

    Locked

    by fungusamongus ·

    I’m a guy who has been programming C, C++/OOP and now PHP open source for about 20 years. I currently own my own business in a non-IT field, and its been doing pretty well for the last 3 years. I am currently looking at getting back into software development for the long-term good of my growing family.

    I have a long resume of very good accomplishments (IBM Advanced Technologies, TransUnion, AT&T etc) in my field, and know C/C++ like the back of my hand (my recruiter told me I had one of the highest ProveIt.com scores he has seen). I sent off resumes last week and have several recruiters already sending Authorization to Represent contracts.

    Here is the problem…back in the heyday of IT madness (around 1998 or so), I got caught with a drug-possession felony (it was NOT pot or cocaine, but MDMA). I was going through a divorce and got caught up with a reckless crowd of younger women, and ended up with this charge.

    Now, I am wondering if this transgression will doom me forever in IT land. It’s not something I want to lead an interview with, but at some point BG checks will be done and it’s surely better if I mention it first to eliminate the “surprise!” factor.

    So what say you…can an ex-“felon” get a job in IT today, with the right skill set?? Or am I wasting my time because HR is going to bounce me no matter what?

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #3213904

      Omit from resume, but be honest

      by dmambo ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Based on past experience hiring, I would not try to dodge this question in an interview. Chances are that you’ll be asked about the time gap, and above all, do not lie about it. If no gap shows on the resume, then bring it up when you’ve gotten to the point in the interview process where your considered a finalist.

      It was nearly 10 years ago. Develop an “elevator speech” on how you’ve changed over that time and the impact it’s had on your life. If you’re sincere and sure that it’s not going to happen again, that’ll shine through.

      Good luck, man.

      • #3213898

        Depends on where you’re applying, as well

        by maevinn ·

        In reply to Omit from resume, but be honest

        No, I don’t think it should be on your reume, but many places have a formal application that must be completed in addition to a resume, and every one of those that I’ve ever seen specifically ask if you have a felony conviction and a place to provide a full explanation. Obviously, lying, even by omission, is a no-no!

        Legally, you CAN’T be discriminated against for the conviction. IRL? Depends on the place…And the HR. If the HR is squeeky clean, they’ll be less likely to be understanding, despite 10 years clean. It wouldn’t be enough to stop me from applying, though!

        • #3276951

          Insurance

          by juasmith ·

          In reply to Depends on where you’re applying, as well

          Most companies will not hire someone with a criminal record (no matter what their qualifications) because their insurance company won’t allow it.

        • #3209667

          That seems argueable!

          by jeroldo9 ·

          In reply to Insurance

          I very much doubt that insurance companies can have much to say about prior felony convictions. While some companies do refuse to hire persons with a felony record, it has been my experience that two issues are of interest to a potential employer.

          First, would be the nature of the crime and how would that relate to the job for which one is being considered. For example, would a public school system knowingly hire a convicted child-molester? Probably not. Another example; would a bank employ a person convicted of stealing money from her/his prior employer?

          The other point most prospective employers would look very hard at is the potential employee’s entire criminal history. A one-time event such as having been caught with a dose or two of something like Extasy neither demonstrates a true “criminal history” or any kind of likelihood that it will ever happen again. Especially if a lengthy period has elapsed since that conviction.

          I say as others have, “go for it.” If asked, don’t lie. Own up to the truth! But never let a past mistake keep you from trying to make things better for you and your family.

          Jeroldo (jercatchesfish)

        • #3209568

          it might pose a problem

          by bluron ·

          In reply to That seems argueable!

          if the person needs to be bonded. with a cimminal background it is highly unlikely the insurance company would approve any such bond.

        • #3209361

          Insurance bond

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to it might pose a problem

          The Federal Government will bond ex-felons. If the company would accept the bond, this would not be a large problem.

        • #3230264

          Government Bond?

          by johnita ·

          In reply to Insurance bond

          I never heard of this, where can I find out more about this.

        • #3230210

          not here in canada

          by bluron ·

          In reply to Insurance bond

          we do not have that particular benefit here. if an insurer will not issue a bond, thats it, out of luck. must be nice.

        • #3209359

          The Application Form

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to Depends on where you’re applying, as well

          It is prettymuch on every application form in the US, especially the standard TOPS forms.

          I think it’s Alaska, where after a very few years, you don’t have to mention it any more. All states should be this way. Let the past be in the past. Iknow I’m in the minority, because every entry-level HR flack thinks they are a junior Homeland Security God, saving the world from iminent destruction by denying average joes a decent job. My two cents.

          Mine as a 25 year old bad check, and my 60- second speech winds up with “… and of course this has no bearing on the position for which I am interviewing today.” Either the interviewer moves on or they dig some more. If they dig, I’ve already mentally moved on, `cause I really don’t want the position any more.

          Any interviewer who wants to dealve into anything older than last year is WAY to self-rightous to be dealing with real people.

      • #3276894

        Have the same headache

        by ravmanic ·

        In reply to Omit from resume, but be honest

        I had a felony conviction 12 years ago on a sexual offense. I did 2 1/2 yrs in prison and 5 years probation. I also had to register as a sex offender. Luckily my employer knew me well and stuck by me. They gave me a leave of absence from the job to do my time. About a year ago I was offered a position with another company with a significant increase of salary. I was up front with the interviewer and explained the situation. the job was offered to me and I accepted the position and was ready to leave my employer. They expalined to me there would still be a background check done by the home office in Florida. The home office made the regional company revoke the offer because of the felony. I currently still apply for positions however, to this point I never receive any offers to interview. I have a feeling that the felony conviction will prevent the offers.

        • #3205353

          It ridiculous to keep punishing for years.

          by ikara.au9 ·

          In reply to Have the same headache

          (I think it’s Alaska, where after a very few years, you don’t have to mention it any more. All states should be this way.)
          This is a sensible approach and here in OZ it is no ones business after 5 years. It is not necessary to make any mention anymore. 12 years is way to long to still find yourself being punished. Anti-discrimination laws are useless, people can to easily find some other excuse if they want to.

    • #3213897

      Have a VERY old DUI

      by tig2 ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Not a felony but the only thing in my life worse than a parking ticket. A lot of time has passed since then- hell of it was that I had gotten about three blocks from home when I realised that I shouldn’t be driving. I pulled into a parking lot and parked the car. I then started walking home. So when I was “pulled over” I was on foot. I was also over the legal limit and in possession of my car keys.

      What I was told by the nice people that run background checks for a City I did contract work for was that they were more interested in the fact that I told them as opposed to trying to hide it. I have herad that from more than one source.

      This is not information that needs to be in your resume. It should be a point of discussion. I bring it up at the point where a background check might be requested. I don’t bring it up before that point. If they aren’t doing a background check, they don’t need to know.

      DMambo is right- know what you are going to say BEFORE you have to say it. Even practise it. It will be hard enough to say without having to come up with the right words on the spot.

      Good luck. I know that you will be able to overcome this.

      • #3213892

        Tig’s new mantra

        by dmambo ·

        In reply to Have a VERY old DUI

        Keep repeating it over and over – “DMambo is right…DMambo is right…DMambo is right…”

        It should give you something to think about while you’re walking.

        I love that sound. 🙂

        • #3213890

          I’ll give it a try this afternoon

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to Tig’s new mantra

          But I am only walking 4 miles. If it works out, I’ll try it again Thursday (5 miles). If that works, I’ll try it for the 10 miles on Saturday.

          Who knows- maybe it will help. Of course, if it doesn’t, I will go back to the old mantra- I want a TR coffee cup… I want a TR coffee cup… I want a TR coffee cup…

        • #3213857

          And I know where you can get one

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I’ll give it a try this afternoon

          you just might have to abuse severely the current owner to get it. ;\

        • #3213802

          I will cheerfully trade

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to And I know where you can get one

          Eight seasons of Red Dwarf and the additionals (on their own disk) for a TR coffee cup.

          Jay? will that do it???

        • #3231931

          speaking of which

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I will cheerfully trade

          did you get my peer?

        • #3231886

          Didn’t

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to speaking of which

          And I really want to get these in the mail to you.

          Try my gmail- it tends to work pretty good. And I can confirm receipt.

        • #3231880

          don’t have that address

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to speaking of which

          so I sent again to both your comcast and excite accounts. Will just have to wait and see.

          You didn’t put me on your black list, did you? :0

        • #3209524

          That’s when the drug addiction started

          by kenscottii ·

          In reply to speaking of which

          I asked someone during an interview how did he handle the most difficult thing in his life. He started talking about a divorce and then matter-of-factly said, “That’s when the cocaine addiction started”. He was honest during the interview but he wasn’t hired.

        • #3213791

          TT, it’s a pity you say you want a TR coffee cup, cause

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to I’ll give it a try this afternoon

          if all you wanted was a TR mug – then all you need do is to pick one of the mugs that log in here every day.

        • #3231962

          But Ernest

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to TT, it’s a pity you say you want a TR coffee cup, cause

          I want one that holds COFFEE!

          But the mugs that show up here are always fun too! 🙂

        • #3232058

          These ones do as well, just open their mouth, pour

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to But Ernest

          coffee in, and they hold it well. If you want some back, first give instruction not to swallow, then open their mouth, pour coffee in, shut mouth; when you want it back, open their mouth, confirm cofee still in primary storage cavern, place your open mouth on their’s, then change head position so that your mout is below their’s, hold position until you have sufficient coffee, close their mouth, and swallow.

        • #3209658

          Coffee only

          by ontheropes ·

          In reply to These ones do as well, just open their mouth, pour

          I seriously doubt that it would work with any of [b]these[/b] mugs for a beverage containing alcohol.

          I may be willing to conduct research as the “primary storage cavern” for an alcoholic beverage. [b]NO[/b] Gin and let me check my schedule… Yep, I’m free. It may take several testing periods over several weeks to determine whether my doubt is warranted.

        • #3209653

          But NeverBusted

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to These ones do as well, just open their mouth, pour

          I never make a martini with vodka! EEEEEEWWWWWWWWW!

          I guess we will have to test with something else. How do you feel about elderly single malts?

        • #3209616

          I don’t have much experience with elderly single malts

          by ontheropes ·

          In reply to These ones do as well, just open their mouth, pour

          but I could be persuaded to perform research, if my arm was twisted. [b]OUCH![/b] Okay!

          Edited because I can never get it exactly right the first time! 🙁

        • #3276945

          Kinda like the old whine in new bottles bit

          by gentlerf ·

          In reply to I’ll give it a try this afternoon

          Personally mine would be, ” I want a MacPro, I want a MacPro, …” *grin*

        • #3276841

          Me Too

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to Kinda like the old whine in new bottles bit

          But I KNOW that I will never get one from TR. So I stick with the coffee cup. At least I stand a chance…

          Good old Bremerton. Used to live there. Used to think that it was the home of the worst drivers in the US. Then I moved here.

          I was wrong!

      • #3276957

        Pardon justice

        by viberts ·

        In reply to Have a VERY old DUI

        If you are a canadian resident, you can get a pardon from justice. Basically, you can ask for a pardon if you have not a felony in last 5 years. If you get, the only one who get your record is a judge. But if you do another felony, your pardon is cancel.

        Good chance and excuse my english

    • #3213871

      In general, no need to mention on resume, but

      by deadly ernest ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      make a point of telling them before you leave the interview room. After proving how good your were, tell them about the conviction. Don’t say I was with a bad crowd, just say something about the pressures and that you made a bad decision to use the drugs and got court, you now know better. With most people this approach will count for you not agianst you.

      However, in some employments you may need to mention the conviction in the application – usually government jobs. Where possible, talk to someone about it in their recruitment area – no need to metnion your name or the job, but ask what their policy is.

      • #3213851

        Ernest, in the US

        by dmambo ·

        In reply to In general, no need to mention on resume, but

        Nearly every employment application asks about felony convictions. Every job I’ve had, I had to fill out an app for my file even if it was requested several days after starting. Unless you want to lie, there’s really no way to hide this.

        • #3213795

          Hey DM, maybe I wasn’t clear enough

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Ernest, in the US

          In any case you are going to have to tell them. My experiences are that you have a resume and a job application, then an interview.

          The resume is a generic doc about you, your skills and experience.

          The application is a written document (often a letter) explaining why you are the best for this job and is targetted at that specific job.

          The interview is a verbal things in person.

          Every job I apply for gets a resume and application. My resume is also often handed out on speculation and available through other sources.

          Some organisations, mostly government ones, will do a basic background check on those they choose to interview before arranging the interview. In these cases you should ensure that the info re the felony is in the application, so they know from you before they get the police record check. Those that do the background check after the interview, the most common case, should be told at the interview. This gives you a better chance to explain the situation and how you’ve improved since then.

          It should not be in the resume as that is widely distributed and not everyone needs to know.

          BTW thanks for spelling the name right, so many think I’m an adverb.

        • #3213789

          One more time…

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to Hey DM, maybe I wasn’t clear enough

          Repeating DMambo:

          Every job application I have ever seen or filled out has a box you check for convictions for anything above a traffic ticket. The interview comes AFTER the written application form. If you don’t LIE on the application form, they are going to know of the conviction, on a FORM, without every having the chance to talk with you about how great you are.

          ————————

          Added on 8/10/2006:

          Context! Context!

          Oops! I just re-read my previous post realized it could easily be misinterpreted.

          I was not advocating lying on the application form. I was trying to say that if the form is asking about past convictions, and if the applicant has one, and if he does not lie about it, the prospective employer will know before the interview takes place and may prevent the interview altogether. This may be obvious to many, but I was responding to Ernest who resides in Australia and was trying to clarify in case practices there are different than in the USA.

          My view:

          – You should tell the truth in your resume. But, it is OK to omit something like a criminal conviction (from your resume).

          [Your resume is a marketing document. You don’t advertise past transgressions in a marketing document. An Exxon marketing document will not mention the Exxon Valdez. White Star Line would not mention the Titanic. Etc.]

          – You should tell the truth on an application form. If it asks about past criminal convictions, you must respond truthfully. I like the “will discuss during interview” suggestion. But, I still think I would opt for an occupation where personal credibility is not being questioned over and over. Start your own business and stay there.

          – You should tell the truth in your interview.

          – You should do your best to introduce something negative like an old criminal conviction at the best time and in the best way possible. But, a past criminal conviction should be disclosed BEFORE you become an employee.

