Yep, a simple way around “ban the box” laws is for perspective employers to become hyper wary of ANYONE with any kind of gap in their employment history.

People need second chances? Sure. But the result of “ban the box” is that you get a second chance after an armed robbery, but not after quitting a job. The fewer things that employers are allowed to consider, the more weight those few other things have.

. . . and the Plaintiffs’ Bar will be there to file negligent hire claims when those convicted employees injure others. We punish those who employ others every way we can think of.

Yes, people do need a second chance and that chance should be earned and not forced upon private companies. And yes, while there are corrupt cops in the so called corrupt system, that does not mean that people who are convicted are not guilty of a crime.

Furthermore, the businesses upon which this is being forced have little or nothing to do with the corruption of the legal system. It is almost obscene to think that the answer to corruption in the “system” is to make more regulations that harm businesses.

That’s the real issue here. Should the government interject itself into a private contract for employment when there is no need to do so or evidence that the interjection will cure what the government says ails the situation?

Someone needs to say and prove how legislation like “ban the box” improves conditions for all parties – the businesses, the convicted person, the person who has never been convicted, etc.

No problem is so bad that the government can’t make it worse. 🙂