Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ask Slashdot: Can a Felon Work In IT?

Posted by samzenpus on from the orange-is-not-the-new-big-blue dept.

First time accepted submitter Lesrahpem writes I'm a felon with several prior misdemeanor convictions from an immature time in my life. I've since cleaned up my act, and I want to go back into the IT sector. I keep running into potential employers who tell me they'd like to hire me but can't because of my past record (expunging won't work, I'm in Ohio). Does anyone have any suggestions for me? Should I just give up and change careers?"

81 of 720 comments (clear)

  1. America, land of the free... by Bohnanza · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and home of the lifetime sentence for nearly every crime. Best of luck to you.

    --

    -----

    Sorry, I'm only a 1336 h4x0r.

    1. Re:America, land of the free... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Funny

      He must have also committed felonies or he wouldn't be a felon...

    2. Re:America, land of the free... by Alomex · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well if you don't like it you can exercise your democratic right and vote against it... unless you live in one of the many states that do not allow felons to vote.

      Nice ain't it?

    3. Re:America, land of the free... by xevioso · · Score: 4, Informative

      While it sucks, there's a good reason why companies have asked people about their past criminal history or have done searches.

      If you have past felony convictions for, say grand larceny or other similar crimes, and are hired, and then go on to commit a crime against a customer while working, it's very easy for that company to get sued for millions. It's would be incredibly easy to make the argument that the company knew or should have known that Mr. Felon (who supposedly cleaned up his act) had prior convictions and was a risk to the company and its customers. Then, BLAM, the company is out millions of dollars, all because it didn't check or didn't care.

      Now, while this sucks for the felon trying to land a job, it also sucks for the company, and lets face it, the recidivism rate among past felons is generally pretty high. Why should a company want to risk it's own livelihood or existence just to give you a second chance?

      This is a risk mitigation issue, and maybe it's a good thing that states are making it difficult to ask or check, but companies will do it anyway, just for the reasons I've outlined. Maybe companies in other, "more enlightened" societies haven't had their pants sued off them enough to make this an issue, bit is one here.

    4. Re:America, land of the free... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Or he simply doesn't know the difference. Either way, criminal background checks are required for most IT jobs I have ever applied for and have never seen anyone with a criminal history get an IT job. I have seen people get rejected for reckless driving and DUI as being able to travel and drive to remote facilities was required, let alone a rash of misdemeanors and a felony off the road.

      If you want to stick to IT I would suggest trying to find (or make) friends with others in management positions over IT groups and try to get hired. Some time on the job and some strong references will help your chances, but not guarantee anything as managers' hands are often tied when HR flags a candidate with a criminal history.

      I would also suggest switching your career to politics, as that career path doesn't seem to care much about criminal history.

    5. Re:America, land of the free... by jd142 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, yes, in the same way that Socrates is mortal because Socrates died.

      The thing is, in the good ol' US of A, where less than 10 years ago you could be a felon for owning 6 dildos, we can be pretty darn stupid. http://www.dumblaws.com/law/938. Yes, the law was overturned, but just one example of the way we are tough on crime. And here's some fun with our drug laws. http://netnebraska.org/article/news/938774/how-tough-nebraska-pot-possession-depends-county I like the quote “Let’s say you have a marijuana brownie,” Steller explained. “We would prosecute you for the possession of hash which is a class 4 felony.”

    6. Re:America, land of the free... by vidarlo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Now, while this sucks for the felon trying to land a job, it also sucks for the company, and lets face it, the recidivism rate among past felons is generally pretty high. Why should a company want to risk it's own livelihood or existence just to give you a second chance?

      I think there's a circular logic somewhere there. If you don't have a job, I guess you have a lower threshold for crime. If you have a job, and everything to loose, I guess crime is not so tepmting.

      In most of Europe, criminal convictions is simply irrelevant to jobs. Some jobs require your record, but mostly not the full - only a limited record. For instance, if you work with kids, you need a record clean of child abuse and sexual assaults. But for a general job in IT? Noone would even ask about your record. I have not been asked ever - except for a visa application to the USA.

      I believe the European system is better at integrating convicts back into soceity, stopping them from committing more crime.

      --
      Assembling etherkillers for fun an profit
    7. Re:America, land of the free... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      While it sucks, there's a good reason why companies have asked people about their past criminal history or have done searches.

      My experience is that most companies do NOT check. I have worked for half a dozen tech companies, over several decades, and have been involved in hiring over a hundred people. Except for a couple cases that involved security clearances, we never did a criminal background check. Why should we? Studies have shown that people with criminal backgrounds tend to do no worse on the job. You are better off screening out people that use MSIE to fill out their application, since that is actually correlated with poor job performance.

    8. Re:America, land of the free... by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now, while this sucks for the felon trying to land a job, it also sucks for the company, and lets face it, the recidivism rate among past felons is generally pretty high. Why should a company want to risk it's own livelihood or existence just to give you a second chance?

      Yes, it's pretty high precisely because of all the people like yourself with such an attitude. If an ex-felon cannot find a legitimate job they will simply turn to crime and thus will land in prison again. And because of that you will pay more and more in taxes to support that.

      So if you want a society in which recidivism rates go down and ex-felons are reformed rather than becoming life-long criminals who get repeatedly locked up in prison, we should all be trying to push for more ex-felons to be given a second chance.