        • #3213749

          If it’s on the form then that is the time to say so

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to One more time…

          but I have seen such a box only on govt job application forms. If it’s not on the form then you save it for the interview. I’ve had job application forms from companies in the USA and of the six, only the two govt agencies had it as part of the applciation form – but that was back in 1998, so things could be different now.

          I still see it as, if they don’t ask up front you don’t say anything until the interview, but you must tell them before they do the checking or offer you the job.

        • #3276940

          RE: On the form

          by gentlerf ·

          In reply to If it’s on the form then that is the time to say so

          Most of the time, there is a time limit attached to the question, e.g., “Have you been convicted of a felony in the past 7 years?”

        • #3276959

          As those of you…

          by jay_el_72 ·

          In reply to One more time…

          That know me realize, this is what I deal with every day at work since I teach convicted felons in an Oklahoma prison. We provide them with training and then try to provide placement for the students.
          On most all applications it will ask if you have been convicted with a felony then say someting like “If yes, explain…”
          I have my students check yes because they will be terminated at some point in the future if they lie. Yet, on the explanation they write “Will discuss at interview.”
          Yes, some places will never even consider you for employment but you have to keep on trying at other places. Legally, they can ask and legally they can decide not to hire you based upon a felony conviction. If anyone is interested, I can give them much more information than most of you will want to read in a thread reply.
          http://www.okcareertech.org/skillscenters/index.htm

        • #3276881

          Oops!

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to As those of you…

          Context! Context!

          Oops! I just re-read my previous post in this part of the discussion and realized it could easily be misinterpreted.

          I was not advocating lying on the application form. I was trying to say that if the form is asking about past convictions, and if the applicant has one, and if he does not lie about it, the prospective employer will know before the interview takes place and may prevent the interview altogether. This may be obvious to many, but I was responding to Ernest who resides in Australia and was trying to clarify in case practices there are different than in the USA.

          My view:

          – You should tell the truth in your resume. But, it is OK to omit something like a criminal conviction (from your resume).

          [Your resume is a marketing document. You don’t advertise past transgressions in a marketing document. An Exxon marketing document will not mention the Exxon Valdez. White Star Line would not mention the Titanic. Etc.]

          – You should tell the truth on an application form. If it asks about past criminal convictions, you must respond truthfully. I like the “will discuss during interview” suggestion. But, I still think I would opt for an occupation where personal credibility is not being questioned over and over. Start your own business and stay there.

          – You should tell the truth in your interview.

          – You should do your best to introduce something negative like an old criminal conviction at the best time and in the best way possible. But, a past criminal conviction should be disclosed BEFORE you become an employee.

        • #3209349

          Resume: Alternative View

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to One more time…

          Having read many articles on resumes that all preach chronological resume, ever increasing responsibility and accomplishments (a.k.a. bigger, better, faster, more!) I’m beginning to wonder if the rest of us shouldn’t just go contrarian:

          Big fat list of certs I don’t have.
          Graduated bottom 1/3 of my HS class some 35 years ago.
          Convictions.
          Forget my employment history, here’s all the time I was out of work.
          I was fired here, here, and here.

          You get the picture.

    • #3213859

      Lucky for me

      by jdclyde ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      “Fleeting and eluding” wasn’t a felony back then! ]:)

      It is now, and NOT something anyone wants to do now. They “frown” on that sort of behavior. :p

      If a cop is a trained professional, and you can get away from him, is using your plates to track you down the next day cheating? Very unsportsman like! X-(

      • #3276927

        Fess up, JD..

        by maecuff ·

        In reply to Lucky for me

        What did you do??

        • #3276847

          party party party

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Fess up, JD..

          This was one of those “old enough to know better, young enough not to care” moments.

          Picture this, jd, 20 years old, the wild long hair/heavymetal headbanger, tearing up the world on his motorcycle.

          Me and my partner in crime had been hitting all the bars and parties that day, and while not drunk, had a good shine on. 😀

          It was about 2:30 am, had just closed down the last bar and were on our way back across town to a party we knew of. Speed limit was 25, we were doing probably 40. cop [b]TRIED[/b] to catch us.

          My bud went one way, I went the other. OF COURSE THE COP HAD TO GO AFTER ME! By using the gears as my brakes, I can get going about 60 and still stop at the next corner if I needed to, so it took about four blocks to lose him in the city. B-)

          Went to a field that had tall grass, laid my bike on it’s side, brushed up the tracks so you couldn’t see where I drove in, and layed down and went to sleep. (they catch you by doing a search grid, so if your not moving, they can’t find you).

          My bud had calmly drove home, slammed a few more drinks to calm his nerves. Saw a light come up the road and figured it must be me. (he had been home drinking for 20 minutes by that time). Took his drink and one for me outside, and three cop cars came flying into his yard and took him away at GUN POINT for “drunk driving”.

          They tracked us down with our plates.

          They left a message I had until 10pm the next night to turn myself in or they would issue a warrent for my arrest. I slept the booze off, and at 9:55pm I walked in “I understand your looking for me?” (me? A smartass? well, ya!) 😀

          Went to court with my lawyer and he came back with two plea agreements for me to choose from.

          Fleeing and eluding

          or

          Reckless driving / no cycle endorsement (I really HAD planned on getting that dang thing too!)

          What was the difference? First has less fines, more chance of jail time. Told lawyerman to keep my a$$ out of jail.

          If the fleeing and eluding would have been a felony back then like it is now, I would not have got off so easy.

          6 points on my liscense and $110 in fines. :0

          I hate to say it, but running away and getting caught, I got in less trouble than if I would have stopped in the first place! I would have gotten the big DUI, and that isn’t cool in MI. Lets just say they “frown” on that sort of behavior.

          I am now usually the designated driver and stop drinking about an hour before we leave the bars. me, the responsible one! B-)

        • #3276822

          You are a rebel..

          by maecuff ·

          In reply to party party party

          My husband and I don’t drink and drive EVER. If we go out, it’s usually to a restaurant close to home and we’ll walk there and back. Or sit on our front porch or our neighbor’s patio.

          There were times, though, that I probably should have been arrested. I cringe when I think about how irresponsible I was when I was younger. I remember one morning, my dad got me out of bed on a Saturday morning and asked how much fun I had the night before. I tried to play innocent until he had me look out my bedroom window. I had parked the car in the yard, parallel to the driveway. I was off by a good 4 feet. And that was AFTER a 45 minute drive home.

        • #3276787

          For the first time in about a decade

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to You are a rebel..

          I have been greatly compelled to go out and drink for about a year now. Not sure exactly why… ;\

          But I am not a “drink to get drunk” guy and never have been. This makes me the logical choice for driver except for on special occasions.

          Oh, I don’t like the meatmarket bars either. Have some rounds, play some pool or some darts. I wish I still lived across the road from a bar like I did about 18 years ago! Oh well. 😀

        • #3276724

          You are not thinking well….

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to For the first time in about a decade

          I have read every post in the section and I find that while there are open minded people, most seem not to be able to think. Opening your own firm is a good option but requires funding which felons mostly don’t have. The people who are caught for I.T. crimes don’t have felony records – do they? Therefore, the background check as a screening tool is of limited value. If the crime where I.T. related then the BC would be of value. You talk about character, I.T. is a rapidly growing field requiring rapid adaptability, risk taking, and imagination. Thinking ‘out of the box’ often does supply these traits. The criminal mind set most often does. Another item that might be considered is at what point does the pissed off, frustrated felon with substantial skills turn against you, your company, or society and uses his/her skills in illegal endevours. Point in case: every few days a new security patch is released by Microsoft. Many of the felons that an I.T. manager turns away has substantial hacking and security skills and would be happy to put them to use for you rather than against you. Most felons applying for work are looking to turn their life around, not to commit more crimes.

          Should you think I don’t know what I speak of I spent 20 years as a career felon.

        • #3276707

          Your Points Don’t Support Your Conclusion

          by darinhamer ·

          In reply to You are not thinking well….

          The points you put in your post are all the more reason not to hire known felons, not to give them a second chance. I’m not following your arguments. How can you reach your conclusions based on the examples you give?

          The fact that some people do not have a criminal background but still commit crimes, is not an effective argument against background checks. It means that even if you weed out known felons, you’re still likely to be dealing with people with no character, who will rob you blind given the chance. That doesn’t mean I might as well go ahead and hire all of the people I KNOW have already done it, or who have otherwise broken the law (committing a felony).

          Also, you say things like “Many of the felons…” and “Most felons…” But where is the proof? Do you have any data. The only proof you offer is anecdotal, based on your own experience being a career felon for 20 years (kind of limits your credibility to begin with). But why should we believe that even though you spent 20 years committing felonies and are now reformed, that “most” or even “many” other felons are the same as you? Need some proof–data-based evidence not opinions or feelings.

          I believe–although I don’t have any proof–that most people want to be open minded and give people a second chance, but does that mean you should ignore what is an obvious risk to your business and your livelihood?

        • #3276703

          Most but not all

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to You are not thinking well….

          There have also been many discussions about hiring hackers to protect your company from hackers. MOST hacks are inside jobs, so can you take the chance?

          And a background check does more than a felony check. There are employers that actually do credit checks as well (regardless of if it is legal or not), and if you have money problems, you ARE a higher risk of employee theft.

          And depending on what the offence was, some will be felonies, depending on what the target was and even if it was in another state they can get you.

          Anyone CONVICTED of violence has no place in any organization of mine. There are somethings that you let slide, there others that you don’t.

          A thief is also someone with no place in my personal or professional life in any way, shape or form.

        • #3209643

          Thinking well….

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to You are not thinking well….

          Fisrt, I unintentially posted this in the wrong thread; I meant it to be in the main thread.

          The statistics are maintained by the U.S. Dept of Justice if you care to search.

          While I respect the man who stated that criminals have no place in his personal or professional life. I disagree with him. On average among Black Americans, 1 in three men have been incarcerated or are one parole or probation; among white males the figures vary between 1 in 10 to 1 in 33; again the source is the U.S. Dept. of Justice. Women are catching up fast.

          The point of most thefts being inside jobs is well taken. These were presumably done by people who had passed a background check — huh.

          I also notice that there is no response to risk takers, rapid adaptability, nor imagination. You need in any firm to have people who do not conform to your paradigm to grow. I offer up Microsoft again.

          Today, I downloaded eight security patches from MS, that was on top of the 50 already installed. How many were found by hackers. Never know. Follow the congressional hearings on spyware and data miners. Upstanding people are taking the fifth amendment to avoid testifying about their activities to collect the information.

        • #3209573

          didn’t say criminal

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to You are not thinking well….

          Said Thief. Especially someone that steals from people they know. I am big on trusting people around me. I don’t trust you, you are not around me. I have only a handful of people I consider friends, but I would trust them with my life.

          Bringing MS into as an example doesn’t carry a lot of weight as I am more of a *nux guy anyways! 😀

          I recognised that not all offenses are the same, and not all will black list you for life. But if I have any reason to doubt someone, why would I place my future at rist for them?

          Someone with a violent conviction could be violent again.

          Someone with theft convictions would be more suspect.

          I have access to every confidential piece of information this company has. I would open that up to “give someone a second chance”? Don’t think so.

          And yes, many of the hackers get that job JUST so they can get inside of security.

          I am not the one that put the strike against people with felonies. I am just paid to protect my employer from as much risk as possible.

          As for people passing background checks, they are not perfect. That means they have to be tightened down more, not disregarded, would you not agree? It also is from people that are not convicted criminals because they have not been caught YET.

          Good luck finding a place.

        • #3209521

          Think about the same.

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to You are not thinking well….

          JD I never said that a person was to be given uproven trust. I read your profile. You were not hired into the position that you have, you had to work at it. After time you defaulted into the position, but you first had to prove your abilities and earn your trust. Should this opportunity not be given to another who screwed up in the past?

          I support your position on violence, but allow for exception and circumstance. Government itself teaches that violence is a politically viable tool. This does not excuse its unrestrained use and I do not like being around people who are violent. On a lessor physical level, how many arguments have you been in with employees or others? This is violence, but restrained violence.

          Someone with a theft conviction should be watched. But is banning them a real solution? A worst case scenerio is that the person would be force to commit more theft to survive, though admittedly this is a weak argument.

          I disagree with you that many hackers get that job to get inside security. In my experience most crime are those of opportunity, not planning. But some are planned. I know one hacker that rather than get the job he made a CD portfolio that contained a trojan and got an interview. When the interviewer looked at the portfolio company security was compromised. This hacker was caught after stealing several hundred thousand dollars from Walmart. He deliberately blew the interview. It took imagination.

          I fully agree that many crimes are committed by people who are not yet caught but disagree with the concept of tightening background checks. Many HR types have a little test that is much more accurate in determining integrity than a background check; it is less expensive to boot.

          On the *nix Vs. Windows issue, in some recent article (last month or so) on one of the security sites I frequent a security comparison was conducted between Linux and Windows. Linux lost. I believe that *nix is useful and has its place, but like all complex software it has bugs. I also read the proof of concept of installing virii and trojans without root privelge in *nix. On my own computers I had to remove Linux because of difficulties with laptops, wireless networks, audio drivers, 1GB ethernet controllers and video drivers. BUT, I do have more than one Linux box that I use for testing. 🙂

          I am not currently looking for work. I am a full time student pursuing a Ph.D. in Computer Science. If I were to ever work for you, all of my abilities would be at your disposal, including the questionable ones when needed. My personal life is my own and not for sale or rent to any god or government or corporate.

          Wish you luck!

    • #3213779

      Try consulting

      by techexec2 ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      If I were in your position, I would do independent consulting work instead of applying for employee jobs. The hiring process for contract work is simpler for many reasons. That there is no “firing” is among them. Easier to start. Easier to end. Therefore, there is less concern up front on the part of the client.

      The conviction will still be an issue to deal with, but less of one. By providing a professional service that you are SELLING, you will often be able to SKIP over the written application form and go directly to the interview with the hiring manager or business manager you will be working for.

      During the interview, AFTER you have discussed what you can do for the client and s/he wants to hire you, disclose and explain about your transgression. Talk about it like it was a lifetime ago and you can barely remember being that person. Be short and direct. “…Just to ensure you hear of this from me directly…”.

      “Felony” is such a loaded word for many people. Ignorant people, and there are SO MANY of them, react to it. You’re not OJ. You just made a personal mistake.

      Good luck to you.

      • #3209592

        It’s Definitely Doable – Consulting

        by ttander24 ·

        In reply to Try consulting

        Having a felony conviction can make things a bit difficult, but it can be done. Try consulting/contracting. Try computerjobs.com, monster, and dice. There are a lot of consulting opportunities that can be realized without a background check. Be upfront and don’t lie only if it comes up. Apply for state, local governement, and city positions. There are a lot of companies that do hire felons. You just have to do your research.

