NEW YORK CITY COUNCIL URGED TO PASS A "BAN THE BOX" ORDINANCE
June 14, 2011
Attn: New York City Council-members:
Albert Van, Annabel Palma, Charles Barron, Christine C. Quinn, Darlene Mealy, Deborah Rose, Diana Reyna, Fernando Cabrera, Helen D. Foster, Inez E. Dickens, James Sanders Jr, Jumaane D. Williams, Larry B. Seabrook, Leroy C. Comrie Jr, Letitia James, Maria del Carmen Arroyo, Mathiew Eugene, Ruben Wills and Sarah M. Gonzalez.
Re: Request that the New York City Council introduce a “Ban the Box” ordinance to assist Unemployed people with criminal convictions in finding Employment
Dear Council-members:
The reason why we need a Ban the Box ordinance
For several years now, states, cities and municipalities have been recognizing that their over-reliance on incarceration to solve their crime problems have been unsuccessful. This narrow approach to crime and joblessness has caused an “Unsustainable” increase in state and city prison budgets. Finding innovative ways to re-introduce formerly incarcerated people into society, while at the same time, protecting the general public is a noble goal all responsible governments should strive toward. However, many would much sooner segregate criminal offenders from non-offenders for safety purposes. These policies, however, have made the American people fundamentally unsafe. Empirical studies prove decisively that education and employment are the best ways to reduce crime. The National Employment Law Project (NELP) and the Justice Department put the number of people with criminal convictions on their record in the United States of America at “65” to “81 Million” people. What many social scientist and economist are finding, as a result of the “Great recession,” is that we simply cannot sustain our economy barring 1/4th of our population from our work force. We simply need tax revenue to sustain a robust economy. This is why more and more states, cities and local governments are banning the box on job applications that request criminal conviction information from an applicant.
The History of the Ban the Box Movement
The “Ban the box” movement was started by a group of formerly convicted people in Oakland, CA – called “All of Us or None.” Many experts studying the negative affects a criminal conviction has on job opportunities have found that people with criminal past have a much better chance of getting hired when they are able to get to the “Interview” phase of the hiring process. The list of states and cities that have passed Ban the Box legislation are steadily growing. Just a few of which are:
(1) Austin, TX; (2) Chicago, IL; (3) Connecticut; (4) Detroit, MI; (5) Durham, NC; (6) Hawaii; (7) Jacksonville, FL; (8) Massachusetts; (9) Memphis, TN; (10) Minnesota; (11) New Mexico; (12)Philadelphia, PA (13) Providence, RI; (14) San Francisco, CA; (15) San Jose, CA; (16) Seattle, WA and (17) Oakland, CA.
The State of New Jersey; Omaha, NE and Washington, DC either have legislation pending or have groups currently pushing for Ban the Box legislation. New York State Senate, Assembly-members and New York City Council-members representing districts with some of the highest concentrations of convicted people should support a Ban the Box ordinance.
The co-sponsors of the bill are:
* (Assembly Districts with large populations of convicted people)
*William F. Boyland; 55th AD *Karim Camara; 43rd AD Richard N. Gottfried; 75th AD
Ellen Jaffee; 95th AD *Hakim Jeffries; 57th AD Brian Kavanagh; 74th AD
*Vito J. Lopez; 53rd AD *Jeffrion L. Aubry; 35th AD (Sponsor)
*Joan L. Millman; 52nd AD *Daniel J. O’Donnell: 69th AD *Annette Robinson; 56th AD
*Keith L.T. Wright; 70th AD
The Multi-sponsors of the bill are:
*Barbara M. Clark; 33rd AD *Jeffry Dinowitz; 81st AD Deborah J. Glick; 66th AD
*Carl E. Heastie; 83rd AD Andrew Hevesi; 28th AD Alan Maisel; 59th AD
John J. McEneny; 104th AD Crystal D. Peoples-Stokes; 141st AD J. Gary Pretlow; 87th AD Bob Reilly; 109th AD Michelle Schimel; 16th AD Harvey Weisenberg; 20th AD
Assembly-members “Not” currently sponsoring the bill:
New York City Metro Area
*Inez D. Barron; 40th AD *Darryl C. Towns; 54th AD *Joseph R. Lentol; 50th AD
*Carmen E. Arroyo; 84th AD *Nelson L. Castro; 86th AD *Vivian E. Cook; 32nd AD
*Vanessa L. Gibson; 77th AD Dov Hikind; 48th AD Earlene Hooper; 18th AD
*Rhoda Jacobs; 42nd AD *Guillermo Linares; 72nd AD Margaret M. Markey; 30th AD
