Recent Studies Cast Doubt on Effectiveness of 'Ban the Box' Laws

Anyone paying attention to employment law or the background screening industry is most likely familiar with the ‘ban the box’ movement. Over the last few years, the movement to ban criminal history questions from job applications has picked up momentum in an effort to provide past criminal offenders what is considered a “fair” opportunity at employment.

The idea behind ‘banning the box’ is that too many people with criminal histories are unfairly discriminated against when asked to disclose past offenses on an application. ‘Ban the box’ advocates claim that by waiting until after the initial interview or a conditional offer of employment is made; it allows applicants a more fair opportunity to demonstrate their qualifications to an employer. Then based on the nature of the past conviction, the employer is able to fairly assess the individual on the true merits of their candidacy.

There is a belief among lawmakers and advocates alike that ‘ban the box’ laws address a true need to eliminate job discrimination, and help what is considered by many a disadvantaged population secure gainful employment. In addition, they believe that these laws help provide employers with qualified individuals they may have missed. A true win-win scenario for everyone involved.

In many cases, these ideas may indeed be true; however, two studies released recently expose potential unintended consequences of these laws. Each study, shown here and here, explains findings of individuals that the law is meant to help, however, may actually hinder their goal of employment. To encapsulate these findings: when employers are prohibited from looking at applicants’ criminal histories, they simply avoid the people they believe are most likely to have such criminal histories by not even brining them in for an interview, specifically African-American and Hispanic men. By mandating employers wait until later in the hiring process to conduct a background screen, the result may include making decisions on who to interview based on even less perfect information.

One study suggests ‘ban the box’ laws be repealed and instead more emphasis be placed on helping former offenders improve their job readiness and educate employers to reduce any uneasiness they have about hiring ex-offenders.

Read more about these two studies:

Should ‘ban the box’ be banned? 2 studies surprising findings

While repeal of these laws appears unlikely, these findings should give advocates and employers alike something to think about. Advocates need to rethink how best to help the people they advocate for and employers need to rethink their hiring practices.

It is generally a good practice for employers to meet applicants face to face to judge their qualifications for themselves, following up with a comprehensive background check to ensure the appropriateness of the hire.

Learn more about the products and services IntelliCorp offers.

Comments

Blog post currently doesn't have any comments.

Add Your Comment