    9. Re:America, land of the free... by timeOday · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not hard to understand why companies might be slow to hire ex-cons in a market with a long-term labor surplus. What is harder is fixing the problems created by such policies - you release somebody from prison into society. You deny them voting rights, and employment, and even welfare and food stamps. They literally have no way to get food. And then sit back and wait for the self-fulfilling prophecy of recidivism. You could hardly design a system more likely to fail if you tried.

    10. Re:America, land of the free... by jd2112 · · Score: 2

      You are better off screening out people that use MSIE to fill out their application, since that is actually correlated with poor job performance.

      Ah, that explains why I couldn't get that job that I applied for. The application page was IE only and changing the agent string on my browser didn't work.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
    11. Re:America, land of the free... by Cytotoxic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree with the concepts your are talking about, but I cannot imagine an IT shop failing to check the background of a system administrator who will be working with banking systems, for example. Think about the fallout if Deutsche Bank hired a database administrator with prior convictions for banking fraud, only to see that employee steal 100 million from the bank.

      I'm going to bet that criminal convictions are pretty important in the relevant areas, even in Europe. They probably do a better job of discriminating which information is relevant and which positions are sensitive.

      The part where they ask about prior history might also be different in Europe. In the US I think a large part of the reason for asking about prior criminal history is to set up a situation where it is easy to terminate an employee if they lie on the application. In Europe they might not have to ask before running a criminal background check. And lying on the application might not make a difference when it comes time to terminate an employee.

    12. Re:America, land of the free... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      “Let’s say you have a marijuana brownie,” Steller explained. “We would prosecute you for the possession of hash which is a class 4 felony.”

      At least hash browns are still legal.

    13. Re:America, land of the free... by Bogtha · · Score: 4, Insightful

      what's the problem with the loss of the voting franchise?

      Aside from the fact that it's fundamentally incompatible with democracy, wasn't a huge part of the American revolution the idea that there should be no taxation without representation? Those felons are taxpayers, aren't they?

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    14. Re:America, land of the free... by TWX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm really starting to wonder if maybe the only felony that should deserve a revocation of the right to vote is vote fraud.

      If the number of convicts or felons is so high that they constitute a voting bloc that could influence law, then perhaps the laws that have convicted them need to be considered.

      That doesn't mean that the voting district, or state, or whatever has to make it particularly easy to vote for those in jail (ie, no polling place in the prison), but if the convict is capable of writing-in to request an absentee or mail-in ballot, then I see no reason why the state should prohibit or preclude that population from voting. I would even argue that those incarcerated in prison (generally long-term) instead of simple jail (short term) should register their address and right to vote where they live, ie, at the prison.

      That might suck for prison-industrial-complex towns like many down in Texas, but there again, if we're incarcerating so many people that they can significantly influence an election, then perhaps our laws incarcerating so many people need to be reconsidered.

      Besides, I expect a lot of those convicted probably didn't vote prior to conviction, and being convicted in of itself isn't likely to get them to start voting either.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    15. Re:America, land of the free... by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Problem is a huge proportion of those people are black, and in America blacks almost always vote democrat.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    16. Re:America, land of the free... by johanw · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know about other EU countries, but in The Netherlands employers can ask for a "declaration about the behaviour" of the applicant. That's a document the government issues, and the employer has to indicate what kind of possibly sensitive things the job requires, like working with children, working with large sums of money, with sensitive/secret information or with dangerous substances. If you're convicted for hild abuse you still can get such a document for working in a bank, but not for a job in childcare (and in childcare the employer is required to ask for such a declaration). If you're convicted for bank fraud the opposite, you are still alowed to work with children.

      That's all most employers can ask, and most won't ask it because if they indicate the job does not require to work with anything like that the declaration will always be given and it's a waste of money and effort. Employers can ask beyond this of course, but I've never eard of it happening and I even think you are legally alowed to lie, the same like an employer isn't alowed to ask if you're pregnant but if he does and you lie a court will not alow the contract to be broken for that.

    17. Re:America, land of the free... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No crime should ever prevent a person from voting. It's a fundamental right to participate in democracy, and if the goal is to rehabilitate offenders then they must be able to fully participate in society after they have paid their debt.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    18. Re:America, land of the free... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

      In Europe convictions are considered "spent" after some time, and you don't have to report them even if they ask. Credit reference agencies and the police are not allowed to reveal those convictions to employers, banks or anyone else.

      So, the OP should move to Europe.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    19. Re:America, land of the free... by gunnnnslinger · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's because Norway (and many European countries) is run by competent people, who care about their country. America is run by greedy and amoral corporations who view their country as a feedlot and a labor camp. Fatten them up by selling them shitty food and sedentary entertainment so you can keep them barely working and dependent upon expensive drugs, and keep them working all the time so they only have time to buy and eat the shitty food and expensive drugs, never time to get a real fucking education that would mean true freedom. America is a shame, I would leave without a second thought if I had the means. This man probably has a felony because he rebelled against this system out of some misunderstood desperation, many Americans do. Whether it's drug abuse, petty theft, or shoplifting, many people desperate to wake up from this consumer shithole paradigm lash-out. After which, of course, the system now knows that they can't be trusted to be mindless fucktard shoppers and slaves any longer. So they get the permanent 'F stamp' which means for the REST OF THEIR LIFE, they will have to beg people to trust them enough to give them shitty jobs, substandard housing rentals, will never be able to possess firearms, will always be treated with suspicion right out of the gate with police and 'law enforcement' gang members. We have an invisible caste system in America, and having a felony for anything (even as minor as getting caught with less than a few grains (as in dust particles) of cocaine can relegate you to the bottom of the caste system for the rest of your life.