Nettie Mayersohn; 27th AD Grace Meng; 22nd AD Michael Miller; 38th AD
*Joan L. Millman; 52nd AD Francisco P. Moya; 39th AD Catherine Nolan; 37th AD
*Felix Ortiz; 51st AD *N. Nick Perry; 58th AD *Jose Rivera; 78th AD
*Peter M. Rivera; 76th AD Samuel D. Roberts; 119th AD *Robert J. Rodriguez; 68th AD
Linda B. Rosenthal; 67th AD William Scarborough; 29th AD Sheldon Silver; 64th AD (Speaker)
Aravella Simotas; 36th AD Eric A. Stevenson; 79th AD Matthew Titone; 61st AD
Michele R. Titus; 31st AD Helene E. Weinstein; 41st AD David I. Weprin; 24th AD
The New York State Senate has a corresponding Ban the Box Bill to the Assembly
No Member of the New York City Council has introduced a “Ban the Box” Bill
Civil Rights/Advocacy Organizations that should support the Ban the Box
Movement:
The Legal Action Center
The National Hire Network
The Fortune Society
The Center for NuLeadership on Urban Solutions
“On The Count,” The Prison and Criminal Justice Report, 99.5 FM (WBAI)
The National Action Network (NAN)
The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU)
The New York Bar Association
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
The National Urban League (NUL)
The Sentencing Project
The Osborne Association
The Women’s Prison Association (WPA)
Unemployment rates in Black and Hispanic communities all across the state are above depression levels. By some estimates, the unemployment rate hovers around 40%. This is why New York State Senate bill #S5427, sponsored by Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson of the 36th Senate District, and NYS Assembly bill #A07782 sponsored by Assembly-member Jeffrion L. Aubry of the 35th Assembly District need to be passed and signed into law by Governor Cuomo. This is also why the NYC Council should follow suit and introduce a ban the box bill also. A “Ban the Box” law would effectively close the “Loop-hole” in Article 23-A of the Corrections Law. However, a “Ban the Box” bill will need the maximum support from the political and advocacy community. The Philadelphia city Council did not sit idly by while their constituents where being “Openly” discriminated on by employers.
The Empirical Studies support the Ban the Box movement
In a study conducted by Professor Devah Pager et al (Princeton University) titled: “Sequencing Disadvantage: Barriers to Employment Facing Young Black and White Men with Criminal Records.” This study found that job applicants with convictions stood a much better chance of being hired when the applicant has an opportunity to build a “Rapport” with the employer in the interview phase of the hiring process. Article 23-A of the Corrections Law (as it stands now) does not require employer’s to allow an applicant with a criminal record to get to the interview table. The law only allows the applicant to challenge an employer if the employer denies the applicant – and admits that the denial is based on the applicant’s prior criminal record. Thus, employers have learned to “Ignore” or “Discard” applications where the “Box” is checked yes, or simply deny the applicant for reasons not related to their criminal conviction, thus, making Article 23-A’s provisions moot! There is simply no way to prove that an employer is discriminating on an applicant under Article 23-A of the Corrections Law unless the employer out-right admits to it! Most employers would much rather use a “Fabricated” reason for a denial – than risk a discrimination lawsuit. Not to mention the fact that there are no laws against “Ignoring” an application. Many employers request online or mail-in submissions of job application’s or resume’s which is the same as posting your application or resume into a “Black hole.”
The National Employment Law Project (NELP) recently released a report titled: “65 Million ‘Need Not Apply’: The Case For Reforming Criminal Background Checks for Employment.” This report makes a powerful and compelling argument that the population of people with criminal convictions is so enormous that we as a country would be committing fiscal suicide to continue to support laws and policies which keep 1/4th of the population of our country unemployed or underemployed. In fact, many states are looking to ways to reduce their over-inflated corrections budgets by implementing common-sense policies which encourage employment of people with criminal past and alternatives to incarceration for non-violent offenders.