    • #3213773

      Expunge a conviction

      by albertg ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      You might check with an attorney about expunging the conviction. If it can be expunged. i.e., legal jargon for erased, then no one will ever see the conviction except law enforcement officials.

      • #3213747

        I forget about that one until you mentioned it.

        by deadly ernest ·

        In reply to Expunge a conviction

        In NSW, and most Australian states, any conviction of any sort that is more than 10 years old does NOT have to be mentioned to an employer, except in certain cases – such as dealing closely with children (child carer, teacher, etc), government jobs, and a few other specials.

        Everything over 10 years is automatically assumed as ‘spent’ and the police doing background checks only look at the last 10 years.

        • #3232041

          Australian Law

          by nehpets ·

          In reply to I forget about that one until you mentioned it.

          Any conviction that is over 10 years old does not have to be legally mentioned, however it will appear in a police check.

          You can apply at any police station for a spent conviction form, and apply (there is a minor cost) and it takes about 4 to 6 weeks.

          You will then be sent a letter advising you of the outcome.

          One of the things the police check is that you have had NO other offences in that ten year period (i.e DUI etc) which can affect your application.

          Once the conviction is marked as spent on your record, any check by any non justice entity will not see the conviction.

          Any police clearance certificate will not show the conviction.

          and no I am not telling how I know…. 🙂

        • #3276986

          That may be the way in Queensland, but last time I checked in NSW

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Australian Law

          it was automatically listed as spent if over 10 years and nothing else to reactivate it int hat time.

          BTW I was checking the rules with the NSW Police HQ on behalf of the HR unit I was working with at the time. I don’t mind saying how I know.

        • #3201442

          Not that way in all other Australian States

          by nehpets ·

          In reply to That may be the way in Queensland, but last time I checked in NSW

          I have worked for the Justice Departments of 3 mainland states, and in all of them an application has to be made, a conviction is not automatically spent. Also the application is made to the Justice department, not the police, but it is made at a police station. Police simply act as the conduit, but the relevant legislation is under the Justice Department. The police are not always forthcoming in assisting people with this process, and there have been instances of mis-inforation being given out. Suggest you check with Dept of justice, ather then police.

      • #3276791

        Patriot Act Banned Expungement !

        by buddy extra ·

        In reply to Expunge a conviction

        Your too late. The Patriot Act passed by Congress
        banned expungements. Renounce your U.S. citizenship, leave the country, and sneek back in. Then get a job as an illegal alien, or change your name to Gonzales, use forged documents and get rich.

        Good Luck,

        Esta La Vista

        • #3209347

          I must have missed that part

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to Patriot Act Banned Expungement !

          .. because oneof my attorney buddies still does a good business in expungements.

          Executive clemancy is a viable option, if all you have is state charges.

          On the federal level, you or your kin have to be big time contributors, and you have to wait 8 years between attempts.

      • #3276659

        2 cents more for Tigger DUI

        by dageezer ·

        In reply to Expunge a conviction

        Your story really ticks me off! Because of an overzealous “punk cop” – you got a ticket for something that never should have happened. To be charged with DUI you GOTTA BE IN A VEHICLE and DRUNK! The fact that you were walking with keys in your pocket meant zip! That cop screwed you up big time! And if you had a lawyer you wouldnt have had this worry since he would have gotten the case tossed. I remember having a similar experience with a piece of crap cop when I was in college. Thank God I had a friend who helped me out -the sad part is the punk cop was able to continue his savory career! Its guys like that that make it bad for the (real) “good guys” trying ot do the right thing!

        • #3276654

          The argument was

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to 2 cents more for Tigger DUI

          That being in posession of my keys meant that it was probable that I had driven my car the distance of three blocks from my home while not sober under the limits in law at the time.

          The problem has ever been that reasonably law abiding people can screw up simply because they are unaware of the laws currently.

          On its face, the situation is outrageous because I was not at the time operating a vehicle. But I understand the probability factor as well. I would have understood it better if I hadn’t had a squeaky clean record up to that point. One speeding ticket in my life and that had been over 10 years before.

          And I am a tragically honest person. Oh well.

          Bottom line- make it your business to know what the laws are and conform to them. Had I known then what I know now, I would have removed the ignition key from my ring, locked it in the glove, locked my car, and walked home with my house keys. Would have saved me much.

        • #3209608

          Punk cop – I love the imagery of a cop with spiked purple hair

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to 2 cents more for Tigger DUI

          and rings in his nose and lips. When I read that line, that picture was what went through my mind.

          Here in Aust, to be copped for DUI you have to be opening the driver’s door with the key on you, that’s enough to ensure the INTENT. Open the passenger’s door and they can’t touch you until you switch to the driver’s seat.

          Walking down the street, what did the bugger expect you to do, throw the keys away?

        • #3201441

          This is only True in NSW, not other Australian states

          by nehpets ·

          In reply to Punk cop – I love the imagery of a cop with spiked purple hair

          Most Australian states have serious differences in traffic laws which cause all sorts of interesting results for poor punters. In W.A and S.A. the behaviour you describe to police would be thrown out by a magistrate as it doesn’t reflect intent (the guiding principle behind most law). Additionally in W.A. the copper would probably get a reprimand, as it smacks of entrapment.

    • #3231975

      Past Convictions

      by bfilmfan ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      In addition to the good advice of others, I would like to recommend that you read the application carefully. Most employers ask if you have been convicted of a felony in the last 7 years and not if you have EVER been convicted of a felony.

      I’ve consulted with a number of high security government positions and have known people holding security clearances that have had past felonies (usually substance abuse or driving while under the influence).

      Felonies, like misdemeanors, have degrees of severity. Most employers recognize there is a world of difference between someone that had a conviction 10 years ago for having some drugs in their possession and someone that assaulted or murdered someone.

      I know that I would consider a 10 year old felony with no further convictions to be a past event. Hell we all have histories. Learning to deal with the whole person is called management.

      • #3231967

        BFilm is absolutely right, but…

        by dmambo ·

        In reply to Past Convictions

        the problem is that during the interview process, employers do not know the whole person, only the tiny slice they see at the time.

        Regardless of how much mark@’s life has changed during the years since his conviction, he’s got an uphill battle ahead of him. It’s likely that some HR (and IT) mgrs will consider his record as the tipping point in favor of the competiton. It might not be fair, but that’s the way it is. He’d better be well-prepared for it.

        The sad thing is that it’s very possible that others in line for jobs could have worse incidents in their past, but may not have been caught or just had good representation. Those people probably don’t even consider that issue; it might just be a “lost weekend” to them that they reminisce about when they get together with their buddies. For mark@, it’s an albatross he’ll live with forever.

        • #3231890

          “lost weekend” is right!

          by fungusamongus ·

          In reply to BFilm is absolutely right, but…

          “For mark@, it’s an albatross he’ll live with forever.”

          DMambo, you could not have said it better…it was a “lost” weekend and IS now something that not only kept me away from Big IT (and nice paychecks) for years, but is now a never ending noose around my neck.

          Thanks to all for the great suggestions…it will be an uphill battle I know but like everything else it can be overcome with perseverance. I have to sleep in the bed I made…

          HOWEVER, it really is shame how today’s world works…at the time of the event I was a very highly paid consultant at IBM in Fort Lauderdale, paying a large weekly tax bill to Uncle Sam and providing a service to a powerful company. Due to a “recreational” event and a very bad 10-seconds, my entire life and record as an employee built over 14 years was shattered.

          It’s really not right…the drug laws in this nation should not be set up to ruin someone’s life for a single bad night.

        • #3276936

          All I can offer are my best wishes

          by dmambo ·

          In reply to “lost weekend” is right!

          Good luck in your job search, amigo.

          Keep us posted. 🙂

        • #3276926

          About those drug laws…

          by gentlerf ·

          In reply to “lost weekend” is right!

          you said: “It’s really not right…the drug laws in this nation should not be set up to ruin someone’s life for a single bad night.”

          Sadly, its an overreaction by the intolerant. I have met a number of them over time, and was one. Now I am a lot more tolerant. I had couple of convictions in my life but they did no lasting harm in my job life. What did was something far harder to combat and that is Asperger’s Syndrome. In my case, one of the Syndrome’s aspects cost me a job through the intolerance I mentioned earlier.

        • #3276885

          Welcome to the club amigo.

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to About those drug laws…

          Both my son and I have Asperger’s – it has taken a slightly different twist in each of us. It’s harder for my son as he can only process spoken words at less than half the rate most people speak at, thus he misses most of any spoken instructions. That means what he does get makes little sense. So the school system tagged him as stupid. Until the truth was found out when he was in year 9, a bit late.

          In year 3 the school system, and my ex, said he was ADHD – but he had already demonstrated behaviours incompatible with that diagnosis. It took me 6 years of fighting to get the right to have a proper diagnosis done. Luckily I was able to stop them drugging him. Wonderful what a threat of a billion dollar law suit can do to some beaurocrats.

          My problem is more social interaction and spelling, I often mispell words that look OK to me but other says out and otu are not the same, ditto re the and teh.

        • #3232040

          or he could move to Australia..

          by nehpets ·

          In reply to BFilm is absolutely right, but…

          Better environment,
          better lifestyle,
          better beaches,
          better beer,
          less pressure (well maybe not, it is IT)

          p.s. we don’t actually put shrimps on the barbie…

        • #3276803

          geez…that actually sound pretty good!

          by fungusamongus ·

          In reply to or he could move to Australia..

          Maybe you are on to something steveg@…does Australia allow convicted felons into its country? I know in some cases it is problamatic to travel abroad with a criminal record.

          Plus, I grew up on the beach and still surf on occasion…for those of you that know anything about surfing I actually grew up will Kelly Slater (8 time world champ). He played for two years on my junior league basketball team.

        • #3209612

          gee mate, we were founded by convicted felons

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to geez…that actually sound pretty good!

          Actually, the dept of immigration do background checks and a criminal record can be a problem DEPENDING upon what it was for and how long back. Also we have a wonderful appeals system that even lets in known terrorists, some of our judges are as bad as those they talk about in California.

          Give it a go, the worst they can say is no.

        • #3201439

          Felons welcome*

          by nehpets ·

          In reply to geez…that actually sound pretty good!

          Deadly is right, we started as a penal colony for the poms (English) and it has become a status symbol here to have forebearers who were convicts!

          About the only thing a convict can’t do in Australia is run for Parliament, and thats no loss!

          And seeing your from Melbourne FL, it would be fairly easy for you to move here as we have a city called Melbourne, its the capital of the state of Victoria.

          * NOTE – we don’t actively encourage people to committ crimes before coming to Australia! 🙂

    • #3231896

      Anything is possible…

      by compootergeek ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Where I work, they perform BG (background) checks on all FTE (full time employees).
      The company also hires lots via TEMP to FTEs.
      Few years back, there was a TEMP that was unable to get hired to FTE, due to a “bad record”. However, the manager liked that person’s work, and kept the TEMP on a long time, and eventually the manager convinced the company to hire this person. I’m not privy to any special agreements or contracts that were made for this individual, but I thought you should know, ANYTHING is possible.
      And I agree with others here, don’t bother with putting it in your resume, but be honest when they ask.
      Best of wishes!

    • #3231866

      Don’t bother with anything healthcare-related

      by bschaettle ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      By law, healthcare institutions cannot knowingly hire anyone with a drug conviction. Talk to a lawyer to see if there’s anything that can be done to expunge your record.

    • #3231858

      forget educational field as well

      by jdclyde ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      At least in Michigan, there is a big crack down of convicted Felons working in the school system, and once you have that big F attached to you, people don’t want you around their kids.

      Of course the average person does not seem to understand that not all felonies are created equal, and while some pose a clear danger to any and everyone around them, many don’t.

      • #3276890

        K-12 no… but higher ed….

        by vicky.spelshaus ·

        In reply to forget educational field as well

        Try non-private higher ed… At the state college I work for we hired a guy currently on work release for his drup conviction. He was the most qualified, and administration was afraid of a discrimination lawsuit if they didn’t hire him.

    • #3231846

      You’re going to have a hard time for a long time

      by m_a_r_k ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      It’s a tighter job market today. Companies are being more cautious in who they hire. Like it or not, an ex-felon is seen as a big risk. If you didn’t have the will-power and responsbility to not transgress once before, how can a company (where the hiring managers know nothing about you personally) trust you not to transgress again? Most companies do background checks. Some won’t mind a misdemeanor. My company even booted a job candidate for an unpaid traffic ticket. Getting caught up in drugs because you were going through a divorce and ran with a crowd of reckless women won’t cut it as a valid excuse for committing a felony of any kind. People get divorced all the time. A company will look at that and come to the conclusion that you will go on a drug binge as soon as you’re involved in a pressure-cooker at work. Or if you have marital problems again (and EVEYONE has a bump or two in their marriage.) Sorry to be a deliverer of such gloom and doom but you have to look at it from the company’s point of view. I really don’t have any advice because I’ve never been in this situation and haven’t ever known anyone personally who has been in this situation. I guess I’ve lived an isolated life.

    • #3231836

      Your Stuck

      by the admiral ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      The felony never falls off your record if you are over 18. You can say ex-felon or anything that you want, the fact of the matter is that they look at what the felony was and people will not touch you if it is drug related, violence related or in any other way related to a really bad thing.

      As stupid as you were, and as much as you know now, as long as it is on your record, you are forever marked.

      • #3231824

        Er… Mr. Admiral

        by m_a_r_k ·

        In reply to Your Stuck

        [i]”they look at what the felony was and people will not touch you…if it is…in any way related to a really bad thing”[/i]

        What kind of felony NOT a really bad thing?

        • #3231802

          lots of things

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Er… Mr. Admiral

          because with the whole “interstate commerce” clause used as much as it is, regardless of if it applies or not, there are lots of things that are felonies.

          Not paying your taxes.

          Insider trading.

          Throwing things at the mail man.

          Crossing state lines with an underage girl for the purpose of sex. oh wait, that is a bad thing… Scratch that one…

          oh yeah, fleeing and eluding is NOW a felony.

        • #3231766

          A non bad felony

          by crashoverider ·

          In reply to Er… Mr. Admiral

          Mark, I have been following the story of Russell Kanning on http://www.nhfree.com forums and he was charged with 5 felonies and has been found guilty by a judge of 4 of the felonies I believe 2 of them were disorderly conduct and 2 other felonies.