    20. Re:America, land of the free... by ultranova · · Score: 2

      Fail? High recividism rate succeeds perfectly in reinforcing the idea that world has good people and bad people. This, in turn, helps justify the use of violence against the bad. And, certainly entirely coincidentally, the USA has invested very heavily into the capacity to use such violence.

      What's a few ruined lives next to an empire?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    21. Re:America, land of the free... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Agreed. Up here there was a bit of a furor (mostly by the "usual suspects") when our supreme court ruled that ALL prisoners had the right to vote, but it quickly died down.

      In its decision in Sauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) in 2002, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that prisoners serving terms of more than two years could not be disqualified from voting, stating that legislation infringing on prisoners' right to vote was not a reasonable limit of that right

      So ballot boxes in all prisons on election day is now seen as normal. Anything that makes inmates feel like they have a positive connection to greater society is a good thing.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    22. Re:America, land of the free... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The question is not why the right to bear arms is a constitutional right. The question is why the right to vote is not.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    23. Re:America, land of the free... by St.Creed · · Score: 2

      That's because Norway (and many European countries) is run by competent people, who care about their country.

      It's because the working class organizations (consumer organisations, trade unions) are so strong in most parts of the EU and especially Norway, they have gained a lot of rights and limitations to the powers of capital.Nothing inherently competent about the Norwegians - a competent crook is still competent after all - but the ability of companies to get away with things most people find offensive has been limited by rules like this.

      --
      Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
    24. Re:America, land of the free... by TWX · · Score: 2

      The problem with that is that someone has to later decide that a prisoner is ready to leave, and could decide for reasons unrelated to the prisoner's rehabilitation whether or not to release them. Declaring sentence at conviction based on already-published guidelines, with the ability for the courts or the state to reduce, but not increase sentence post-conviction means that those who are truly rehabilitated early might be released early, but those that are not will serve out their sentences.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    25. Re:America, land of the free... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Use a recruiting agency, work a contract first, then convert to a perm. The recruiting agency will do the background check, after they have an offer on the table, and only if requested by the company. Once they have the offer, all that they will see is $$$ and be more likely overlook issues. Stuff that happened long ago in my case. If you are competent, it is quite easy to get converted to perm without any checks (for a mid sized company).

    26. Re:America, land of the free... by Jhon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      " If you don't have a job, I guess you have a lower threshold for crime. "

      I've been homeless and I've been jobless and I cannot disagree with you more. I think the reason it MIGHT appear that way is that people are willing to risk potential punishment for quick rewards rather than put in the work necessary to earn them. It's really as simple as that. There is virtually no place in the US where someone who is homeless and jobless cannot get enough assistance from city/state/private agency to change their situation. The exceptions are those in similar circumstance who are UNABLE to work or manage their own care/life due to mental illness or substance abuse.

    27. Re: America, land of the free... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Anyone who doesn't understand the importance of both shouldn't be allowed to vote.

    28. Re:America, land of the free... by mi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing is, in the good ol' US of A, where less than 10 years ago you could be a felon for owning 6 dildos

      Somehow I doubt, the asker was convicted only of violating something as stupid as possession of dildos or innocent as that of marijuana — he would've said so (if any employer even paid attention to it in the first place).

      No, he was, by all appearances, genuinely guilty of at least one violent crime — plus some misdemeanors. I'm not saying, he "deserves" never to work in IT at all, but I don't blame the IT-folks — most of whom have not hit anybody in anger since middle school — for not wanting to work (be under the same roof!) with such a guy.

      Why would you choose to drag out your anti-Americanism over this, is beyond me...

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    29. Re:America, land of the free... by Creepy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not to mention the forced prison labor market. Felons get to learn "valuable skills" (for third world countries) and make products to sell at full value while getting paid a pittance. Refuse to work? No problem, 3 months in solitary will cure that, or you'll just go nuts. Really, the prison system is just slavery by another name.

    30. Re: America, land of the free... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The fundamental problem is - sysadmins have more or less unfettered access to a companies' systems, and there's no good way for non-technical people to tell if a sysadmin is misusing his position. If you're the one running a company's mail server, you can conceivably intercept all sorts of sensitive information. It's the same if you're the one responsible for keeping company desktops operational.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    31. Re:America, land of the free... by Sardaukar86 · · Score: 2

      Anything that makes inmates feel like they have a positive connection to greater society is a good thing.

      Exactly. Unless we intend to lock up all prisoners for ever, the vast majority will be released back into society eventually.

      Do we want released inmates re-integrated with society as smoothly as possible, or do we want them back amongst us harbouring a deep resentment due to the way they were treated in prison? It's our choice.

      --
      ..Mullah or Pope, Preacher or Poet, who was it wrote: "Give any one species too much rope and they'll fuck it up"?
    32. Re:America, land of the free... by Ichijo · · Score: 2

      there are limits on what one [can] do to influence the behavior of others.

