Feds Push States to Ban “Discriminatory” Background Checks

Judicial Watch, August 29, 2013

Pressured by the federal government, states and municipalities across the U.S. are adopting senseless measures restricting employers from asking job applicants about criminal history.

The Obama administration claims criminal background checks are discriminatory because they disproportionately exclude minorities—especially blacks—from hire. That’s why the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, is spending taxpayer dollars suing companies that run criminal background checks on job applicants.

Besides litigation, the administration is working behind the scenes by offering local governments “guidance” on passing measures banning criminal background checks. The laws are known as “ban the box” because they call for removing the question and check box that asks candidates if they’ve been convicted of a crime. So far three states have passed laws prohibiting employers from asking about criminal history and dozens of municipalities nationwide—including those in Ohio, Texas, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Delaware—have done the same, according to a nonprofit that advocates for workers’ rights.

Minnesota became the last state to pass a “ban the box” law a few months ago. The measure, which takes effect in 2014, prohibits employers from asking an applicant about his or her criminal history or performing a background check until the applicant has been selected for an interview or extended an offer of employment. {snip}

A legal news site notes that “of particular relevance to the Minnesota restrictions is the recent guidance from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regarding criminal background checks. That guidance expresses the EEOC’s view that employers should not deny employment based on arrest records and should utilize conviction records only after evaluating the nature of the job, the severity of the conviction, the time elapsed since the conviction and the applicant’s rehabilitative efforts.”

Bottom line: The feds are coercing local governments to make it illegal for private companies to properly vet job candidates. {snip}

{snip}

Topics:

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • MekongDelta69

    Let’s get this over with already…

    EVERYTHING is discriminatory to non-whites.

    Are you idiot leftists happy now?

    • Oil Can Harry

      If a company refuses to hire a brother because of his rap sheet they get sued by the Obama regime.

      If they hire the ‘brutha’ in spite of his record and he attacks a customer or co-worker the company gets sued anyway- and loses business because of the bad publicity.

      • bob

        The obama regime has already lost the EEOC case in federal court as far as suing companies for asking about criminal backgrounds. Now it is up to them to pass laws banning companies from doing that. Certain cities might try that. It will only force businesses to leave those cities. The same goes for states. The risk of theft and lawsuits is too great. Imaging a repair company sending a rapist to a woman’s house to fix appliances and she gets raped or killed. Her family will own the company.

    • Diversity Awareness Brigade

      Whiteness is discriminatory to “people of color.”

    • Mergatroyd

      What do they care? Their mission of destroying the White race and completely ruining this once great country is nearly accomplished.
      They’ll be departing for their homeland in the ME soon, some have already left. You know, the place that has very very strict immigration policies to keep everyone out except for one, chosen etho-religious group.
      It’ll be a lot safer there after Syria is taken care of by the White American military.

      • foundingstockcracker

        I think Syria falls in the area of “Greater Israel” that they’re working towards.

    • SFLBIB

      EVERYTHING is discriminatory … period.

      The very purpose of law is to classify (discriminate among) people for different treatment; for example, burglary statutes distinguish burglars from non-burglars; speed laws distinguish speeders from non-speeders. The list is as long as the legal code itself.

  • Okay, once again, these liberals are hiding behind the name of the organization, and are not afraid of being called out.

    As long as twentysomething whites are being left out, this might be a good thing. What better way to slap someone back to reality once they realize why they didn’t get hired?

    • Glickstein44

      Perhaps,but its not a good thing when it happens to you,your son or your daughter or your wife and any of your relatives and best friends.

      • Spartacus

        Have them move to the country-side and start farming , training with guns and starting a family earlier, it’s more viable economically, and good preparedness for what’s coming .

      • Oh well, they’ll survive. I should know. It’s already happened to me several times in my life.

      • CharlesFinley

        commaspace

  • Lewis33

    Asking if they have a college degree is discriminatory to blacks as well…guess that’s next.

    • Nathanwartooth

      They actually were talking about this in Seattle.

    • A Freespeechzone

      They will say ‘yes’—-you can’t prove or disprove it….can’t do background checks…

      China is just laughing at us…..unless people stop this stuff; we are done.

      • NordicHeritage

        This is all by design because this economy is a “mature” economy now. We no longer need highly skilled workers so It doesn’t really matter to the powers that be if the workforce is full of gangbangers or people with bachelors degrees.