          Russell was charged with these felonies because he was attempting to enter a IRS office and hand out flyers to the employees. In my eyes that is not a bad felony it depends on the situation.

        • #3230300

          There is a concept called “felonization”

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to A non bad felony

          … where crimes that were misdemeanors or not even crimes at all should now be felonies.

          Law enforcement and politicians like these, as it makes them look as if they are “doing something” about crime.

        • #3232039

          a non bad felony

          by nehpets ·

          In reply to Er… Mr. Admiral

          how about repossessing computer equipment sold to a shyster who refuses to pay, then because you don’t know enough law, you get busted for stealing your own stuff, then top it off with poor legal representation at court.

          Stupid yes.
          Bad… I don’t think so.

          p.s. the person mentioned was the bast IT hire I ever made in almost 16 years.

        • #3230292

          Non-Bad Felony

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to Er… Mr. Admiral

          $10 check, with a stale date, cashed by the ex-wife of the person it was written to. She was cute, batted her eyelashes, and the bank cashed it, knowing the acount was closed.

          Of course the check-writer deserved a felony conviction (and can teach my kids any day he wants to).

    • #3231768

      It’s hard to say

      by maxwell edison ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      I do a lot of hiring for my company, and I do the only hiring for one particular department. Moreover, many of my hires move up and out of my department into other departments with positions of more individual responsibility. So a lot of people who work at my company have initially come through, and have been trained by me. When I hire somebody who’s to start in my department, I always make the final choice on who to hire, at least I pretty much do, but my boss (the company’s owner) has veto power over it. He’s never vetoed any of my selections, not ever (and there have been a lot) — except one.

      I wanted to hire a guy who was looking for his first job out of prison. He was sentenced to a few years for a gun related/drug related crime. I was impressed by the guy’s work, he seemed sincere in wanting to get his life back on the right track, I liked his attitude and honesty, and I wanted to give him a chance where other employer’s wouldn’t.

      I was really pissed, and I even got into a huge argument with my boss when he told me no. I’m not really one to hold back giving my opinion (as some of you know), and this was no exception. I let that “compassionate Democrat” (my boss) know exactly what this “mean-spirited Republican” thought about his hypocrisy. I almost quit over it, and I probably even came close to getting fired. It took a while for the hard-feelings to pass.

      So if it were me (or somebody like me), I’d say that honesty is always best, present yourself professionally and sincerely, prove you can do the job, and it’ll be yours. On the other hand, I guess not everyone thinks like me. I never thought I’d personally see it, but I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised.

      This probably didn’t answer your question, but it might be better than a blanket “I don’t know”. Good luck.

      • #3276923

        Actually, it did answer the question

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to It’s hard to say

        The answer is, it all depends on who is on the other side of the desk when you give it a shot.

        I don’t think I would have hired someone with gun related issues, depending on what they were, but there are many stupid things we all do that are one time F ups in our lives. We learn and move on.

      • #3230290

        Kinda points to the problem

        by too old for it ·

        In reply to It’s hard to say

        First, Maxwell, nice to see you out here again.

        Next, I think that a large part of the problem is turning over the all important “who is the best person for the job” question to cookie-cutter HR departments. Before the IT department gets to interview, the best candidate has already failed screening.

    • #3232103

      Another victim of the drug war

      by crashoverider ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Mark,
      I am sorry to hear about your conviction. This is one reason why the War on Drugs (War on citizens) needs to be ended. I personally think that a person should be able to do what they like as long as it does not hurt anyone else, this is supposed to be a free country. Once the sheeple figure out that the drug war is a failed policy and goes against the principles that the USA was founded on.
      I can only hope this happens sooner rather then later, and once this does happen I hope your record and everyone else that was wrongly convicted of non-violent crime is expunged and completely erased.

      • #3276828

        Not a victim…

        by darinhamer ·

        In reply to Another victim of the drug war

        This country (the U.S.) was founded on liberty, but that does not mean doing anything you want “as long as it does not hurt anyone else…” With liberty comes responsiblity and the founders of this country believed that everyone had an obligation to society and that without morality, that society would fall. It has happened repeatedly throughout history. Study the history of our country and you’ll find that your philosophy of being able to do anything and everything you like would not have been supported by our founders. There are some limits and they are not all measured by whether they obviously hurt someone else.

        While I feel a great deal of compassion for the original poster, he made a choice to break the law. I don’t think that employers are scared to hire him for irrational reasons. They are afraid that he might be a drug addict, who quite frequently lie and do things to hurt other people, especially the businesses they work for. This guy is not likely a drug addict and has clearly learned a lesson. The question is, how can he convince a potential employer of this? If he can, I think most people want to give others a second chance.

        • #3276687

          Re: not a victim

          by crashoverider ·

          In reply to Not a victim…

          The USA was founded on three ideas, Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. None of these ideas are allowed to be violated without due process of law. The first idea “Life” gives you the choice to make decisions for yourself. Second “Liberty” a synonym for liberty is freedom like the liberty to assemble, the liberty to worship as you see fit, the liberty to bear arms. Finally “the pursuit of happiness” which means you can look for happiness how ever you choose. As long as you respect other peoples rights the government is not supposed to be able to infringe on your rights.
          If a person wants to use drugs, drink alcohol, or live as a hermit that is their pursuit of happiness and should not be invaded.

          Does the hermit have a obligation to society even if they remove themselves from the society?

          Also you speak about “morality”, what gives you the right to legislate what is moral?

          You also said that “he made the choice to break the law” if something is a law it does not make it right. In some of the Southern States people were allowed to own slaves and treat them as property, just because this was a law did it make slavery right? No it did not.

          Also a small history lesson on drug legislation. Opium was the first drug to have legislation passed against it in San Francisco. The reason that this law was passed was to shut down opium dens in the city, the dens where people went to smoke the drug were frequented by mostly Chinese men and white women. The people of San Francisco were not knowledgeable about what went on in the dens and people did not disclose information about the goings on in the dens. The white men believed that the dens were used for the Chinese men to take advantage of the white women to have sex, and because interracial sex was not condoned the first drug law was passed.

          Race was the reason for most of the drug laws, Marijuana was outlawed due to racial hatred of Mexicans, Cocaine was outlawed due to racial hatred of black people. Currently the super majority of people that are arrested for drug offences are African Americans and Hispanic.

          Do you see a pattern of racial bigotry and the war on drugs. This war on drugs is in actuality a war on citizens, due to this war America now incarcerates a larger percentage of the citizens then any other country. The percentage of black people in jail in the United States now is higher then the percentage of black people that were incarcerated in South Africa during apartheid.

        • #3209646

          Well Put!

          by paul.dame ·

          In reply to Re: not a victim

          You could also have mentioned the Boxer Rebellion in China in the early part of the 1900’s, where the US went to war against China who wanted to stop outside nations from shipping opium into China. This is literally a case where the US went to war to support Illegal Drug Trade.

    • #3232034

      Forget About It

      by plexus it ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Unless you are trying to get DOD clearance, forget about it. Most background checks only go back 7 years and they typically only check in the county in which you currently reside.

      If they do ask, honesty is a double-edged sword – if you lie and they find out ther truth after hiring you, they’ll have ammo to can you down the road. If you are honest, they might get fear taking a risk w/ an ex-con on the premises.

      I’d take each interview at a time. Also do a background check on yourself and see what comes up. Knowledge is power!

    • #3276972

      Be forthright and honest, but don’t spill your guts.

      by tl.eckels ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      In general, if the application asks if you’ve been convicted of a felony, just check the yes box. If it asks for an explanation, just give a brief clear and concise answer, such as the actual name of the charge.
      Before you go to the interview you need to remember that these people may have been around, and understand what you went through. Above all else, do not be afraid of your past, you cannot change what you have done.

    • #3276966

      This is totatlly ridiculous

      by jacques.venter ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      What does it have to do with a prospective employer that you have any past transgressions. Are they paying you to program or are they paying you to be a role model to teenagers.

      This type of thing is just another example of Big Brother watching you. I live in the UK and thankfully work in a company where we have a strict equal opportunities policy and any such discrimination would be taken very seriously indeed.

      It sounds to me like companies in the US think just because you work for them they own you. Well if thats the case then is it really the “Land of the free!”

      • #3276952

        It has a lot of validity in SOME circumstances

        by deadly ernest ·

        In reply to This is totatlly ridiculous

        If a person has done time for bank fraud, you would want to check their work when they’re working on a bank program. Similarly a person sent a way for a sex crime with a juvenile would be watched more closely if sent to do work at a school; probably send someone else.

        In an area of high security to would wonder about someone who did time for a crime related to breach of confidentiality, but be less concerned about someone convicted of drunk driving while an alcoholic.

      • #3276929

        A right to hirer trust worthy people

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to This is totatlly ridiculous

        You have a repeat offender of anything, that is not someone I would hire.

        It is very valid, especially in IT where you typically are trusted with the keys to all the data from the top down.

        I would bet asking GG if she could hold her job in security if she had major convictions on her record would give you the same results you are hearing from the US.

        There was just a big release of information from the Detroit Free Press, where there were about 2000 people got pass the screening process, that have felonies and are working for the public school system. The majority of them will now be removed, because we have a right to decide who can be in charge of our kids.

        • #3276912

          One little problem with your position

          by paul.dame ·

          In reply to A right to hirer trust worthy people

          You are assuming that our legal justice system is accurate and fair. It is neither. If you are poor and black, you are less likely to escape the Criminal ‘Just Us’ System with your record unblemished, than if you are white and well-to-do. Remember, OJ Simspon does not have a felony conviction. With a good attorney(s) who know how to manipulate the process, you can literally ‘get away with murder’. Even if you do have a conviction, if you have the money, you can work to have the conviction expunged. Using conviction records does not provide any guarantees about the caliber of people that you are hiring. So, in Detroit, where they have 2,000 people who are already in the school system, the quality of their work is known, their character is known, and the school system is going to fire them anyway for having a previous felony conviction? This should be added to Webster’s dictionary as an example of the definition for “knee-jerk reaction”.

        • #3276845

          Many problems with your position

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to One little problem with your position

          Regarding:

          “…You are assuming that our legal justice system is accurate and fair…”

          No, I don’t think he was.

          It’s not about accuracy and fairness. I agree that the system is not perfect. I believe there are a bunch of guilty who go free (e.g. OJ) and a bunch of innocent who get convicted (e.g. http://www.innocenceproject.org). But, our system is our system. If you think it needs correcting, you should apply your energies on getting changes to the system, not on making it easy for those convicted to avoid the consequences of their actions.

          On the other hand, I believe in giving people a second chance. For “all” of us, second chances have kept us from having a failed life along the way. A small transgression during childhood, while you are growing up and learning and developing, is all but universally agreed to be forgiven and expunged. But, after you reach adulthood, YOU MUST become responsible for your actions. At that point, society MUST assume that you have learned what to do and what to not do and hold you responsible for your actions.

          Are you suggesting that because our system is not perfect that job applicants should be allowed to HIDE their previous convictions?

          Regarding:

          “…So, in Detroit, where they have 2,000 people who are already in the school system, the quality of their work is known, their character is known, and the school system is going to fire them anyway for having a previous felony conviction? This should be added to Webster’s dictionary as an example of the definition for “knee-jerk reaction”…”

          By definition, a felony is a serious crime. Do you have any children? What is more important to you? Giving the adult with a felony conviction a second chance or not taking any unnecessary chances with your children?

          As J.C. Watts said, “Character is what you do when nobody is looking”. Well, school employees are not being watched 24 hours per day. You DO NOT know what they are doing when nobody is watching. Their character is NOT known. But, for the 2000, their conviction is known.

          —–

          Regarding:

          “…Using conviction records does not provide any guarantees about the caliber of people that you are hiring…”

          This isn’t about guarantees. People without convictions are not guaranteed. But, in the absence of other information, we must assume that something is known about people with a felony conviction.

          —–

          In conclusion:

          Yes, I might hire someone with a previous felony conviction. I don’t have any absolute rules about it, unlike many people who would never do so. Among other things, it would depend on the crime, the job, the risks to the business (real or perceived by customers, shareholders, employees, etc.), and the specific circumstances. Most importantly, I would have to be convinced that the applicant was trustworthy. That is not easy to do, even if you do not have a felony conviction.

          Getting convicted of a crime as an adult is a burden you must carry around for the rest of your life.

        • #3276793

          Easy for you to say

          by paul.dame ·

          In reply to Many problems with your position

          Not that my family has anything to do with the points I put forward, but I do have kids. Any any responsible parents takes every precaution to protect their kids, whether they think that there is a preditor around or not. If you only take precautions because of impending danger, you are playing a risky game. Fear is the wrong basis for making public policy. You’ll end up with a police state, kinda like the one we are fast becoming.

          As for the 2,000 people in Detroit, they are not a mere number. They are mothers, fathers, real people with real responsibilities, each working to provide a life for themselves, their families, and to support the school system which they work for. If any of the 2000 were already problem employees or dangerous, they would/should already have been dealt with. The fact that they are in the system and have (presumably) no other marks against them than an old conviction, is merely another form of discrimination, looking for an excuse to be.

        • #3276745

          Feeling vs. Thinking

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to Easy for you to say

          I “feel” badly about the fate of the 2,000 felon school system employees in Detroit. I “feel” badly that our justice system is not 100% accurate and fair. I “feel” badly that black people in America have some additional hurdles to overcome. But, I also “think”. A felony is a serious crime. I “think” that it is plain stupid to have convicted felons teaching our children.

          Perhaps one of the many consequences of being convicted of a felony is that you cannot be a teacher anymore.

          —–

          Operating based on feelings is not going to take good care of business. This isn’t about fear. It is about thinking and being prudent.

          You are throwing around a lot of fuzzy emotion here in this discussion. If there is substance behind it, you’ll be willing and able to provide some direct answers to some direct questions. Let’s start with the questions I already asked that you did not answer:

          Q1. Are you suggesting that because our system is not perfect that job applicants should be allowed to HIDE their previous felony convictions?

          Q2. What is more important to you? Giving the adult with a felony conviction a second chance or not taking any unnecessary chances with your children?

          Now, some new direct questions:

          Q3. Would you approve of your school administrators hiring convicted felons to teach your children?

          Q3B. If so, what would you do if their criteria for screening the felons were less strict than yours?

          Q4. Do you think it should be legal for employers to ask about previous felony convictions in the application and during the interview?

          Q5. Do you think it should be legal for employers to deny employment based on a previous felony conviction in their sole judgement?