NELP recently released another report titled: “Ban the Box: Major U.S. Cities and Counties Adopt Fair Hiring Policies to Remove Unfair Barriers to Employment of People with Criminal Records.” The report documents the progress of the Ban the Box movement in States, Cities and Counties all across the country. According to the data in this report, New York State (if it were to pass a Ban the Box law) would become one in only a few states to pass the initiative “Statewide,” and along with Article 23-A of the Corrections Law, will make New York State the absolute “Leader” in anti-discrimination legislation in the country.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) also recently released a report titled: “Misplaced Priorities: Over Incarcerate, Under Educate.” this report offers a clear look into the budgetary expenditures states and municipalities allocate to incarcerating citizens as opposed to educating them.
The Community Service Society recently released a report titled: “Only one in Four young Black Men in New York City has a Job.” The CSSNY has taken a “Leadership” role as it pertains to “Cutting-edge” advocacy for the poor and disenfranchised in New York and around the country. The CSSNY remains as one of the “Top” advocacy organizations in New York.
A scientific study recently conducted by Professor Alfred Blumstein (Head of the Justice Department of Heinz College/Carnegie Mellon University) and Co-Authored by Kiminori
Nakamura titled: “Redemption in an Era of Widespread Criminal Background Check’s studied “Hazard rates” of formerly incarcerated individuals based on the amount of time that elapses after incarceration or conviction. Professor Blumstein et al found that the risk of recidivism decreases in 5 to 7 years, to almost equal the hazard rate of non-offenders. They recommend the removal of the “Brand” of “Offender” after 5 to 7 years, as one of the best ways to promote desistance.
In Closing
Public and private jobs growth has slowed. The national unemployment rate is now 9.1%. Black unemployment nationally, statewide and here in the New York metropolitan area is extremely high. The conviction rates of Blacks are extremely high as well. Many public and private employers are using creative methods to sift out undesirable applicants. Resume reading software that reject resumes without certain key words or terms is being widely utilized. Some employers will not hire a person unless they are “Already employed.” Many employers are reluctant to hire a person with a criminal past for several reasons. Poor performance and reliability are just a few common assumptions about formerly convicted people. However, negligent hiring lawsuits appear to be the main sticking-point to employer’s reluctance to give a person a chance to prove their worth. The New York State Legislature has taken steps to remove an employers liability in this area by removing the burden of negligent hiring lawsuits against an employer when the employer hires a person with a Certificate of Rehabilitation or Good Conduct in accordance with Article 23-A of the Corrections Law. Yet, by the assembly’s own admittance, very few people actually apply and receive Certificates of Rehabilitation and Good Conduct. Thus, New York State Assembly Bill # A03658, which streamlines the process of obtaining these certificates, should be passed in this legislative session as well.
A Ban the Box initiative would only allow an applicant to get an offer of employment on the merits of their ability to do the job before the applicant’s criminal history is considered. A Ban the Box law would automatically remove the question from job applications where the employer is not required to ask it by statute, i.e., Law Enforcement, Public Schools, Nursing Homes etc. Passing this legislation would prevent both public and private employers from having “Blanket barriers” on people with criminal convictions, requiring reluctant employers to abide by Article 23-A of the Corrections Law. However, employers would still have the option to deny employment to an applicant whose past criminal history is job related or would cause an “Unreasonable” risk to the employer’s business interest. The New York State economy would benefit from the enormous tax revenue created from promoting the employment of able-bodied people, while at the same time lowering our massive corrections/prison budgets. I truly believe that a Ban the Box initiative is a common-sense approach to lower our states crime rate and raise
much needed revenue. The Ban the Box initiative is a “Win-Win” approach to governing in New York State.
I hope you believe this as well, and introduce a “Ban the Box” Bill in the New York City Council, support New York State Senate bill #S5427, sponsored by Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson of the 36th Senate District and NYS Assembly bill #A07782 sponsored by Assembly-member Jeffrion L. Aubry of the 35th Assembly District.Eric M. Deadwiley is a Freelance Op-Ed Columnist and Author
Contact: Eric M. Deadwiley
Comments
Post a Comment