      Such as letting them go free as soon as they've rehabilitated and not a day sooner? I think that alone gets the job half done.

      That reminds me of a joke. How many psychologists does it take to change a light bulb? Only one, but the light bulb has to want to change.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    33. Re:America, land of the free... by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In Ohio, criminal records can be expunged except for first and second degree felonies or crimes considered violent- after they are settled and punishment and fines have been paid. There is a process that is sort of like asking for parole but ends up in court with a judge making the final decision.

      He said he couldn't get the felonies expunged because he is in Ohio. This means it was either violent, or a serious enough felony that it was a first or second degree felony as defined by the state. I concur, it was not a crime he woke up one day not realizing he was committing or thought was a minor misdemeanor and got roped into a felony.

    34. Re:America, land of the free... by LiENUS · · Score: 2

      People who equate the right to vote with firearms ownership shouldn't be allowed to vote.

      The us constitution places greater importance on one of these and not the other, guess which (hint: voting is less important)

    35. Re: America, land of the free... by jsh1972 · · Score: 2

      Actually, mushrooms are a Felony as well.

    36. Re:America, land of the free... by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, and back when speeding tickets in Texas were misdemeanors (changed in the early 2000s to the points "infraction" system used most other places), I got a conviction (overturned on appeal). I'm even on one of the blackmail criminal background sites.

      But, answering truthfully on a FedEx application (have you ever been convicted of a crime, including any misdemeanors?) got me eliminated from contention for a job there. Apparently they only want lying criminals.

      So yes, even a speeding ticket (going 35 mph in a 55 mph zone was the speed) can get you eliminated from consideration for jobs. The more applicants per position, the more it applies. When they can look at 1000 applications for one position, they'll eliminate all the people with a conviction of any kind and still be left with hundreds of people for the position. The chance of eliminating the only qualified person in that first step is near-zero, and if they don't find anyone in the remaining hundreds, they can always go back to the criminal pile. But in practice they never do.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
    37. Re:America, land of the free... by davydagger · · Score: 2
      No one is blaming IT.

      We are blaming backwards ass fucking laws, that stay on the books due to conspiracy minded dofuses who still think some variant of the satanic minded deviants running around are the reason for society's "decline".

    38. Re:America, land of the free... by Kabukiwookie · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, he was, by all appearances, genuinely guilty of at least one violent crime

      This is rubbish. Usually it's laziness on the part of HR.

      You have two candidates; one has a felony conviction, the other does not. Do you really think that the HR person is going to invest hist/her time to find out whether person with the felony was only arrested for eating a hash brownie or robbing a liquor store?

      --
      The mountains of madness have many little plateaus of sanity - Terry Pratchett.
    39. Re:America, land of the free... by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Informative

      You cannot be charged with trespassing or any extent of it if someone who has charge of the property invites you on to it. You will have to show the person entered the premises by force, stealth, or deception which negates going to a friends house and getting busted by their parents for raiding the liquor cabinet.

      Also, you will not be able to show any cases in which that has actually happened and a kid or anyone has been charged with a felony, convicted and now suffers from it when he was invited onto the property. If you broke into someone's house, then I would definitely say felony applies.

      I'm not saying the OP is an angel, but there's no need to assume violence.

      I never said violence has to be present. I said violence for lesser crimes than a first and second degree felony. Theft over a certain amount is a felony of the second degree and over a larger amount is a first degree felony offense. Stealing a gun from a federally licensed firearms dealer. it is a first degree felony. As you pointed out, burglary which doesn't have to involve violence is a second degree felony. So there are things that are not violent that can make a person non eligible to have a record expunged that do not involve the convolution of laws and situations in order to make them fit.

    40. Re: America, land of the free... by binarylarry · · Score: 2

      Damn Koopa and his GOP connections.

      --
      Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
    41. Re: America, land of the free... by HappyDrgn · · Score: 2

      You've never seen a background check report have you? It lists state and county, date of conviction, the severity of the crime, what crime was committed and penal code section. It's a bit more detailed than just showing a yes/no for convictions, no one has to investigate what happened as it's pretty plainly detailed in the background check.

    42. Re:America, land of the free... by turbidostato · · Score: 2

      "he was, by all appearances, genuinely guilty of at least one violent crime"

      OK. So he was genuinely guilty of at least one violent crime, so what? He already paid what our society deemed a proper penalty and now is in the clear. Or he should be, shouldn't he?

    43. Re:America, land of the free... by Jhon · · Score: 2

      "Yeah, a serious threat to their wealthy, racially privileged position at the top of the pyramid."

      While there may have been a few present at the constitutional convention with that rationale, they were very few. Most representatives were much more altruistic than that. The argued reasons were that PASSIONS were a threat to the stability of any government. The sudden swings and moods of the people can destroy a country. Read Federalist 10.

      To get a better understanding of what transpired I would highly recommend A Constitutional Journal (by St. John). It's an excellent laymens account. I prefer the notes of Madison as well as various journal entries and letters from the members, but St John is not only informative, it's entertaining.

      Another serious thread was noted by Franklin: “When the people find that they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic."

       

    44. Re:America, land of the free... by cduffy · · Score: 2

      There is no law barring employment for felons â" on the contrary, the state goes out of its way to encourage employers to hire them, to reduce recidivism.

      ...but they do a rather bad job of it, as a great many of your larger employers have a zero-tolerance policy.