      • Mergatroyd

        “unless people stop this stuff; we are done.”

        Don’t you get it? That’s the goal. It’s mission accomplished.
        Also, if we go down, China’s going down, only harder.

  • Puggg

    Okay, prohibit asking about criminal convictions when people apply to work at the White House.

    • And the Defense Department.

      • Sick of it

        Yeah no more background checks for security clearances either. It’s discriminatory!

        • They should take especial care to force organizations to award clearances to people with bad credit and ties to hostile foreign nations. That way, we can be certain that classified information will never be sold to the highest bidder!

          Also, only individuals who have caused at least two drunk-driving fatalities should be considered for slots as state troopers (non-fatal accidents are not acceptable).

          • Sick of it

            I think state troopers may already fall in that category, they just go unpunished. They certainly drive like drunks.

    • Mergatroyd

      That will never happen. These people are your betters and therefore you do not deserve to be as equal as they are.

  • NeanderthalDNA

    Da gubbamint is now officially on the side of criminals.

    • Jenkem Huffington

      Birds of a feather….

    • It’s not criminals per se that they are technically on the side of …..

      • NeanderthalDNA

        Yup. Code talkin’… Quack quack, the duckpeaker quacketh, lol…

    • ViktorNN

      This policy is actually about trying to make it easier for black males to get government jobs.

  • Glickstein44

    Any corporation who knowingly hires a convicted felon that results in injury to another employee,said employee should file a lawsuit against said corporation as well as the federal government. Sick of this ****!!

    • These laws place businesses in an insane Catch-22: they’re violating the law if they conduct the checks, but if a felon they hire hurts a customer or fellow employee, the business is on the hook for a major lawsuit.

      The Unintended Consequence is that blacks will simply not be hired at all, and businesses will relocate from predominantly black areas at an increased rate.

      • RisingReich

        Do you really seriously believe the destructive powers (tribe) that be will allow that?

        • They won’t have any direct control over the small “mom & pop” businesses. My understanding is that the EEO law expressly exempts each company with less than 50 employees.

          Outside of universities, I’ve never worked for a company with even 15 people, let alone 50. The most numerous high-tech company I ever worked for never had more than 13.

          • ms_anthro

            Smart entrepreneurs run small companies to avoid exactly that.

          • evilsandmich

            I remember when I was looking for a tech many years ago I got a resume in that appeared to be written with a Sharpie. I’m guessing throwing such resumes out as I did will be discrimination as well (the applicant was black, and Sharpie aside, was unqualified for the position).

          • me

            If you see the names Tyrone, LaQuisha, Consuela, Jose, or anything colorfully ‘ethnic’, it’s a good chance that you don’t NEED to do a criminal background check–as well as the spelling, punctuation, and grammatical correctness on the resume. It’s a no-brainer.

          • The Sharpie was pretty good! A company I once worked for had a black African interview with my bosses, and according to them, the “interview” was a long-winded tirade by him about how bad blacks have it here. Of course he didn’t get hired.

            I’ve heard of people showing up to interviews wearing flip-flops; even better than a resume written with a Sharpie! What puzzles me about that one is why not just type it on a library computer, save it to floppy disk (or USB flash drive today) and print it there?

          • RisingReich

            Hope you’re right but I doubt it.

    • A Freespeechzone

      What about the fiduciary responsibility to stockholders to manage risk?

      Oh, that’s right, I forgot that blacks don’t own stocks…being responsible to stockholders is racist.

      You can’t make up this stuff…..Obama’s a fool…reinforces negative stereotypes.

    • sbuffalonative

      The Feds need to look into the case of Normal Mailer and Jack Abbott. Criminals are found guilty for a reason.

  • Easyrhino1

    Maybe the feds should push for a ban of security screening at airports for minorities as well.

    • evilsandmich

      Feds Push States to Ban “Discriminatory” Background Checks

      I was actually thinking firearms, but I guess since criminal blacks don’t care about firearms law that it would be redundant.

  • libertarian1234

    It was Obama who decreed blacks can’t be disciplined in school more than their share of the population even though they commit the VAST majority of crimes and infractions.

    Too, almost everything the community organizer has set as policy can be seen as typical of third world countries with this latest push to mainstream felons. He also wants them to be able to vote.

    But this latest debacle is going to prove dangerous, besides causing costly law suits as others have pointed out.

