Ex-Felons and Employment: Hiring Barriers and Benefits

Introduction

In the United States, a great number of people cycle through the prison system each year. The prisons are overcrowded and there are fewer and fewer resources available to inmates and administrators alike. After a prisoner's release, they are assigned a period of probation during which they must prove their dedication to remaining law-abiding. During this time, some resources are still available — including halfway houses where ex-convicts on probation can live. However, a central requirement of the probationary period is demonstrating the ability to hold down a job. This can be very difficult, as many employers are reluctant to hire ex-convicts.

The ramifications of unemployment for ex-convicts are serious. Without a job, a former inmate may return to criminal activity out of necessity, or may fail to meet the conditions of parole and be returned to prison — likely more bitter and resentful than before. Given the number of unemployed people in the United States, employers need to determine whether a policy of refusing to hire ex-convicts is truly in the company's and the country's best interests.

The Link Between Employment and Parole Success

In order to be paroled, an ex-convict typically must secure employment. Some begin at halfway houses and cannot earn additional privileges until they find a job (Machan). Usually, a first job is secured through the efforts of a parole officer. However, these jobs may end, or an ex-convict may complete probation and seek work that better matches their interests or skill level. Under these circumstances, the former convict will search for a new position, apply, and eventually be required to disclose their criminal history — an admission that very often costs them the job offer.

Those who cannot find work quickly become desperate. Without income, a person cannot support themselves or any family members, cannot satisfy debts accrued in legal fees, and may lose whatever housing or transportation they had managed to obtain. When people lack money and stability, desperation can override better judgment. Statistics indicate that of the 67% of people who reoffended after release, 89–90% were unemployed at the time of their arrest (Brooks). Hiring ex-convicts is therefore not only beneficial to those individuals — it weighs heavily on whether those individuals will go on to harm others.

Employer Concerns About Hiring Ex-Felons

There are reasons employers choose not to hire ex-convicts (Epstein). An employer who hires a felon may reasonably question whether that individual is likely to commit new offenses. A convicted thief raises concerns about the safety of company property and finances. A person convicted of a violent crime raises concerns about the safety of the employer and other employees. Furthermore, if the ex-convict does commit a crime after being hired, the employer may be held at least partially liable for those actions. Refusing to hire ex-felons can therefore appear to protect the employer from financial and ethical risk.

Conclusion: Societal Benefits of Inclusive Hiring

Background checks are still legal, but it is likely that in the future it will become more and more difficult to refuse employment solely on the basis of a criminal record. Given the positive societal outcomes associated with hiring ex-convicts, few viable arguments remain for blanket prohibitions on their employment. Reasonable exceptions still apply — convicted pedophiles should not be permitted to work with children, and those convicted of violent offenses should not work unsupervised with vulnerable populations — but these targeted restrictions are quite different from a wholesale exclusion of all formerly incarcerated people from the workforce. As research on recidivism consistently shows, there are greater social dangers in keeping ex-felons unemployed than in offering them a measured second chance.