Freedom and Justice Pre-Essay
The “Ban the Box” movement proposes that an employer cannot question potential employees about criminal history until after the first interview. This brings up interesting arguments for both sides. Employers need to know their employees before they hire them, so they can make the best educated decision. If an employer is not allowed to know his potential employees he could put the company, those who work there, and those which the company serves at risk. An employer’s ability to know their employees is an important part of their rights.
On the other hand, criminals who have served their sentence and have been released have rights as well. The term “Innocent Until Proven Guilty,” which our country’s justice system supports, could be argued for either side. The felons who have served their time have, at one point, been proven guilty, but should this start over after they complete their jail time? I think it should. The purpose of jail is to repair damaged citizens and return them to normal society. If we don’t allow them to actually return to normal society after they complete their jail time, then jail has no purpose.
|Hard at Work|
The “Ban the Box” movement is a good idea for reintegrating criminals in to society, but I do not think it will help much. Some employers do not base their hiring decisions around the yes or no answer in the box, but instead look deeper in to the crime and its history. In the other extreme, many employers are not willing to take the risk of hiring an ex criminal on the chance that they have not corrected their ways. “Ban the Box” would not help in that case, as these employers would just wait until after the first interview, when they could investigate criminal history, to make any final decisions about hiring a new employee. “Ban the Box” would not have a large effect on either of these types of employers. I think the “Ban the Box” movement has good values, but it needs further refining before it is ready to be put in to place.