      To be born and raised in the USA â" the country, to which millions of people dream of migrating (legally and otherwise) â" and waste your youthful years on crime?

      The advice the OP is asking for applies to other folks as well. One of my friends has a felony record for running web hosting for a brothel a friend of his owned, and otherwise offering services and support to a business which was to the best of his knowledge strictly offering services between consenting adults... and not turning her in when he changed his mind about being willing to continue to provide that support. That folks who don't follow a libertarian philosophy could see that as a lapse of ethics is certainly granted -- but a lapse that should mean that 4/5ths of employment prospects are permanently off the table? That's harsh.

      That said -- he's working today, for an employer well aware of the entirety of his background (including his meticulous attention to detail and corner cases in software design and development). So, yes -- fewer options, but some do still exist.

    45. Re:America, land of the free... by solosaint · · Score: 2

      "he was, by all appearances, genuinely guilty of at least one violent crime.." Violent crime? really? Dude, do some research, there are MANY felonies that do not involve violence, drug possession, sales, and piracy are two examples...

    46. Re:America, land of the free... by Isca · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that you also get shady prosecutors who intentionally change charges so that they will be a more serious crime, then negotiate little to no jail time as part of the sentence. This makes their numbers look better to voters with the number of convictions and unless you have your own lawyers (Not a court appointed defense attorney) the fact that your misdemeanor just turned into a felony that'll restrict you for the rest of your life.

      In addition to that it's easy to have a felony battery charge that sticks with your for the rest of your life when you are young. All you need to be is drunk and belligerent to an arresting officer just once. I know several guys who matured once they got into their 20's who only survived not going to prison by being white and well off enough to have their own attorney. They turned out to be perfectly normal people that are hard workers and model employees 20 years later. Be poor or a minority in that situation and your life is now shot.

  2. Clearance by gcnaddict · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seek federal jobs which offer a clearance. If you admit to everything thoroughly and give the investigators the truth, and if they're not worried about you after all of that (they think the risk of recidivism is low), you'll get the job and you can say on your resume you were cleared for federal work.

    Whenever you decide to leave, the fact that you had a clearance might actually help counteract your priors.

    --
    Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:Clearance by gcnaddict · · Score: 2

      Clearances are about trust and risk. Can a candidate be trusted? Can a candidate sufficiently avoid blackmail? If both are true, the candidate has a good likelihood of getting cleared.

      Everything that's evaluated is done so against these two questions. With this in mind, the list of crimes which can sufficiently bar a person from cleared work is very, very low.

      --
      Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:Clearance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm in personnel security in a Federal agency. Given a few years of productive behavior in society, and positive evidence of rehabilitation, you will probably be able to mitigate any criminal conduct issues for basic suitability or even a security clearance.

      Most agencies use suitability (5 C.F.R. Part 731). As long as you haven't done anything horrible for a few years, you are honest about what you did, and your crimes do not have a direct nexus to the position sought, you will be good to go. The OPM-FIS web site has a little more information on suitability. Beware of the "issue characterization chart" that has been floating around since the JPL lawsuit. It's not current, and it doesn't take into effect numerous additional considerations that upgrade and downgrade issue characterization.

      Cleared positions will use the national security standard (E.O. 12968). Go to the PERSEREC web site and download the Adjudicator's Desk Reference. That will tell you everything you want to know about that. You might also want to find the web site of the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals, and read some of the published cases. That will give you a realistic idea of how contractors with criminal records mitigate them.

      I wouldn't bother with excepted service positions like law enforcement or the intelligence community.

  3. I've hired people with misdemeanors before by Minupla · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've hired people with misdemeanors before.

    Be honest about the crime, don't have it be a surprise that I find out during the background check part of the hiring process.

    I also know other managers who've done the same. Its tough to find good people. A drug offense 5 yrs ago, with proof of a completed drug treatment program for instance isn't going to stop me from hiring a good IT worker.

    Min

    --
    On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    1. Re:I've hired people with misdemeanors before by geogob · · Score: 2

      Why wouldn't he? Giving a decent work to a past felon shouldn't be a question at all. I'd even say that not giving him a job because of its past is a strict contradiction to the justice and rehabilitation process.

      Giving him a job is not just good for him, its also good for society. And he might even be good at it!

    2. Re:I've hired people with misdemeanors before by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

      Your drug example is understandable, but would you hire a convicted felon as well?

      Your statement seems to imply that a felon is some sort of untouchable non-human. You realize that many ex-felons were not convicted of, for example, a violent crime, right? What world would you rather live in? One in which felons are given second chances that have been proven to reduce recidivism or one in which we keep treating them as if they are untouchables who become life-long criminals because they happened to make a mistake in their life?

    3. Re:I've hired people with misdemeanors before by hey! · · Score: 2

      While I agree in principle, I would consider the nature of a felony and its relevance to the job. For example I wouldn't hire someone convicted of embezzlement for a job where he has access to sensitive financial data, no matter how long ago that offense was. I would tend to overlook certain drug related charges because of the long history of overzealous prosecution of "drug offenses" in this country.

      I'd also consider the amount of time since the offense, particularly for offenses committed by people when they were in their teens. Research shows that many peoples' brains don't develop impulse control until they are out of their teen years. At thirty they're almost literally different people than they were at 16. And I would strongly discount misdemeanors that occurred a long time ago.