          Q6. By what specific method should we allow people convicted of felonies to be school teachers?

          edit: added Q6

        • #3276693

          Q&A

          by paul.dame ·

          In reply to Feeling vs. Thinking

          A1: I am suggesting that employers can be encouraged to hire persons with prior criminal convictions, say with tax credits for each Felon hired. This would facilitate ReEntry programs as well as alleviate one of the prime reasons for recividism.

          A2: Those are not mutually exclusive conditions. You should not take any unnecessary risk with your children AND give the felon a second chance.

          A3: Certainly…IF they were qualified…and if they aren’t child predators. (BTW: Very few felons are child predators, and very few child predators are felons. The very few that have been caught, convicted, and posted on web sites creates this false sense of security which is more dangerous than ignorance.) I would welcome Martha Stewart to the teaching environment.

          A3B: Advocate. All parents must become advoctes for their children in order to maximize the benefis and minimize the damage that our schools do to our children.

          A4: Certainly.

          A5: Certainly, if the nature of felony indicates a potential conflict of interest. A child sex-offender should not be hired to work in an ice-cream parlor.

          A&Q6; Methodology? Your question presumes the postulate that you make that a felony conviction somehow makes someone unfit to be a teacher. A felony conviction does not mean that a person has no value, is immoral, or has no redeeming characteristics. The felon made a mistake…or a series of mistakes, for which their judgement has been called into question…and for which they are required to pay a penalty. They are NOT damned for eternity, neither are they suddenly any less human or moral than you are. Remember, Jesus was a convicted felon.

        • #3209656

          paul: My Answers to my own questions

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to Feeling vs. Thinking

          Here are my answers to my questions:

          I’m sure you mean well, Paul. I just think you’re wrong to advocate hiring felons as teachers.

          My answers to my questions are:

          A1: No. Job applicants should not be permitted to hide their felony convictions.

          [The government should not be providing tax credits in order to encourage employers to hire people with felony convictions. What a boondoggle that would be! For me, such a credit would change nothing. Hiring such a person is either acceptable or not. And, I either trust or not. No amount of tax credit would ever change that. Further, if the government thinks this is such a good idea, let’s see a massive hiring program WITHIN the government. No new taxes. No tax credits. Non-teaching jobs for all felons. Everyone should be happy.]

          A2: Teaching our children is a sacred trust that we should not give to people who have felony convictions. There are lots of other jobs. There is no reason teaching has to be one of them.

          A3: No.

          [Martha Stewart is an excellent example of where the system has failed. If she really did what she was convicted of (obstruction of justice, et al), then she should not be trusted as a teacher. I just don’t believe she should have been found guilty of that crime. Regardless, that doesn’t mean we should suddenly start hiring felons as teachers.]

          A3B: I would take my child out of that school immediately. I don’t associate with felons. I certainly would not allow my children to spend all day being taught by one.

          A4: Yes.

          A5: Yes, without qualification.

          A6: N/A. Being a teacher of children should be one of the privileges you lose when you are convicted of a felony. There are lots of other things you can no longer do when you are a felon.

          [It’s not about not having any value, or being immoral, or not having any redeeming characteristics, or being damned for all eternity, or being less human. It’s about trust with our most vulnerable ones. Schools demand that their teachers adhere to high standards, as they should. Hiring felons as teachers is incompatible with those high standards.

          Comparing what was done to Jesus to a felony conviction in the USA in 2006 is not a valid comparison. What Jesus did to earn his conviction is not even illegal today.

          It appears that your answer to Q6 is that there should be no special restrictions except maybe not allowing child sex-offenders to be teachers. What about rape of an adult woman? Assault? Selling drugs? Murder? Armed robbery? Felony embezzlement or fraud? Terrorism? Conspiracy? Where do you draw the line? What do you define a “little felony” to be? The more I write this paragraph, the more INSANE your position appears to me! None of these people should be trusted as teachers of children!

          Perhaps, if a judge agrees to expunge a felony, maybe then a person could be hired as a teacher. But, I would leave it up to the justice system to decide that, not a tax credit to encourage a school system to hire felons as teachers.]

        • #3209638

          Still muzzy non-thinking…

          by paul.dame ·

          In reply to Feeling vs. Thinking

          It is very gracious of you to allow an felon to teach children if he gets the felony conviction removed… but I submit, what about the change in label makes him/her a better risk for the position? Is your child any safer? Is he suddenly a good teaching candidate?

          The error in your arguments are:
          1) Felony convictions BY THEMSELVES do NOT mean that a person is evil or bad.
          2) Felony convictions do NOT equate to general untrustworthiness.

          You might be offended if I told you that you have done things for which you could well have landed in prison with such a conviction. Even innocent people go to prison on some occasions. Any time that you make a blanket statement about a group of people regardless of the circumstances, regardless of the person’s character and skills, that is discrimination.

          As for Jesus’ actions not being a crime today… that is irrelevant. There are plaenty of actions and teachings that were illegal once but are legal now, just as there are plenty of things which were legal once, but are not now. What matters is the label that you and others assign to this entire category of people to justify discriminatory practises… because they are not like “us”.

          In any event, I know that we disagree and that you are not likely to change your rigid opinion. I do want those who read through all of these, those who are struggling to put their lives back together and who want to make something good out of a life that fallen apart, to not give up hope. Those of narrow minds are out there, and you need to know that they are there… but also there are people who want you to succeed and to build a better life. To those of you who strive to rise out of the ashes of your former lives… you have friends.

        • #3209610

          paul: You’re stuck

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to Feeling vs. Thinking

          Regarding:

          “…It is very gracious of you to allow an felon to teach children if he gets the felony conviction removed… but I submit, what about the change in label makes him/her a better risk for the position? Is your child any safer? Is he suddenly a good teaching candidate?…”

          When a judge expunges a conviction, s/he does so in the interest of justice. For example, s/he might do that if the crime was a lesser felony and it was a long time ago. In that case, the judge has made the judgement that the person in question should be given a break. That is part of the criminal justice system and I accept it. That effectively makes that person no longer a felon and should be given the same freedoms as anyone else.

          Once again, it not about “knowing” the child is safe or the teaching abilities of the teacher. It is about trustworthiness.

          —–

          Regarding:

          “…
          1) Felony convictions BY THEMSELVES do NOT mean that a person is evil or bad.
          2) Felony convictions do NOT equate to general untrustworthiness.
          …”

          We have already covered this. Once again, we’re not talking about evil or badness or “general” untrustworthiness. We’re talking about specifically trusting someone with the most vulnerable in our society, our children. When a person is convicted of a felony, it is a serious crime by definition. The person has shown seriously bad judgment, done a terrible thing, etc.

          I fully support hiring people convicted of felonies in other jobs.

          —–

          Regarding:

          “…You might be offended if I told you that you have done things for which you could well have landed in prison with such a conviction…”

          I wouldn’t be offended. You would just be incorrect. ALL of us have made mistakes in life. I just know that I have never committed a felony.

          —–

          “…Even innocent people go to prison on some occasions….”

          We have already covered this. Our system is not perfect. But, that does not mean we should allow people convicted of a felony to be trusted as school teachers. And, I do not agree that our society should review felony convictions over and over and over. That is what the justice system is for, imperfect as it is. How can someone who is not directly involved in the evidence and the trial possibly make a proper judgement about the nature of a felony conviction? It is perfectly reasonable for society to make a hard rule when it comes to people allowed to teach children in schools.

          —–

          Regarding:

          “…Any time that you make a blanket statement about a group of people regardless of the circumstances, regardless of the person’s character and skills, that is discrimination…”

          Absolutely correct. And, it is APPROPRIATE discrimination.

          The word discriminate means “to make a difference in treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit”. It is impractical to re-try every felony case every day.

          In this case, we’re talking about rules established by society (or a school board) for how decisions are made in trusting someone to be a school teacher. I think it is appropriate to have a rule about that. Other jobs are a different matter.

          —–

          “…As for Jesus’ actions not being a crime today… that is irrelevant…”

          You brought Jesus into this, not me.

          You’re citing all sorts of things, including Jesus, to justify your view that felons should be permitted to teach our children in the classroom. I am knocking them down one by one and you just don’t like it. The fact of the matter is that your position is wrong. Felony crimes are serious. People convicted of felony crimes should not be permitted to be school teachers. They cannot be policemen either. Positions of trust require a higher standard. Sorry. Serious mistakes have consequences.

          There are all sorts of jobs that do not require the kind of trust necessary to be a school teacher. I fully support the idea of hiring people convicted of felony crimes in non-teaching jobs, subject to the sole judgement of the employers.

          —–

          People convicted of felony crimes should know that some doors are closed to them because they have made serious mistakes in their life. But, they should also know that second chances are available in other areas and they should never give up. Americans LOVE a good comeback story. Make one yourself and all of us will applaud you and support you in doing so.

        • #3276662

          Very well said

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Many problems with your position

          No finger pointing, no name calling, just calling it like it is.

          Some will complain about if it is “fair” that you treat felons differently, but they forget to mention it was by that persons own choice that they did something that made them a felon.

          Personal responsiblity. The world would be a better place if there was more of it expected out of people.

        • #3209651

          Thanks, JD

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to Very well said

        • #3209649

          We are all accountable for our actions…

          by paul.dame ·

          In reply to Very well said

          There is a good deal of truth in what you say, but you are not universally correct. No one chooses to become a felon, that is a status imposed by others. It does NOT mean that you were (or are) a Bad person… merely that you made a poor choice. For example, if you made an illegal U-Turn that lead to an accident, fatality, and a criminal record, you made a poor decision. If you choose the wrong people to hang out with, or choose the wrong form of entertainment, you could find yourself facing criminal prosecution. It is not as far-fetched as you might think. If you overhear two people in a restaurant discussing the declining state of affairs in their company (one in which you hold stock) and you decide to unload said stock… you have just broken several Federal statues against insider trading. All of these are bad choices… and some people do decide to disregard the Law (or are merely ignorant of it). This does not make them evil, or any less competant to do the work for which they might be hired. They should be held accountable for their choices, but not be subject to a lifetime of discrimination and abuse.
          Granted that there are some felons who should not work in some areas, but that should be carefully weighed and intelligently decided. Blanket decisions to not hire anyone with a felony conviction REGARDLESS OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES is as discriminatory and hurtful as not considering someone because they are Black, or a woman… regardless of whether they can do the work.
          Even worse, we have a CJ system which allows people of a certain racial category a greater chance of escaping a conviction. Thus the poor, Black felon is multiply victimized. Let us try to judge people for who they are and not because of whether they are like “us”.

        • #3209630

          Accountability without consequences is not accountability

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to We are all accountable for our actions…

          In this section of the discussion, we’re talking about felonies and teaching jobs, correct? It’s an entirely different matter if we’re not talking about teaching children.

          —–

          “…For example, if you made an illegal U-Turn that lead to an accident, fatality, and a criminal record,…”

          That must be some kind of whopping illegal U-turn to result in a felony criminal conviction. You’re going to have to cite a specific example of where a simple illegal U-Turn results in a felony conviction.

          One example of a traffic “incident” that is a felony is a DUI where someone gets killed. Another is a hit-and-run where there is significant monetary damage. Either of these is very serious and should disqualify the person from being a school teacher. Of course, that person should be permitted to do other work if the employer agrees.

          —–

          “…If you choose the wrong people to hang out with…”

          You mean like being in a car during a drive-by shooting or an armed robbery? Nope. That is too serious of a judgment mistake for an adult to make who also wants to teach children in school. However, if a judge expunges such a felony, as could occur for someone who did nothing but ride in the car, OK. Again, non-teaching jobs are completely different.

          —–

          “…choose the wrong form of entertainment…”

          I presume you mean felony drugs. Nope. When a drug crime rises to the level of a felony, it is a lot more serious than a simple personal mistake. You’re using and also selling drugs or you are a significant repeat offender. These poeple should not be teachers.

          —–

          “…If you overhear two people in a restaurant discussing the declining state of affairs in their company (one in which you hold stock) and you decide to unload said stock… you have just broken several Federal statues against insider trading…”

          I’m not an expert on this. Usually this is an SEC enforcement action and a fine, not a criminal case, correct? If this action rises to the level of a felony criminal conviction, it would have to be a lot more than just merely overhearing a conversation and selling a few shares of stock. In that case, it would be a serious ethics problem and that person should not be trusted as a teacher of children.

          —–

          “…evil, or any less competant to do the work…”

          Once again, teaching is a sacred trust. The felon doesn’t have to be evil or incompetent. S/he is just unworthy of that sacred trust.

          —–

          “…Granted that there are some felons who should not work in some areas, but that should be carefully weighed and intelligently decided…”

          Elsewhere in this discussion, I asked you to provide a specific method where we should allow people convicted of felonies to be school teachers. You passed the opportunity by.

          As I said there, in my view, if a judge was willing to expunge the conviction, that would probably be enough for me to agree that the person could become a teacher. I cannot imagine, nor would I want to fund, any other mechanism for such a thing.

          —–

          “…(as) hurtful as not considering someone because they are Black, or a woman… regardless of whether they can do the work…”

          Discriminating against people who are convicted of felony crimes is not in any way equivalent to discriminating against people based on race or gender. The former is based on what the person did. The latter is based on who the person is.

          —–

          “…Even worse, we have a CJ system which allows people of a certain racial category a greater chance of escaping a conviction. Thus the poor, Black felon is multiply victimized. Let us try to judge people for who they are and not because of whether they are like “us”…”

          Any racial bias in the criminal justice system should not be balanced on the backs of our children in school. Period. Felons are free to apply for many other jobs.

        • #3209585

          I missed something very important

          by techexec2 ·

          In reply to We are all accountable for our actions…

          Regarding:

          “…Even worse, we have a CJ system which allows people of a certain racial category a greater chance of escaping a conviction. Thus the poor, Black felon is multiply victimized. Let us try to judge people for who they are and not because of whether they are like “us”…”

          What a stunning thing to say! The poor, black “multiply victimized” felon?!! You’re advocating giving one felon a break because another one got away with a crime?!!

          This is not about race. This is not about economic status. This is about people who commit felony crimes. The poor, black person has great power to avoid getting a felony conviction. Don’t do the crime!

        • #3209571

          Where are you pulling this race card from?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to We are all accountable for our actions…

          I don’t recall saying anything about “keep the blackies out because they are all criminals” while putting on my klan hood or anything. We are not talking minorities or poor.