    How apropos. It took a black to reduce our country to a banana republic.

    • In every state except Florida and Kentucky, felons can vote… but they have to wait until they are off probation or parole.

      • me

        Well, the law is no longer applied for voting. Even dead people and non-citizens can vote now. What’s the difference?

    • me

      Nah. Obummer has done more for racial awareness in this country than any other factor, besides ‘diverse’ criminality. Whites will be flocking to areas where they can be with their own kind. How they’ll manage to keep out the ‘diversity’ is going to be tricky legally, but not impossible.

  • borogirl54

    I do not agree with this because if a person is applying for a position handling money such as a cashier, bank teller, money room counter in a casino etc. There needs to be a criminal background check done because would anyone hire a person with a conviction for embezzlement as a bank teller?

    • me

      Who cares about money? I’m more worried about daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and other businesses that are involved in caring for the vulnerable and helpless.

  • DonReynolds

    Why do we have a Sex Offender Registry? Why are sex offenders required to tell the police where they live? Why is that information made available to the public? But….if you are an employer, you are NOT supposed to check on the background of applicants? Sorry….that is not going to fly. Lemmie guess, next they will not have any educational requirements for applicants……because that is discriminatory?
    Fine…..I will go hang out at the hospital and they can pay me like the other doctors. Give me a Rx pad and a white jacket, and I am good to go.

    • Because…sex offenders are evil, because they commit evil sex offenses like diddle little kids. It doesn’t hurt that the universe of “sex offenders” is almost entirely lower class whites with some Hispanics thrown in.

      Why?

      Consider these two hypothetical scenarios:

      * 40-year old white man is caught on top of 13-year old white girl in a bedroom in a house in suburban whitopia. Cops get called. End result: 40-year old white man has to register as a sex offender, a sex offense is recorded into NCIC.

      * 40-year old black man is caught on top of a 13-year old black girl in a bedroom in a house in the ghetto. No cops are called, must not snitch, just two people doin dey thangs and keepin it real homey yo. (Cops are too busy drawing chalk lines on sidewalks.) Nobody has to register as a sex offender, no sex offense will be recorded in NCIC.

      Plain words, a whole lot of black sex offenders get to disappear in the shadows of a combination of black insouciance and nonchalance and police and law enforcement resources being stretched thin.

      • Sick of it

        Considering how often blacks forcibly rape people, that means a whole lot of rapists get away scot free and people have no idea they’re living on the same street as a rapist.

        • CharlesFinley

          Rape by force?

          • me

            Is there any other way to rape, except by force? Bantus and mestizos rape plenty. Not very many false accusations there, despite the enormous success of that fictional work by Harper Lee.

          • Sick of it

            Remember that an act of rape can now be committed simply by having sex with someone under 18. According to the law anyway.

    • S.O. Registries are public record: one can go online for free and check the registry in any given area, even doing name searches The whole point is that they’re easy and free. I discovered my old housesitter had violated his deferred sentence and gone to state prison only after his name dropped off the Colorado Springs registry.

      The next lunacy we hear of of the EEOC is that commercial drivers and heavy equipment operators shouldn’t be given mandatory drug tests.

    • MikeofAges

      Why? The people who work in the CJ system have house and boat payments and a retirement fund. What is a lifetime on the rack for some poor sucker compared to that?

      I will tell you, I once looked up the sex offender list for a friend of mine’s neighborhood. We found one guy living on his block. He was 57 year old male. His offense involved an underage girl, but the registry did not tell when the crime was committed. From the description of the offense, I concluded that he might have been in his 20s and hanging out with “party” crowd.

      If the people in the neighborhood had full information that would have laughed anybody who told to watch out for the guy right out of town, if they weren’t afraid of ridicule or worse themselves. But they are afraid.

      We have a constitution in this country. Criminal liability should be in proportion to the crime. My opinion is, you cannot have an excess of punishment simply to deter other people or because elected politicians choose to enact excessively harsh law because they think they the voters will turn against them if they don’t. Worse than the cowardly fake conservatives are the feminists and feminist-subservient leftists who want to disenfranchise as many people as they can who might disagree with them.

      The restrictions put on people with criminal convictions originated as a way to punish renegade aristocrats. They did not affect the common people because the common people had no rights anyway. If they were convicted of a crime and jailed, they simply went back to their trades after their punishment ended.