      But hiring someone with a criminal record, or not hiring someone because of that record -- that's not an easy decision, nor should it be. As a hiring manager you have a responsibility to society, certainly. But you have other responsibilities, to your employer, customers, and coworkers that you have to honor as well. You should try to make a decision that is as fair as possible to everyone affected, and sometimes the candidate may come up holding the short stick, which is too bad.

      I don't think criminal record should be used as an automatic screen, that's just lazy. As a manager I'm paid *not* to be lazy, and to make good decisions, so that's what I should do.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:I've hired people with misdemeanors before by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      "My mother got sick and was given 2 weeks to live. 20 years later, she finally died. I went to be by her side, and didn't end up moving on until after." Nobody would question that. Nobody would ask any follow-up questions to that. And it's better than murder.

      --
      Learn to love Alaska
  4. start your own business? by zr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    unfortunately i'm not speaking from experience, just spitballing ideas.

    best of luck to you!

    1. Re:start your own business? by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Informative

      That was my first thought. If you can't find someone to hire you, start your own. Corporations don't have criminal records, and unless you are working for someone who screens your employees (and that's slippery ground from a contract work perspective) you are simply doing work.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  5. A felon with misdemeanor convictions by kamapuaa · · Score: 2

    I'm a little confused by the phrasing. Being a felon is a roadblock to a career. Having misdemeanor convictions probably isn't. If you're a felon, why even bother mentioning that you've had misdemeanor convictions?

    --
    Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    1. Re:A felon with misdemeanor convictions by Oligonicella · · Score: 2

      Better to be fully honest. If a felon, a prospective employer will check that. When checking, the misdemeanors will appear. Unmentioned, it could look like trying to hide the garnish.

    2. Re:A felon with misdemeanor convictions by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 2

      A string of convictions for assault and battery might hurt your chances in a team situation, or customer service situations

      Sounds more like useful experience to me...

      --
      Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
    3. Re:A felon with misdemeanor convictions by Wycliffe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Being a felon means he committed a serious crime.

      really???

      i got convicted of felony because i got caught with some personal MDMA pillis in 2001 at an electronic music concert.

      that's a "serious crime"??

      As someone who hires programmers, a felony like this I would completely ignore if everything else was in line.
      Honesty and theft are the big ones in IT not drug use or even assault. Other careers would be different but
      as a programmer you are entrusted with alot of stuff (like credit cards) so a felony that is theft related is
      probably going to be much harder to be overlooked. Drug use, I don't really care that much about. I've hired
      plenty of alcoholics and probably a few pot smokers but as long as it doesn't interfere with their job, why
      should I care?

    4. Re:A felon with misdemeanor convictions by tnk1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Misdemeanor is a minor crime. Misdemeanor can lead to jail time and fines and gets you a criminal record. Jail time is not uncommon, but is usually not handed out unless it is a more serious offense or this is a second conviction. It tends to be on the order of like 30-180 days. Fines and probation are the usual sentences.

      Felony is a very serious crime, and in addition to a record and much more likely jail time, which starts to become years in length, you also lose many of your civil rights. In many places, you cannot vote, serve on a jury, or own a firearm as a felon and this lasts for some period after your release, up to and including the rest of your life. Your only recourse to that state is often an executive pardon.

      Of course, these are classifications, not actual crimes. Murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, grand theft, etc. are all felonies. Speeding is an infraction, not a misdemeanor, but speeding excessively over the limit might be reckless driving, which is a misdemeanor. Carrying illegal substances would usually be a misdemeanor as well (in the places it isn't legal anyway).

      Dealing illegal substances is more serious and can often end up as a felony, although laws vary based on how much you've been dealing.

      You will frequently end up with a felony if you continue to repeat misdemeanors. And this is a frequent reason for drug based offenders to turn into felons. In addition to the utility of becoming a dealer if you are a user, if you are simply a user, addiction puts you in a position where you continue to have strong motivation to keep breaking the law which escalates charges to felony-level under repeat offender provisions in the law.

      It is important to note that a crime is defined by law as a felony, there is no hard and fast requirement for a crime to meet some sort of definition to be considered a felony. For instance, two minors sleeping together used to be able to both be convicted of statutory rape, even if the act was completely consented to by both parties, because under the law a minor cannot consent to sex. In many places that is a felony. The drug laws are also one situation where felonies seem to be handed out very easily, and so consequently, is a reason the US is seen as a place where the jails are busting at the seams with non-violent offenders.

    5. Re:A felon with misdemeanor convictions by lachlan76 · · Score: 2

      We have a distinction between summary and indictable offences here, the cutoff being two years maximum in gaol.

  6. Look at Indian outsourcing/H1B companies by i+work+on+computers · · Score: 2

    I managed a contractor that never would have been hired by my or most engineering companies due to a criminal history and being a registered sex offender. He worked for a company that otherwise is H1B and Green Cards from India. I know he got paid quite a bit less than if he worked for my company, but he at least got in the door after his prison term. If you are skilled, one of these companies may take a flier on you.

  7. Re:Freelance/Consulting by yog · · Score: 2

    This is absolutely not true. Any respectable broker will thoroughly vet their contractors.

