Hire them crims, or we sue - Fed agency
The latest bizarre behavior from a US Government agency comes from the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (USEEOC.) It has been threatening firms that have a blanket policy of not considering people with a criminal record for jobs. These twisted federal regulators are arguing such a 'no ex-cons' policy contravenes the Civil Rights Act since it can have a "disparate impact."
So-called 'minorities' it seems are disproportionately represented among those with a criminal record. So, the USEEOC reasoning goes, to exclude from job consideration those coming from jail will disproportionately rule out such 'minorities.'
They say therefore such a policy constitutes racial discrimination.
USEEOC went so far as to sue a Kentucky based staffing firm Peoplemark Inc for civil rights violations based on the charge that it was excluding all ex-cons from job consideration, resulting in the heinous "disparate impact" result.
As Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity reports, the USEEOC failed to prove in court the existence of a 'no ex-con' policy at People Mark Inc, so the federal agency lost the case. The Judge said the agency's law suit was "without foundation from the beginning" and sanctioned the USEEOC ordering it to pay the employment company $750k in compensation.
But the question arises: why shouldn't an employer be allowed a policy of not employing ex-cons.
Clegg asks: "why should the federal government be second-guessing a company's judgment that it would prefer not to hire people with a criminal record, when--as is true in a disparate-impact case--the government does not show that the policy treats people differently because of race, was not adopted with racially discriminatory intent, and has not been discriminatorily applied? In what sense can such a policy be called racial discrimination?"