      You ask why sex offenders are required to tell the police where they live. The rational answer is that the registry provides a list of possible suspects when certain types of crimes occur. If a person is no longer a criminal risk, they shouldn’t be on a public registry.

  • Jenkem Huffington

    ” prohibits employers from asking an applicant about his or her criminal history or performing a background check until the applicant has been selected for an interview or extended an offer of employment.”

    So basically it changes nothing, because any personnel manager with half a brain can look at the applications with names like “Darquavious Tamarquon Jackson”, or “Chlamydia Porsche Washington” and put them in the proper place.

    • JDInSanD

      You beat me to it. I was going to suggest they swap the “Have you ever been convicted” box with:

      Did your mother make up your name?

      • evilsandmich

        “If there are five or more siblings in your family, are any of them not a half-brother/sister?”
        “Is the number of men that your mother has lived with less than your age?”
        “What’s a regatta?”

        • “What is the airspeed velocity of an unladen African swallow?”

          Blacks don’t watch Monty Python.

    • CharlesFinley

      Brilliant! Those names are NOT over the top in this infestation.

  • Background checks for jobs: Bad, discriminatory, disparate impact, must be eliminated right away. (Except for certain scenarios, for me but not for thee type of thinking).

    Background checks to buy guns: Absolutely necessary, the panacea to stop all violent crime, the magic cure all for all our problems, so necessary and desirable that there should be a background check before Billy Bob Senior hands off his double barrel 12 gauge to Billy Bob Junior while they’re duck hunting.

    • jane johnson

      Funny you should mention guns. According to Obama’s ‘Deputy’ press secretary (haven’t seen Carney in awhile), HRH Soweto has issued 2 new “executive orders” relating to our second amendment rights: #1 closes a ‘loophole’ (no specifics), and #2 bans the “importation of surplus military firearms”. I’m guessing that #1 is about gun shows and private sales, and that #2 is an effort to keep returning combat vets from bringing their military issue weapons home with them. These 2 little nuggets were dropped like throwaways at the beginning of today’s White House press briefing. The “Deputy” is a much better, and more arrogant, liar than Carney was.

      • Don’t worry. It was nothing at all like that. What Obama did today was a matter of this:

        “I went to see Obama issue new profound groundbreaking executive orders on gun violence, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt.”

        Or:

        “Obama promised us shock and awe but gave us a second rate 4th of July firecracker.”

  • bubo

    Meanwhile they will continue to use credit checks and outstanding college debt as reasons to turn down white males for employment. I can’t even pretend anymore, I flat out hate the country I live in.

    • RisingReich

      You shouldn’t pretend. I’m glad you’ve stopped.
      Let people know, and let them know why.
      You’ll find you’re far from the only one, I suspect.

      • JDInSanD

        I always think about how I still felt pretty good about this country on 9/10/01. How I felt so angry on 9/11 but also thought, “Finally we’re going to fix this mess. Lock down our borders. Wash our hands of Islam. Become energy independent, etc.” Instead our own government declared Islam the religion of peace and we elected an unqualified, marxist, muslim, affirmative action product for president.

        • bubo

          Looking back on those events I can see how naive I was. I was in my early 20’s at the time. I actually thought that 9/11 would be the catalyst to show the West that Islam is our eternal enemy. Nope. The left doubled down on their love for “the other” and Bush blathered that “religion of peace” nonsense and invaded Iraq for seemingly no reason whatsoever.

          My eyes were opened and they’ve stayed that way.

    • jeffaral

      Amerika has become the perfect jewish-run dictartorship.

    • Alexandra1973

      I think it’s insane to turn down someone for those reasons. Isn’t that why they’re wanting a job in the first place, to get rid of the debt?

  • Spartacus

    “Bottom line: The feds are coercing local governments to make it illegal for private companies to properly vet job candidates.”

    ———————————————————————————————————————

    Every step towards the crashing of the US economy is a good thing, as far as I’m concerned. Move out of big cities, get armed and trained (including hand-to-hand) combat, and get ready for when SHTF .

  • ed

    The effect of this will be that no one will hire blacks at all. There is no way of knowing what is sitting across the interview table. Is this black guilty of petty theft, rape, or murder? Who knows.

    • Jesse James

      Sorry but it won’t work that way because the Equal Opportunity Commission and the Department of Injustice is run by radicals who demand companies fill quotas for minority hiring. If you don’t hire them blind you will definitely get hit by federal laws suits and perhaps even criminal investigations.

