Page 71 - Impact: Collected Essays on the Threat of Economic Inequality

incarcerated candidate could be offered a job, unless the background check and inquiry determines that the candidate poses a risk to safety or property, or there is a direct relationship between the job or licensure sought and the prior conviction (the specific criteria depends on the state) .
To date, there are 17 states and over 100 U .S . localities that have embraced Ban the Box .27 Hawaii passed a Ban the Box provision in 1998; in the following decade, 14 other jurisdictions adopted fair chance reforms . In 2014 alone, 42 jurisdictions elected to Ban the Box . In 2015, even Georgia and Virginia joined the fray . Ban the Box most often applies to jobs in the public sector but some localities have broader provisions that apply to private-sector jobs, and a few even extend to housing .28
Based on the initiatives mentioned above, there is room for optimism . A groundswell of support for change has reverberated in the halls of policymakers . The principal impetus for this change has been budget deficits, as cities and states can ill-afford to sustain the criminal justice system that has evolved over the past four decades .
A word of caution is necessary, however . Policies are not static entities; they require proper implementation and monitoring . Indeed, courts can still impose fines and fees without due consideration to a person’s ability to pay; landlords can continue to arbitrarily deny housing to an otherwise suitable person simply because of a criminal record; and hiring managers can circumvent state laws and Ban the Box provisions by doing Internet searches for job-seekers and by asking questions during initial interviews that act as a proxy for the question about criminal history .
Legislators are reticent about requiring employers to collect data about new hires with criminal records . Consequently, despite the popularity of Ban the Box, there is a dearth of evidence that it is achieving its desired effect . Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who signed a Ban the Box provision in New York City,29 has famously cautioned that, “In God we trust . Everyone else, bring data .” To that extent, New York City has gathered preliminary data on Ban the Box . The Fortune Society intends to assess the data, as well as talk with hiring managers, city officials, policymakers, and the formerly incarcerated, to determine if this initiative has improved the employment outcomes of people with criminal records . In the final analysis, we would like to dispel the notion that Ban the Box may be just another feel-good measure . We need the data to affirm that the policy actually makes a difference for thousands of individuals and their families . •
27 Michelle Natividad Rodriguez, Ban the Box: U.S. Cities, Counties, and States Adopt Fair Hiring Policies, naTional employmenT law proJecT (May 26, 2015), http://www.nelp.org/publication/ban-the-box-fair-chance-hiring-state-and- local-guide/.
28 michelle naTividad rodriguez, naTional employmenT law proJecT, Ban The Box (2015), available at http://www.nelp.org/ content/uploads/Ban-the-Box-Fair-Chance-State-and-Local-Guide.pdf.
29 See NYC Executive Order No. 151 (2011), available at http://www.nyc.gov/html/records/pdf/executive_ orders/2011EO151.pdf. The Executive Order applied to hiring procedures in many New York City agencies, with some exceptions. At the time of this writing, Ban the Box legislation that would cover private employers has been passed by the New York City Council. NYC Introduction No. 318-2014 (passed the City Council on June 10, 2015), available at http://legistar.council.nyc.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=1739365&GUID=EF70B69C-074A- 4B8E-9D36-187C76BB1098.
Criminal Justice Reform
69