    --
    it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
  8. Not specific to IT by sjbe · · Score: 2

    I keep running into potential employers who tell me they'd like to hire me but can't because of my past record (expunging won't work, I'm in Ohio). Does anyone have any suggestions for me? Should I just give up and change careers?

    Sadly that problem will not be confined to IT. Even if you try to change careers a felony record is going to follow you and (right or wrong) there aren't a lot of employers who are going to be willing to take a chance on an ex-con. Companies just generally do not want to take on avoidable known risks and a felony makes a job candidate into an avoidable known risk.

    Your best chance is probably through personal networking but it's going to be tough. The good news is that there are companies that will work with people with troubled pasts but finding them usually takes a lot of work. If your skill set is in IT and your convictions aren't for things related to IT then I see no particular reason to switch because the same problem will exist regardless of what type of job you seek.

  9. awww.... by Connie_Lingus · · Score: 5, Informative

    hello and welcome to my life.

    it's well documented here on /. that i struggle with this same issue, and have for over a decade.

    i wish i had good news for you, but i don't. it's going to be hard for you for find "regular" employment.

    my advice? try to find a small company where you can get hired without a lot of fanfare. finding and owner/ceo who does the hiring, or a contracting company where they have no real interest in caring about your background because it will cost them money if they don't place you, is pretty much the only way i've been able to get back into a stable, well-paying job.

    pretty much anyplace with a fulltime HR department will discover your transgressions and gleefully report to the hiring manager that they "gotcha" and are doing a really great job keeping reprobates like us away from their "sanitary" workplace.

    i've started my own small consulting company and have found that it's fairly easy to work from home (im a software guy) doing the code monkey thing...it beats digging ditches that's for sure. i advertise back-end/full-stack web development/server management on craigslist and it works.

    good luck...you are going to need some.

    --
    never bring a twinkie to a food fight.
    1. Re:awww.... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ...pretty much anyplace with a fulltime HR department will discover your transgressions and gleefully report to the hiring manager that they "gotcha" and are doing a really great job keeping reprobates like us away from their "sanitary" workplace....

      My experiences working with a full-time HR department ("HR Team") both as a candidate and as a hiring manager correlates yours, but more generally --- the HR department looks for reasons why a candidate is not suitable for the position. The more reasons the HR department finds for not hiring a candidate, the better the job they consider themselves to be doing.

      .
      I've overridden a HR department on more than one occasion because they focused on minutiae instead of qualifications. In those instances, the candidate was hired and became a very good performer. At times I wonder if I would be able to hire anyone if I listened to HR's opinion of the candidates.

  10. Start your own business. by yog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You really have very few choices. There are employers out there who actually seek out people with priors, but for the most part you're going to be frustrated in your attempts to land a job.

    Your best bet is to start your own business, for example web design or outsourced PC network maintenance. There are lots of people making a good living as free lancers.

    Once you have gotten established, which admittedly may take a couple of years of networking and marketing efforts, you may not wish to be an employee again anyway. You can set your own hours, choose your own customers, and take full charge of your life. It's not easy, and requires more skills than just showing up and doing a specific task from 9 to 5, but much more fulfilling in the long run, and few will run background checks.

    You're still going to have trouble getting loans; just work hard and build up equity, and the rest will follow. Best of luck.

    --
    it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
  11. Finding work is hard by MoonlightWolf · · Score: 2

    I understand your situation. I don't know how long ago the felonies are for you but it sounds like they might be a while ago. I am in North Carolina and expungement won't work for me either. I had to go into restaurant work (serving, bartending, then became managers at independently owned restaurants that I was completely honest with when applying for a manager position. Corporate restaurants and companies frown on this and it won't work without executive and HR approval. I have a degree from a good college, about ten years work experience doing everything including IT support, networking, database and systems programming, and management positions and I still could not get an IT job. It has been five years since I committed my felonies (acting stupid one time in your life can cost you everything so a word to the wise, think before you act and if you're too drunk, it's probably not wise to act at all) and if I go to an interview they say everything is great until I tell them about my background. I have been doing some consulting work on the side, helping local businesses out with their computer work and helping fix as many people's computers as I can and doing websites for businesses (it's not what you know, it's who you know). It helps keep me sharp. Recently I have been able to attain a developer position from an independently owned company and am their head developer now through a connection I made doing websites. Also, one of the companies I used to do security with (and they are a medium sized company) is trying to find a way to hire me back as a Systems Engineer but I am waiting to hear back from their lawyers and executives, but this is only because I've worked there before and done well and the president and vice president of the company would like to have me back. You can't imagine how surprised I was to get that phone call after five years of nothing. Realistically, I don't think it will work yet, but I am still hoping. So basically, try for smaller businesses, startups, and in the worst case scenario, start your own business. If is your passion and you keep trying, something will happen. If you need money to live and eat like I did, you will probably have to resort to another field temporarily. But do your best and things will happen. I have extra work maintaining and programming POS systems for restaurants and that field needs some good IT people in it, trust me. If you want to try starting something up yourself, let me know and I will be glad to help with what I can. Be honest with employers, but telling them everything right from the beginning may not always be the best bet, but let your judgement and the other person's personality determine that. Best of luck!

