Jobs critical to reintegrating former inmates, reducing recidivism

I’m Mike and I am a felon. This is not enough information to effectively assess me for a job. Yet this is as far as I get in the interview process. Six years ago I was convicted of a drug possession that was a “class i” felony, which is the lowest class, but that is irrelevant because no one ever asks what I did. The questions always end after, “Are you a felon?”

I’ve applied to at least 1,000 jobs over the past six years. Many of the recruiters and managers asked me about criminal history in the initial contact phone call. I never heard from any of those people again. Any application that asked me to check a box about criminal history resulted in no contact.

Because of my persistence, I have been employed the last five years with three companies. All three ran background checks, but it was the last part of the hiring process. This gave me time to make an impression before having to disclose my record. In my experience, a simple change in hiring laws can have a significant effect on the lives of many people and help reduce the recidivism rate.

Fair Chance Hiring, also known as “ban the box,” is a policy that removes the question about criminal history from job applications. Currently, Fair Chance Hiring policies have been implemented in 24 states. The intent is to decrease employment discrimination against people with criminal backgrounds. Studies find time and time again that employment after incarceration dramatically reduces the recidivism rate. The Verify Project data show that one year of employment reduces the three-year recidivism rate from 52.3 percent to 16 percent.

Reducing recidivism

Providing jobs to people with criminal histories is fundamental for their reintegration to society and the best way to reduce recidivism. The City of Durham adopted Fair Chance Hiring in 2011, and the overall proportion of people with criminal records hired by the city increased from 2.25 percent in 2011 to 15.53 percent in 2014. Not to mention 97 percent of the applicants with criminal records referred to human resources by a county department were hired. The statistics show Fair Chance Hiring increases tax revenue, expands the pool of qualified applicants and reduces the crime rate.

But as Fair Chance Hiring gains momentum nationwide, it has brought to the surface an unintended consequence. Some recent studies show that racial discrimination has begun to take place in the absence of the box because employers profile minorities, presuming without evidence to the contrary that they are felons.

This kind of racial discrimination is unacceptable, not to mention illegal, but I question the validity of the studies that came to this conclusion. There are several other studies that report a different outcome. One study in New York and New Jersey found that while call-back rates for black applicants remained the same overall, the call-back rate for white applicants rose from 11 to 15 percent, causing the statistical call-back rate for other races to drop even though the actual number of call backs was not affected. Also keep in mind, the call-back rate for felons increased by a considerable amount as the law intended.

Another serious flaw found in the report of racial discrimination around Fair Chance Hiring is that private-sector job call-back data were assessed, even though in many areas ban the box applies only to public-sector positions.

The statistics surrounding the positive aspects of Fair Chance Hiring are consistent in all participating areas. Fair Chance is a critical instrument for reducing recidivism and for giving people a chance to contribute to society. As someone who has seen first-hand the difficulty of getting a job with a record, I am excited to see the change that Fair Chance Hiring can continue to cultivate.

This story was originally published September 12, 2016 at 5:54 PM with the headline "Jobs critical to reintegrating former inmates, reducing recidivism."