          We are talking about people that made a choice to do something illegal, and they were caught doing it. Felons made that choice and have to live with the consequences of that choice.

          Are you saying because someone is black or a woman, that they are more likely to commit a crime? Is it a genetic defect? What exactly are you trying to say here? And why?

          I have said, hold all people accountable for their choices in life. Will rich people, both black and white, escape justice? Of course, as I covered earlier. Money can help out a lot. It isn’t the race that determines guilt.

          If there are more black people convicted of crimes, it is because a lot are making a bad choice and getting caught doing it. (based on your numbers that I don’t have the time to verify right now) Some will blame social woes, I blame the individual that made that choice. While yes, I am white, I came from a broken home with the bills paid by a welfare check. We never resorted to crime, and we (the whole family) rose to at least middle middle class. (was upper middle class until my divorce last year)

          You make a choice. You live based on those choices with no one to blame but yourself.

          While I wish people well, there will be no river of tears from me. I have my own problems to worry about, and they do not include racist theories such as yours.

        • #3209528

          JD, I think he’s misreading the prison stats, that happens a lot

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to We are all accountable for our actions…

          A few years ago I saw a special program on Discovery or Nat Geo, on of those channels, about prisons and psiron stats in the USA. They started with some basic stats based on population racial demographics, then added prison stats based on racial demographics. The rate of black male prisoners per 1,000 head of population was about 20 times that of white males.

          What was interesting about the program was a criminalogist and a statistician pointed out how false they were. They provided population and prisoner stats based on education levels, and household earnings. The prisoner population stats followed closely the education level stats, and so did the household earning stats.

          Well to cut a long, 90 minute, story short. They proved that the problem was not racial but educational and that the educational standard was related to income while growing up. That, at present, the majority of the uneducated poor were black males – bingo the stats.

          They also showed some much older stats, that showed the uneducated poor were Italian migrants and prison states showed a extremely high level of Italian migrants in prison. And the few stats from that far back did the same for the Irish in New York.

          But many people just see the racial aspect, not the underlying causes. And with so many social problems happening in the areas where the uneducated poor live, it’s difficult to turn that educational aspect around.

        • #3209508

          Education and root causes

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to We are all accountable for our actions…

          Did anyone look at the root cause for the lack of education? How about the negative culture in inner cities where if you use proper grammar and get good grades your “trying to be white”? The worst enemy to the poor black are other poor blacks.

          I see this getting worse with the Rap culture glamorizing being a scumbag.

          Right now in Michigan there is an initiative on the November balot to ban “Affirmative Action” in all public places because no one can honestly say that it isn’t reverse discrimination.

          I disagree with giving someone a break based on the colo(u)r of their skin.

          I have no problem giving a break based on economic region and school system that you came from. Do any other ethnic groups that live in the innercities not have the same disadvantages? Or is it a genetic thing that only blacks can not compete simply because they are black?

          Lord that is so ignorant for people to drive that race card, and is hurting more people than it would ever help because you are telling a whole race they can not compete on a one-on-one basis.

          And yes, it used to be the Irish. It seems people NEED someone to hate so they don’t feel so bad about themselves?

        • #3209464

          JD, Over the decades the major uneducated poor ethnic

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to We are all accountable for our actions…

          group has changed, Irish, Italian, Afro American (or whatever you guys call them nowdays) and Hispanics are hitting that list in some areas. Individuals still get out.

          The problem is that since the race card started, you can get better welfare if you’re of a particular race (in some places) and that is a disensentive to get out. Brooklyn used to be THE uneducated poor place of New York (I don’t know if it still is). Over decades the ethnic mix there constantly changed as the majority of those there worked their way out, they had a work ethic.

          100 years ago no one in the USA knew about their rights, but they knew about working and the trouble for committing crimes. Now everyone knows about their rights, for know about working or have a work ethic, and few are worried about doing time for a crime. Add in the social problems you mentioned, and the latest one I read about for the uneducated poor – see how many schoolgirls you can get preganant while still in school yourself. What chance do any of the poor girls have of doing better, and if they give up hope, who the hell is going to push the stupid boys into being something more than cannon fodder for a street gang.

        • #3230379

          Mistakes Happen

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to Many problems with your position

          Regarding:

          “Getting convicted of a crime as an adult is a burden you must carry around for the rest of your life.”

          It is just that attitude that creates bitter old men of great skills and intellect living in cardboard boxes.

        • #3276669

          Nice example? Not….

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to One little problem with your position

          Talk about the poor black vs the rich whites, and then you bring up OJ? did you forget that OJ is really not white? :0

          It is the money, not the race. You have enough money, you can even admit to sharing a bed with children and walk away free, but it is the money, not the race.

          A good legal team will do more for you than a court appointed lawyer will, just because the court appointed lawyer does not have the time or resources to spend on your case.

          But, is it the legals systems fault that you can not afford a good lawyer? No one to blame but yourself.

          The 2000 was through out the state, not in detroit. It was just reported in the Detroit Free Press. The lions share IS in Detroit though.

          And yes, if you have felonies, in most cases you will not be trusted to work around children. someone crying for a second chance is not worth the risk to people that have not screwed up their own chances yet.

          But talking about convictions and money, the richest contributor for the Democrats, Soros, is a convicted felon for insider trading. Ken ley didn’t beat the legal system, even if he did beat the punishment factor.

        • #3276878

          I could understand a problem if it was a sex crime

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to A right to hirer trust worthy people

          but sheet, being a felony would probably make you a better teacher than most. You wont be so ‘holier than thou’ that so many are. I don’t see how being convicted for car theft several years ago, or something not life threatening could make you a bad teacher. Sure if it was grievous bodily harm or murder.

        • #3276661

          What about character Ernest?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I could understand a problem if it was a sex crime

          Does the character of the employee matter?

          Someone that is a thief has no character, and can not be trusted with anything. If they would steal a car, can we trust them with kids or anything else? No.

          Your own crediblity is based on things YOU have done to EARN trust and respect. If you have no credibility, whos fault is that? (general term of you, not YOU specifically Ernest, Earnestly! )

        • #3209603

          I could go on about people making mistakes

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to What about character Ernest?

          and getting their life together afterwards. But I’ve seen cases where people have been convicted through no fault of their own.

          1. Mate pulls up in new car secondhand, everyone admires the flash car. A few get in for a drive down to the local chick pick up spot. Cop hits siren on way, driver ‘rabbits’ (puts the foot down and runs fast), chase occurs. Finally the car is stopped and everyone on in it is booked for stealing the car and eluding arrest. Only mistake the passengers made was not knowing the car was stolen when they got in. They still got convicted.

          2. Kid walking down the street his bag on his back, unknown to him a mate slips a small bag into his bag. Cops stop them, a search ensues, kid charged with possession of drugs. Luckily an adult friend nearby insisted that they get CSI out to fingerprint the plastic bag of drugs. No evidence the kid every touched it, case dropped, other kid charged. But would’ve gone the other way without the ‘interference.’

          One breach of trust does NOT mean a person will always breach trust. In the case of a convicted person owning up to and accepting what they did and working to get over it, shows a greater level of respect and, in my mind, buys them an opportunity to earn that trust.

          I have a friend from my youth who I would trust with my life. Most of his adult life has been spent in prison due to drunken brawls and personal use of marijuana. yet is I told him I needed him sober for something, he will stay sober until it’s over. I trust him to keep his word, he always has. I don’t trust him to back off from a fight when drunk.

        • #3209567

          Doesn’t the first example prove my case?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I could go on about people making mistakes

          Someone that will steal a car, that is not the first thing they have ever stolen, and the others most likely knew of other thefts.

          To continue to be “Mates” with this person is a bad choice on their part.

          I take trust are more seriously than many it seems. Betray my trust or give me a reason to distrust you, and the game is over.

          Fights and pot do not a felon make (the way I understand it)

        • #3209559

          It may not be their first theft but it could be

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Doesn’t the first example prove my case?

          the first one that those passengers find out about, via the police and arrest. One point about it being that two passengers got records for theft and evasion when they did not know about the theft and couldn’t do a thing about the evasion. So do you treat them the same as the driver?

          Anyway, I think we may ahve to agree to disagree on this issue.

        • #3209575

          Yes, and…

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to What about character Ernest?

          The way to recover from a past mistake is to own up to it, which starts restoring your credibility, and others’ trust in you. It’s not always easy, to be sure, but if you’re in that position, it’s the only real way out.

        • #3230289

          Actually, sex criminals may not repeat near as much …

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to I could understand a problem if it was a sex crime

          … as the drive-by media might have us believe.

          Some early studies I’ve seen seem to point to a rate of recidivism no more than any other criminal class, and I’d like to see more research before we have more laws.

          (Fat chance of that happening.)

        • #3230245

          Isn’t getting fact before knee jerking a reaction unamerican

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Actually, sex criminals may not repeat near as much …

          it sure seems that way.

          However, I can see that people may be concerned about putting known sex offenders in charge of their kids at schools etc.

        • #3231575

          Hysteria Rather Than Common Sense

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to Isn’t getting fact before knee jerking a reaction unamerican

          It has been an AMerican tradition since at least the 1950’s.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HUAC

        • #3276837

          All of them should be removed.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to A right to hirer trust worthy people

          Because the lie on the application is an indicator of their [b]current[/b] mindset. This, IMO, may be a higher risk than a decade old felony conviction.

        • #3276789

          Certainly a humble opinon

          by paul.dame ·

          In reply to All of them should be removed.

          [TonytheTiger wrote: “Because the lie on the application is an indicator of their current mindset. This, IMO, may be a higher risk than a decade old felony conviction.”]

          Very simplistic TtT. Clearly you have never had to struggle for employment or had to face discrimination because of something that you have done or something that you are. You are truely blessed.

        • #3276657

          I’m not claiming to be an angel.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Certainly a humble opinon

          I’ve done things wrong. Lots!

          I discovered early on, however, that lying about these things only makes them worse.

        • #3276655

          Discrimination?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Certainly a humble opinon

          Our friend Webster says it best.

          “to make a difference in treatment or favor on a basis other than individual merit”.

          This IS based on individual merit. You show that you have no regard for the laws, you have shown something about yourself that does not fit in a civilized society of rules and laws.

          It is no ones fault but your own if you did something illegal. Don’t make it sound like the poor felons are getting picked on for no reason, oh boo hoo.

          Trust is EARNED, not given. You HAVE to have trust when you work around children. Every single one should be removed.

          Note: I never said they were all teachers. This also includes staff.

        • #3209341

          And I hope all 2000 of them …

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to A right to hirer trust worthy people

          sue.

          Has to be a federal judge somewhere that thinks you should be hired on your merit, not on your past.

          Every stock advertisement has “Past performance is no guarantee of future results” plastered on it, and it;s the same way with people.

    • #3276965

      There is a way…

      by ladyzguy ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      You can go back to the court that originally found you guilty and petition them to have your charges/sentences reduced to misdemeanors or even dismissed. This is usually allowed afer a few “clean” trouble free years have passed after your probation/parole period, if you have one is finished. You would need to have your lawyer that represented you in your original case handle it. Since the charge was minimal and if you have no priors or anything since it’s a good bet you will prevail. What this does is effectively “clean your slate” so to speak. You will get all your rights back such as being able to vote and also carry and use firearms and weapons as well as being able to accuire a passport to leave the country. Most people don’t realize it but a felony conviction of any type usually means you give up those rights, basically forever. Petitioning the court to reduce the charges or even dismiss them after the sentence is over and you have proven you can stay out of trouble means that nobody can use those charges against you. (Law enforcment will still “see” your old charges come up if they run you through their systems but nobody else is supposed to be able to see them). It’s usually a matter of your lawyer filing a form with the court and then a waiting period while they check you out. It might cost you a small fee. If your defense was a public defender it may even not cost anything. Hope that gives you some relief and good luck with your career futures. -=LadyzGuy=-

      P.S Once I was hired by Pac-Bell for a great tech job. On the application it asked the usual question about having any felonies. I asked the lady who was giving the hire test/application how long back did they look and if I needed to put down a felony I had gotten about 7 years earlier. She said No the statute had run out so they weren’t interested. I DID put down a felony that occured about 5 years earlier however. NO lies on my application, nothing was “Omitted”. I got the job and was scheduled to start training in two weeks time. 2 Days before I was to report for training I got a letter saying that during a background check it was revealed that I had intentionally witheld information about a felony conviction 7 years earlier, (remember now I HAD told them on the application about the one 5 years earlier as well as verbally discussing the older one with them). I was told that they would not be hiring me after all. I argued with the lady whom I talked to saying “but I asked you about that and whether or not I needed to report it and you said no, It was after the statutes had run out” to which she replied “she didn’t recall that conversation” (read that as covering her a$$) I also stated to her that if I was going to lie about anything it would have been the most recent one not the oldest one don’t you think? She just said it was out of her hands because I had withheld info on my application. I was a “NO HIRE” and would remain on that list for a period of 1 year and no applications from me would be accepted during that time. So here I “told them about it and still got the shaft because of a 7 year old felony. Since then I have told every prospective employer about my problems in the past and said basically if give me a chance you won’t be sorry – and I have always lived up to that promise. -=LadyzGuy=-

      • #3276924

        LadyzGuy has it correct…

        by paul.dame ·

        In reply to There is a way…

        My best friend just had his felony conviction expunged a few weeks ago, following the procedure that LadyzGuy laid out. While the court system is getting tougher, it can still be done in most states.

      • #3276807

        BUT…are you still being honest?

        by darinhamer ·

        In reply to There is a way…

        Even though you are technically NO LONGER a felon, would you still be comfortable leading a potential employer to believe that you had never committed a felony? Perhaps still mentioning and explaining this during an interview would be the honest thing to do. Or at least doing it at the time a job is offered. Expalain that because it was a one time deal several years in the past, your record was allowed to be expunged, and that you have changed. Surely this would score some points with a potential employer–knowing that you went above and beyond the call of duty to paint an accurate picture and not just leaving it at technically telling the truth. At the very least, your conscious would be clear and you would never have to worry about someone finding out about your past. Seems like the right thing to do.

        • #3209662

          if it is dismissed then you are not a felon any more

          by ladyzguy ·

          In reply to BUT…are you still being honest?