  12. Not a big deal, if handled correctly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    As a hiring-manager for IT roles, I'd totally hire someone with a felony from their past. As long as they were upfront about it, and it wasn't a "background check surprise" and they showed real talent and openness. The biggest unfair downside, is that you kind of have to open up about it and share more about your life than you'd probably want to with the hiring manager if you didn't have any previous convictions. That is, you'd have to provide a context for understanding the crime that would make me feel comfortable that I wasn't putting the company at risk by brining you in. I think it's fairly easy, to be honest. Just explain the circumstances, your background, and what you want to do with your life, etc.

    Don't get discouraged! It's definitely something that will stick with you, but I think IT is a great career for earnings / long term potential and while managers have to be security conscious, an *honest* employee who open shares their past dishonest mistakes is a rare treat.

    The employee who applies and is honest about a past conviction is NOT going to the the person who ends up ripping you off. It'll be someone with no priors.

  13. No, you're not barred by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Informative

    A felony can only delay a security clearance because the only relevance a felony has to a security clearance is whether it shows a fundamental character issue making one insufficiently trustworthy. That's fundamentally what they want to find out in a background investigation. Can we trust you? That's why a guy who's 40 with a felony charge for selling drugs but can show he's been a cleaned up citizen for 15 years can probably get a clearance but a guy with no criminal past who's had an affair on his wife or two in the recent past cannot hold one.

  14. like all employment problems by phantomfive · · Score: 2

    Like all employment problems, with this one, some companies will not hire you but other companies will. You don't need to work for every company, you only need to find one.

    Different companies have different ideas. I got rejected by four different companies last time I was looking for a job, then I found a sweet gig. No big deal. One company even told me, "you have natural talent, but lack experience." I don't even know what that means, if anyone ever looked at the early code I wrote, they would NOT say I have natural talent.

    My point is, to play the numbers game. If you get in an interview, they ask about your felony and don't hire you because of it, then move on to the next company. No big deal.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  15. Re:Freelance/Consulting by Wycliffe · · Score: 2

    This is absolutely not true. Any respectable broker will thoroughly vet their contractors.

    This might be true but most of the people I know who freelance/consult don't use a broker.
    If you're good, it's pretty easy to pick up jobs on craigslist, vworker, walking around town, etc..
    and the more jobs you pick up, the more your name gets around.

  16. Felons can be teachers and child care workers, too by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2

    It depends profoundly on what the felony conviction was for. I'm afraid the fact that you asked a very vague question and expect a somehow useful answer is, itself, a much stronger indication that you do _not_ belong in IT. Expecting a useful answer from such a vague question is not a good engineering approach, especially in IT where incredible resources can be wasted addressing unspecified requirements. I'm afraid that, if I saw your resume after this, I'd reject it on the grounds of the horrible question without even having to consider the felony itself.

    I've met people with drug convictions and who practice medicine, after treatment and with regular blood tests. I even knew of a child care worker with a kidnapping conviction. (She helped hide a mother and children from an abusive father under extraordinary circumstances.) And if "expunging" is not available, perhaps a pardon is feasible: Ohio apparently can seal court records with a pardon, though it's not automatic.

    So a conviction is not necessarily career ending. But without more details, the question is too vague to be usefully answered.

  17. Re:Felons can be teachers and child care workers, by conoviator · · Score: 2

    A vague question posted to Slashdot isn't a _strong_ indication of anything other than perhaps being new to Slashdot. No doubt, more details will garner better responses. But, there's no reason to be harsh.

  18. Re:Representation and voting are two different thi by Rich0 · · Score: 2

    Aside from the fact that it's fundamentally incompatible with democracy, wasn't a huge part of the American revolution the idea that there should be no taxation without representation? Those felons are taxpayers, aren't they?

    Technically representation and voting are different things. Representation means you have a person in the legislature representing you. Someone you can go to and share your grievances with. Voting means you got to pick that person.

    So, why couldn't all those colonialists send a letter to an MP back in England?

  19. I'd hire a felon by LukeWebber · · Score: 2

    ... ahead of a smoker. Or a PHP developer.

  20. why by cas2000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    why are americans such judgemental pricks?

    when you've done your time, you've done your time. that should be the end of it and, aside from some very limited cases like not letting pedos work with kids, discrimination against former criminals should be illegal....even a fuckwit yank should be able to figure out that if ex-crims can't get jobs and have no choice but crime to support themselves then that's what they'll do.

  21. Interesting by kilodelta · · Score: 2

    Misdemeanors shouldn't even show up on a criminal record. Only felonies. But then you did say you're in Ohio and they have one of the more archaic legal sysems in the U.S. Time to get the hell out.

    I suggest you have an NCIC check done - if nothing shows up there just move to another state that isn't as ass backward as Ohio and you'll be in the clear.

    I say this because I know in most states the look mostly at NCIC but in some places the look at the state BCI. Thing is, NCIC only records felonies not misdemeanors. So it looks like those rejecting you are running state BCI checks.

  22. Small companies by readin · · Score: 2

    I suspect (I'm speculating though) that most large companies have policies in place that prevent hiring of people with criminal histories. However small companies and start-ups are often more free to make case-by-case decisions. My one datapoint is having worked for a small company with an excellent programmer with no college degree. When I started at a large well-known company he asked about working there as well. I recommended him to my boss who told me they had a strict rule - you need a college diploma to work there.

    So look for firms of less than 200 employees where you have a decent chance of the top guy finding out about you and overriding any policies in place (if there are any).

    --
    I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.