          Yes of course you still “morally” have been convicted of a felony, However since you got it removed from your records by having the charges dismissed or reduced to a misdemeanor, Legally and technically you have not ever been convicted – hence the term reduced to misdemeanor or dismissed – not expunged. Expunged just means the charges and disposition of them were removed from your record. Once they have been dismissed, you are no longer a “convicted” felon and nobody may use the fact that you were once “charged” with a felony against you for any legal purpose. (The cops only are able to see that you had a conviction and it was later dismissed in the interest of justice so they can take extra caution when dealing with you if need be) They cannot use it to “search you” or as probable cause for a reason to “find” something to charge you with. Technically you were “charged and it was dismissed”. No employer (or anybody else) may use those against you if he finds out by other means that you were once a felon. The bottom line is once it is dismissed then you are no longer a convicted felon to the world. -=LadyzGuy=-

        • #3231647

          I see your point…

          by darinhamer ·

          In reply to if it is dismissed then you are not a felon any more

          I was thinking more of expungement, where you were convicted of a felony, but now it is “removed” from your record as if it never happened. Legally, you still wouldn’t have any obligation to tell the employer, but perhaps a moral and ethical obligation. But, if the conviction was reduced to a misdemeanor, then perhaps that is slightly different.

          My point is that I think it is better to be up front if you think it is going to be an issue for your employer. It is better to start a new job on a footing of trust if possible.

    • #3276913

      Everybody lies…..

      by gilsbugs ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      This is really one of my hottest disagrements with our current position on crime. Drugs, so what! It’s been used since biblical days and now we have this HUGE federal agency, that consumes billions, in what we all know to be a futal attempt to erradicate.
      We have REAL felons of violent crimes, running around, but we permently destroy a young persons life, if they buy chance find his weed garden. Now, you have a young person, with the world still ahead of him/her/whatever, with doors shut and they wonder why we have ignorant, jobless, homeless people on the street. Sure, they did something illegal but I dare who hasn’t, be it weed, driving drunk(many are guilty of this one),speeding, a little reckless driving, all of which with the right circumstances could mark you a “felon”.
      Don’t ask, Don’t tell, unless your signing a document that specifically asks, and will hold you to prosecution-you don’t need more trouble.
      You have your own company, I assume you deal with a law firm, have them petition to have those record removed. With enough money, you can have anything—look at OJ. No, let’s not look there. It should be a relatively simple matter for you or anyone else that’s out there with the same tag “they” place on you. good luck….I’m running late……oh my!

      • #3276870

        Drugs can be a major problem to others, however

        by deadly ernest ·

        In reply to Everybody lies…..

        the best answer I’ve heard is:

        1. Possession of illicit drugs is unlawful,

        1a. If below a certain level, the drugs are confiscated and destroyed, you get issued with an on-the-spot fine and signature is admittance of guilt. Want to challenge it go to court for your fine, double the rate. It has about the same effect as a parking ticket.

        1b. Possession of an amount higher than in (1a) and you are classed as a dealer, duck quick cause the book is coming hard and fast. Major felony.

        2. In charge of a motor vehicle with possession of illicit drugs of the (1a) level is a heavy misdemeanor, major fine and time for repeat offences.

        3. In charge of a motor vehicle while illicit drugs are in your system, major felony, get used to light through bars.

        The way they treat the person with the illicit drugs is based on the risk they represent to the general public.

        Easy to tell drug users, there the ones having trouble staying on their horses.

        • #3209668

          Are you breathing air?

          by teddowdey ·

          In reply to Drugs can be a major problem to others, however

          In ’69 we ALL smoked “therapy” and applied massive
          amounts of (your choice here) just to “be” here.
          Now, the VA health $#*&, has seen fit to cause me another “drug” problem. 18 pills 2x a day. I ain’t
          the one with wet feet, showin’ up late. Rx drug abuse is so far above “illict” abuse, NASA is still
          printing the estimated total. And if you dig, you mioght find that”teachers, law enforcement, camp councilers, (the holy guys) and people of the upright and stable types” have been doin’ most of the mo-lestin’ without gettin’ to be the arrested!
          Thank you

        • #3209595

          yeah I’m breathing air AND I have a brain

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to Are you breathing air?

          I’m in my 50s and never used illicit drugs, don’t like the idea of not being in control of myself and I have a good grip on reality so i don’t need to avoid it. I’ve never been so drunk I don’t remember everything, twice I’ve been so drunk I threw up and I DEFINITELY remember every minute, and taste, of those nights.

          I know many people who do use illicit drugs, and some who abuse prescription drugs, and some petrol sniffers, and glue sniffers. I’ve not done those things, as a personal choice.

          In the past I’ve written submissions to Royal Commissions recommending the decriminalisation of illicit drug USE. I’ve also reported drug dealers to the local cops. And I given a person trying to coerce a friend into using heroin a strong need to see a dentist for repair work, he lost three teeth during the lively discussion on his behaviour.

          I don’t care what you CHOOSE to do to your self where you wont put anyone else at risk. I do object to you doing something for your pleasure that puts others at risk, regardless of what it is you do.

          Most people who use illicit drugs, lose reponsible control of their thought processes due to the effects of the drugs. When they do that in publis, they usually put others at risk in doing so.

          Also people who are prepared to risk criminal charges with major fines and prison for their short term pleasure, clearly have no respect for others or the society, and thus deserve none in return.

          Having said all that, I also believe that people can, and many do, turn their lives around and should be allowed to get over mistakes that they are not repeating.

        • #3209566

          This has been a test,

          by teddowdey ·

          In reply to yeah I’m breathing air AND I have a brain

          had it been an earnest attempt to rile you,,,,,
          Well said,Sir! I applaud you and hope that you are much too busy to enter into (too) many lively
          dicussions. Being in the middle of the half century
          mark, if I look over my shoulder, I see ’83, when I had my LAST drink of any alcohol and ’94 when I threw off the “meth-monster”. Both addictions (affic
          tions) were self medication. At 18, no one should see the things…..Point! You are correct! But, as anyone who has had to face the bull from the business end will tell, legal is not always legal,
          but it sure isn’t justice either. Some of the “founders” down under, were not innocent by far, but neither were they guilty of the crime they were punished for. A warm “form” fills voids.
          (combat front lines or ships holds)
          I meant only to ruffle, not imply any lack of
          cognitive function and certainly not in any way that you had missed any part or portion of the whole (mess). If I have erred, please post one of your “dicussions” to my inbox and I will download it first in my am.
          Thank you.

        • #3209553

          A few points but first justice and transportees

          by deadly ernest ·

          In reply to This has been a test,

          Justice has absolutely NOTHING to do with the laws or legal systems, so don’t waste your time thinking it does, OK. The laws are written by people for personal reasons, most are aimed at protecting the community or a specific section of the community that they are conencted with in some way. Nothing about justice in there at all.

          Transportee, most of the people transported to Australia were guilty of the crimes they were convicted of, but what was seen as a felony back then would likely be a misdemeanor or a warning to day. Steal a loaf of bread and it’s 7 years transportation. One of my ancestors was 15 years old when he went to prison, his father and uncle told him to come along and help them with their cart. So he did. They got caught on their first crime, he didn’t know until they were breaking into the house that they were going to steal things. He was left outside with the cart as they dropped things into it from the window. Got caught a few miles down the road.

          He came out in chains. After getting his ticket of leave, that is released. He started a business, became rich, one of the first no aristrocratic Justice of the Peace, and became the Goaler of Sydney Goal, during his term he even spent a few months inside for contempt of court, and that was while the official head of the prison. We get some cuties down here. He helped establish Australias first home grown commercial fleet as well. Busy fellow, despite being a convicted felon.

        • #3230364

          NOT all of us.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to Are you breathing air?

          Some did and made life worse for all of us.

          What part of “Don’t do it” is too hard for you to understand?

          The point is even alcohol is under direct fire today. Zero tolerance and zero intelligence is the word of the day.

          I don’t smoke,drink,chew or put illegal substances in my body. I once caught my son at 18 with a tobacco cigarette, and he hit the sidewalk on the first bounce. He is back home, but he knows I’d turn him in for a single joint, if he lived that long. B-) You remind me of some of the guys that I sat on Disciplinary Boards, (and courts martial) who couldn’t keep away from booze or drugs…

      • #3276808

        Some crimes shouldn’t be crimes.

        by tonythetiger ·

        In reply to Everybody lies…..

        But that doesn’t change the fact that an employer has the right to hire someone who won’t lie to him. Lying about that isn’t different than lying about your education, experience, certs, etc. If the employer can’t trust an employee to tell the truth, how can he trust that the employee is going to have the company’s best interest at heart. If an applicant doesn’t like that condition, he can apply somewhere else.

        [i]Honesty[/i] and [i]honor[/i] have the same etymology, as well as the same source from within us.

        • #3209660

          Tru$T ?

          by teddowdey ·

          In reply to Some crimes shouldn’t be crimes.

          The “star” employees are the ones that own the dog and pony show they are concealing with the smoke.
          If some one, an FNG, reports for the first day early and by lunch has another sixteen hours of extra work
          lined up,chances are, they ain’t Mr. Trump, so how do they devote that time with no “here ya r, and an
          attaboygrl”? Don’t worry, someone will start an inventory,,,soon.

      • #3276796

        Wouldn’t hire you.

        by darinhamer ·

        In reply to Everybody lies…..

        Even though you probably are not a felon, if I were aware of your opinion about these things, I would probably not hire you, even if you have great technical credentials.

        The bottom line is that character matters. The reason that employers are skiddish about hiring felons is that there are, no doubt, reliable statistics that show what kind of a risk there is to hiring people convicted of drugs and other crimes. I don’t advocate making an across the board prohibition against hiring felons, because that doesn’t seem fair to me, but it has to be one of the things considered when making a hiring decision.

        Your post shows that you don’t respect the law, believe that drug use is no big deal, and that the need for honesty should be dictated by the circumstances and your opinion about those circumstances at any given time (it’s all relative). It does not seem, just based on what your post says, that an employee could ever rely on you to tell the truth because you do not appear to value honesty. I don’t say this to be critical of you personally, but to try to help people see from an employer’s perspective how these things might pose a risk.

        By the way, it doesn’t seem to me that the purpose of drug enforcement agencies and laws is to erradicate drug use, but to try to control it. I shudder to think what might happen if they didn’t exist.

    • #3276908

      Depends…

      by angry_white_male ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Most employers who put an emphasis on safety and security will likely turn you away no matter what.

      Some more liberal-minded employers will probably shrug it off – you made a mistake, paid your dues and have been a good boy ever since. It happens.

      Whatever the case may be – if you know they’re going to check your background, fess up. If they have a spot on the application asking about past felony convictions, fess up. Even if they don’t do a background check – fess up anyway. Felonies are public record. Sooner or later they’ll find out about it and if you hid your past – you’ll be called to the table and shown the door.

      Back in my cop wannabe days – going through the applicant process for the NYPD they made it clear – if you have some past transgressions, that’s not going to be an automatic disqualifier, however if you lie about it or hide the truth, they will find out and they will show you the door.

      Felony possession of ecstasy isn’t the end of the world – probably a low-grade Class E felony (in NY), a fine and probation – right?

      • #3276846

        not in Orlando…

        by fungusamongus ·

        In reply to Depends…

        “Felony possession of ecstasy isn’t the end of the world – probably a low-grade Class E felony (in NY), a fine and probation – right?”

        Well, that’s what it would seem, but Orlando, FL went through a major ecstasy problem in the late 90’s and the city higher-ups decided that too many people were getting involved, so they started hammering people. I had a few pills (<10) and they gave me a YEAR in a "work-release" program. And it took about 3 monthes to get there so county jail it was...

        Pretty stiff stuff, but it happened, its long past (although I *do* still like listening to DJ's "spin" now and then), but I will pay for this forever it seems because every year that goes by makes it harder and harder to get back in IT.

        • #3230295

          You could always open up a coffee shop

          by too old for it ·

          In reply to not in Orlando…

          twelve oz. of coffee, a cup, sleeve, lid, sweetener, cream and a stir-stick = about 45 cents.

          Sell for $1.50 and repeat.

          Install a wireless hot-spot, and you have the second best job in IT (assuming Bill Gates job is first best).

    • #3276904

      reporting felonys

      by stefanog65 ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      i dont recommend listing felongy information on background checks because generally always if you have a felony they wont hire you anyway, but in some case the background check companies cant find the felony. BUT they do exchange data submitted with a national database shared by other background investigation companies. so if you have listed a felony on your app or resume and that information wasnt in the database before (non government db) they make sure it is in their database now. so dont list it

    • #3276903

      For 30 + years

      by gihly ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      I was released from prison in 1969 (second degree assault) and I have been employed by Government, private sector and on contract. The one advantage I had was that I learned “data Processing” while I was incarcerated and was on a work release program with the state when I was released. I have had to mark the box as having a felony a number of times but it really hasn’t been a major obstacle. You will also find that sometime there will be a time limit like “in the last five years”. I hope this information is of value to you.
      Go for it.

    • #3276882

      Business Owner’s Point Of View

      by meanderson ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      I run a medium size corporation and I can tell you for a fact. If your resume says felony I throw it in the trash. I know many, many business owners that do the same. The reason for this is all companys have had problems with drug abuse and theft by employees. There is a wide selection of resumes without past criminal history. People that care about the future do not engage in illegal drug use and those who do should expect to pay the price. I make my children well aware of the fact that if you screw up at a young age it will stay with you the rest of your life.
      All I can say to the felons out there. Start your own company and hire people of the same caliber. This may sound cold but over the past 25 years in business I have had every experience possible with employees and illegal behavior.
      There is no company around that has not had the same problems and there is no company around that needs more. I am sorry for your past indiscretions. Do your children a favor. Sit them down and tell them your problem so they will not follow in Dad’s footprints.

      • #3276850

        True

        by brian.kronberg ·

        In reply to Business Owner’s Point Of View

        I second this response. I do a lot of interviews and have to narrow down searches. This unfortunately is a very easy item to narrow a search with.

        Start your own consulting company and present yourself as a business rather than an individual. With your background you should have no problem picking up contracts.

      • #3230376

        Your arrogant attitude …

        by too old for it ·

        In reply to Business Owner’s Point Of View

        … adds to the bitterness.

    • #3276880

      Be up-front, but matter-of-factly

      by markm_in_atlanta ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Interviewers usually ask if you have any other questions. You can say that, as a matter of fact, you did want to make them aware of one minor issue — a mistake you made quite some time ago (under an understandable set of circumstances), paid your dues and have moved on. If they do conduct a background check, you want them to be aware that this will show up and you want them to know the truth about it right now. It is not an issue now, evident by your family, etc.
      I have a problem of age bias, masked as a lack of current expertise, the rationale being that it has been over 1.5 – 2 yrs since you actually coded in a language, you have effectually cleared memory. Just as you still know your field like the back of your hand, I still know mine (mainframe). Most of the time, you just never hear back. Very frustrating. Expect that to be what you get also, if you even get any feedback.

    • #3276867

      Try getting record Expunged

      by sdurfee ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      My state, (RI), allows expungment of most non violent felonies 10 years after your sentence ends. This may be an option.

      Good Luck.

    • #3276833

      Sorry to be so harsh but…

      by d-ram ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      If you get hired it will be nothing short of a miracle. I too have a similar issue and even though I formerly owned and operated, along with a partner, a Computer Service/IT business in my multiple attempts for employment my resume’ has never gotten past the first look by HR.

      • #3276718

        i always appreciate an honest opinion

        by fungusamongus ·

        In reply to Sorry to be so harsh but…

        I think you are right and that it will be very difficult to overcome the justifiable prejudices that my background elicits. That’s life, it’s not always fair and often those with more “resources” (ie dollars) get off of things much easier then those in lower classes do.

        Well IMO it’s their loss…I have a ton to offer any IT company and the background and chops to prove it. Like several here have suggested I will go at it alone if need be, and my hard work and talent will overcome the obstacles.

        Thanks all for your thoughts and time on this matter!

        • #3276679

          Another $0.02

          by tig2 ·

          In reply to i always appreciate an honest opinion

          Mark- Someone mentioned consulting or contracting. While in some industries a background check will be done (finance is one industry), in most cases not.

          By choosing to consult or contract through an agent, be honest about your past with the agent. That way they know who to NOT present you to.

          For the longest time, I worried every time I submitted an app. What I discovered was that the company often didn’t care as long as I disclosed. And I have been through FBI checks.

          Granted, the circumstances were different.

          It doesn’t help any, I know. But I am more likely to be passed over as a result of my medical history. In short- being passed over will happen for whatever reason presents itself.

          Keep at it. The right thing is out there. Let us know how you do.

        • #2515110

          Its been awhile..have you made any progress???

          by pnuts999 ·

          In reply to i always appreciate an honest opinion

          I just want to know if you made any progress with your situation. I think your situation is extremely unfair. Its dumb politicians that are making these dumb laws that don’t make any sense. The same politicians that are doing drugs and so on. I’m originally from DC and i’ve seen it all. FYI one of our past mayors was a crack/wh0re addict!(Marion Barry)

    • #3276783

      Contract or Consult Instead

      by kdonn ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Try marketing yourself as a contractor on consultant. Frequently companies do not do background checks, ask whether yoy have had a conviction, or have you fill out an employment application when you are contracting

      It is a terrible job market right now. Several of us were at the top of our field and lost our jobs to downsizing and outsourcing. You would have a better chance of getting employed in IT right now if you lived in India. Most of us are finding we have to find employment outside of IT. Contractors and consultants included.

    • #3276706

      Start Over

      by smills ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Mark, not sure where you’re located but you can have the charge removed from your record due to the fact it’s a henderance to your ability to find a job. It may take a year to complete but what are you doing in the meantime.

      Call your court system.

    • #3276690

      Mark, Expunge or reduced to misdemeaner go on line or contact lawyer

      by alland100 ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Mark, See if you can expunge the charge or have it reduced to a misdemeaner. Talk to a lawyer. Go
      to the court house (were you were convicted) or on line and get the papers you will need to expunge or have the charge reduced. Good luck.

    • #3276658

      Some one slap me or StOp IT!

      by teddowdey ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Okay, (there is no short game here) Mark,, you have done well to move on (& up). But! as I’ve learned
      in my (pick one) life, I will never be an EX-Marine,
      you and a (very large number here) more of us will
      never be EX-felons!
      We have a (words here) “legal” system, not a system
      of or for “justice”. Oh, stop it, Ill get there.
      Try this one on. This is,,,,,TR? No? Okay, the following is taken from the confirmation sent to me
      from,,,,TR.
      “To protect your privacy
      and prevent unauthorized sign-ups, please take a moment to verify your
      registration by clicking on the link below. Doing so will activate
      your TechRepublic membership.” “Just by clicking the link above, you’ll join nearly 4 million of your
      peers in TechRepublic’s innovative, interactive, and dynamic community
      of IT pros.”
      Garsh!! I r some body now!
      Please do not read anything I have not pecked here! Every tim I push “da go bu-ton” I say thank you to each and every one of you that sat somewhere learning each 0 & 1 that enables this mess befor you. (really)
      I have nine (9) years of, you choose, did not power up a machine such as this one until my mid 40’s, survived Veitnam, have held (what’s plural
      for plethora) way too many “positions” in every
      type and/or kind of condition, am a “papered” Ship
      Wright, Land Surveyor, have a Cert. from DOE to weld (water lines) and still have a nuclear implosion devise mos (job) classification from the USMC. I have had several wives, three of my own, lived or at least “rented” air on most of the non-wet areas, am tattooed (yes) still own a two
      wheeled (yata, yata) BUT! I have no idea of what all of (ya’ll) do to make it possible for me to waste your time. POINT!
      If the Mayor of D.C. can get busted, and do “time”, then be re-elected, the Ken//y’s, whose cars have killed more people than my tattoos ever
      will, can continue to , just be, (?) and every
      “Political Debutaunte” aka da man, rewrite, overwrite, & “hey, that’s not right”, anything they NEED to on a per hour basis, a whole bunch of us are gonna need to KEEP finding new jobs.
      29 years for scofflin’ fo’ nutin’, I do “know from
      ” aw hell, you know.
      Thank you, one and all for every hour of your labor to learn “this”. (yes, Virginia, it’s a mess, but so is, in your own words, your world.)
      “don’t fix the roof in the rain”

    • #3209606

      Try Networking and Volunteer Work

      by maj jbm ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Mark,

      I feel sorry for someone in your position. If you are unable to have the conviction expunged (see a lawyer about that), it will indeed continue to haunt you. I see two things you can do:

      1) use networking to personally introduce yourself to decision makers and hiring managers, or people who know them. Join local computer user groups, professional societies, or things like Lions Club, Jaycees, or Rotary. As you get to know them, let them know about your situation and explain the circumstances. That way, someone can be your advocate with HR or the hiring manaager.

      2) Since you have a good technical background, perhaps volunteer work with a non-profit organization can help, not just in a practical sense but in a “penitential” or “karmic” way. A lot of non-profits are staffed by people who know people, and that will help you in the door. And who knows? Maybe you can parlay that volunteer job into a paying job…non-profit doesn’t always mean non-paying–low paying, perhaps, but not necessarily non-paying.

      I wish you well!

    • #3209552

      Get it quashed from your record…

      by crake ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Mark, you should try contacting the the court and the judge who convicted you and submit a request to get your conviction removed from your record. I have two friends that have done this, one for felony drug possession and one for a DUI.

      Below I am posting a URL that has some basic information about how to go about getting this done – albeit a Michigan Web site – much of the methodology applies to everyone.

      http://www.courts.michigan.gov/scao/selfhelp/intro/criminal/setaside_help.htm

      I hope this helps!
      Good luck to you 🙂

    • #3209518

      Deal with the felony with the court

      by lluchesi ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      I dont have any experience with hiring in the IT field but I do have knowledge on dealing with the felony. You need to go to the court that convicted you with the felony. Ask to speak to the Restoration of Civil Rights Clerk. The clerk should be able to provide you with an Application To Vacate Judgment And Restore Your Civil Rights, to be filled out and then filed with her/him. The application may have a different title depending on the state you need to file in. Regardless, the clerk of the court will be able to inform you on how to have your felony expunged, vacated, or set aside. Many courts are online now and have the form you will need listed in their online forms section. Once you’ve completed the form and filed it, if the judge grants your application, your felony will automatically be expunged, set aside, or at least vacated and turned into a misdameanor. At that point you never have to say that you have a felony conviction, only a misdameanor (if that’s how your state handles restoring civil rights. Word of advise, make sure you don’t owe the court any money in the way of fines and restitution before you file your application. If you do, pay it, because your application will be denied if you owe the court a penny or more. Its a simple process that doesn’t need to be handled by an attorney. You generally wont go infront of the judge, the decisions are usually made in their chambers without anyone present. It can take up to 45 days from start to finish, when you recieve a letter informing you the court is granting or denying your application. You shouldn’t have any problem in getting this done because the felony is old, and you haven’t been in trouble since.

      Hope this helps you. Good luck!

    • #3209513

      honesty in applications

      by richardmflorin ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      As someone who hears about hr stuff everyday I can only suggest that although many companies do not check backgrounds and arrest records it can hang over your head. A lie on an application is grounds for firing at any point in your career. Many companies have employees with past convictions and the best thing going for you is how long ago it happened. I would say be up-front and honest.

    • #3209365

      Yes, you are forever blackballed

      by too old for it ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Plan on a future of low paying, low responsibility, short duration gigs.

      That is the good news. The bad news is that holier-than-thou employers will act like they are doing you a favor by givng you these scut jobs.

    • #3231535

      It depends

      by dr_zinj ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      You’re unlikely to get a job with the government in any capacity, especially those requiring a security clearance.

      I’d venture that you’ll have troubles getting a job in insurance, banking/finance, and medical also.

      Unfortunately, all of those are major users of IT.

      Never lie on the application about it. If it happened, it can be found. It may not be in your legal record, but it WILL be in your government security record – and those do NOT get expunged, ever.

      A lot depends on the type of violation. It’s one thing to be busted at a pot party you’re visiting, but not actually using. It’s another for DUI (of non-alcoholic drugs). And it’s something entirely different if you’re convicted of intent to distribute. So be prepared to explain the circumstances, and what’s happened since then.

    • #3231452

      Encouraging

      by gendersrm ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Oh, heck no, you have a very good chance. First, you are being honest now and up front. That?s rare in itself. So, here is my take as a manager from a Federal Agency. Government agencies that require clearances and background checks will not hire you so you can stay away from them. Other companies, if you go in and explain what happened and what has changed in your life so you value good morals and explain that there is no chance that you will digress back into these transgressions, you will stand a pretty good chance. Managers want people who are productive, dependable, and truthful. Remember, everyone has something in the closet, is just that your closet has a glass door. Best wishes, Rich

    • #3212693

      Here’s the skinny for your job hunt – Good news

      by blueknight ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      You are not wasting your time. A felony conviction is NOT an automatic “bounce” — unless you did hard time for a serious felony such as a sex crime or armed robbery and such. That type of conviction will hit you hard — but good news…

      Advice from this cop is BE HONEST. Don’t list the conviction on your resume – it doesn’t belong there anyway. If a company intends to do a background check, disclose the information at that time. If they are a decent company and can tell you’re the kind of employee they want (I’m talkin’ skill set, personality etc.) then it shouldn’t be a problem. Here’s the better part:

      You can get the case dismissed under certain conditions (hopefully in Florida too). Here in California for example, if you completed your probation (if any) without any violations, and paid all your fines and fees, then you can do a PC 1203.4 motion to have the case dismissed. It will still show on your record, but it would look much better because it would show that the court felt you were rehabilitated and thus dismissed the case.

      You would always have to disclose it, but honesty is always the best policy. If you lie about it, employers could find out and you’d be hosed – even fired if you got a job and they found out later.

      Have an attorney file the motion and argue on your behalf. It’s not a very time-consuming thing, so it shouldn’t be too expensive. It’s actually quite common for those who make these kinds of mistakes in their lives.

      By the way, I confirmed this with my sister who is a Deputy D.A. to make sure I didn’t post something that was incorrect or misleading.

      Go forth and job hunt. If you’re up for the lawyer thing, go for it. Life isn’t over for you.

      Good luck,

      Jim

    • #3283710

      Behind the scene

      by plockit007 ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      The felony is going to eliminate you from almost any high paying job. Unfortunately, if you can go through a staute of limitations which I believe is 10 yaers. It can be admonished if you can get past the paperwork to make it go away.
      I recall almost the same incident with myself. I was applying for a job as a DEA agent passed the interview and was ready to be accepted for the job, when WHAM during the personal interview process and old charge of youthful offender hows up on my record which was 35 yaers ago or more by know. That should have been off the record within 7 years after the fact. So, due to that charge I did not make the employment. We live in strange times now and some of the stuff we did long ago is back to bite us. Best regards, I recommend that if this continues to be of a concern to you just stick with your own business and slowly push yourself back into the IT field on your own grounds. I have ny own computer repair business and have never been happier. The plus side is you are the one who is in charge of you.

      Phil Lockit
      http://www.philscomputerroom.com

    • #3284843

      Becoming An Ex

      by lan_ker ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Experaince teaches one several things. In your case the conviction has several parts(elements} first was there ANY violance or Minors or weapons or dealer charges???? If none of the above and there was but a possion charge then it depends on the state were conviction accured AND currant law at THAT TIME of conviction, not currant law. The order of process and the law your options 1. Lawyer costs 2,000/ process seal records 7 years then apply for Expungment of conviction then should that not work pitition Governor for pardon of conviction!! This is the short verision Oh get second & Third Opinion as well. !!!!!!!!!!

    • #3284834

      hah

      by ibanezoo ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      At my company its almost a requirement to have a criminal record….

    • #3284801

      FORGET IT

      by jmaysonet ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      MARK, AS ONE WHO HAS BEEN THROUGH THE SAME SITUATION, TELLING THE TRUTH WILL NOT HELP. OMITTING THE TRUTH, SAME THING. Y OUR MISTAKE WILL FOLLOW YOU FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE. ONLY WAY OUT, GET THE CONVICTION EXPONGED OR SEEK A PARDON. I HAVE SEEN DRUG CONVICTIONS PARDONED AFTER TEN YEARS OF GOOD BEHAVIOR, BUT YOU MUST FIND AN ADVOCATE TO PUSH IT THROUGH. GOOD LUCK

    • #3283154

      Try MacDonald’s CONVICT!

      by mjulson_z ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Just kidding. Good luck.

    • #3201391

      As long as it doesn’t involve violence, I’d hire you.

      by absolutely ·

      In reply to dealing with a past felony

      Possession of a controlled substance does not imply any difficulty working well with others, although MDMA might encourage some inappropriate workplace behavior. I assume you didn’t take it at work, though!

      So, as long as you didn’t have a drug [b]habit[/b] that interfered with your ability to do your work and to which you might relapse, I’d hire you just as if you had a parking ticket.

      What you do in your free time is between you and those with whom you do it. I’m old-fashioned.

Viewing 43 reply threads