      • ed

        Very true. They really want to give us no option: “you will employ and work with the worst of criminal black society”.

        Fortunately most of those workplace laws kick in at 50 employees, so under that number a business owner should be safe.

        • serious123

          If so it accounts for the fact I see few blacks in small business, other those like McDonalds and others who are actually part of huge chains or franchises.

          • Mergatroyd

            Why do you think all those make-work government jobs were created? Where to put all those college educated blacks were it not for the government?

      • evilsandmich

        The blacks seem to resolve this themselves though as they don’t want to show up for work anyway.

    • evilsandmich

      It seems that the fix for most businesses now-a-days is not to hire anyone.

      • Or pick people up as self-employed contractor/consultants so they can be disposed of without any fuss and bother.

  • Jesse James

    Well this initiative will certainly make it easier for nursing homes and hospitals to shrug their shoulders and say “we had no way to know” as the blacks thieves, rapists and murders they hire do what they do. You may be better off just laying down in a ditch to die, curled up with your favorite dog and a empty milk jug full of water than trust yourself to whatever remains of the American health care system by then. First they integrated the prisons and left white men and women to the tender mercy of the savages and nobody gave a damn because they were “criminals”. What excuses will we make for inaction as black savages prey on grandma? This is of course already happening now in the US.

  • ed

    This was intended for Spartacus, but as his comment was deleted, I’ll leave it here.

    Our technology is our curse; through its comforts we’ve become weak, and
    it draws non-European people to us, looking for our good life. We were
    better off a couple of thousand years ago. Life was harder, but it was
    ours, and we were better people.

    • Spartacus

      Someone else said it before you, and in a more concise manner :

      “Mankind has grown strong in eternal struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace.” – Adolf Hitler

      • ed

        I don’t think Hitler was saying the same thing, but he did have a good point nonetheless.

        • Spartacus

          Notice how my reply to you was immediately downrated, and yours as well. Some people don’t bother to actual read about Hitler, and see the enormous differences between what he was really like, and the “mainstream” view of him is .

          • ed

            I agree. People have been taught to react negatively to the word “Hitler”. They ought to have that reaction when they hear the word “Churchill”, or “Eisenhower”.

            Hitler was a lover of his people, just as we here profess to be. And who has come closer to ensuring Europe’s survival? None.

  • ViktorNN

    The term “felon” is supposed to be a social stigma. It says you’re a rapist, murderer, thief, violent, etc. The significant consequences of being a “felon” (like how hard it is to ever get a decent job) is one of the main deterrents to people becoming felons in the first place. What does our government think the result will be once the consequences for committing felonies are lessened?

    • Under old English law, a felony was a crime for which you could have been executed, but for some reason or another were not.

      • ed

        I say we bring back good old fashioned outlawry, and strip the worst offenders of all their lawful protections.

      • evilsandmich

        The line between high end misdemeanor and low end felony is all goofed up.

        • It actually overlaps in Colorado. Some “misdemeanors” carry sentences of up to two years, which the feds call “felonies” where one’s gun rights are concerned.

  • A Freespeechzone

    Background checks help MANAGE RISK!

    So, let me get this straight–if a company hires a minority, because of ‘discrimination & hate crime laws’ is enjoined from conducting a background check and drug testing and hires this person….will Obama/Holder reimburse this company for any losses as a direct result of the hired person’s dishonesty?

    What if the company goes under as result of this person’s actions? Will Obama cover that?

    This is the kind of stuff that people who have NEVER run a business want to force on those who do….

    This will only embolden felons to ‘rape and pillage’ and put businesses at risk….

    Obama’s America…….STOP THIS RACIST MUSLIM.

  • Luca

    There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man’s fears and the summit of his knowledge. It is an area which we call, Liberal Government. (apologies to Rod Serling)

    Welcome to the Twilight Zone. This is the land where up is down and down is up. Where black is good and white is bad. Where the Government decides how much money you can take home, and how much they can keep. This is the land the Government controls, the land of the Liberal politicians.

    This is the land where the government says who gets food for free and who has to work for it, who goes to college based on voting skills and not academic achievement, where certain groups are favored and others’ rights are allowed to be trampled upon.

    This the land where the Founding Fathers despair in their graves and where the patriots have been silent for too long.

    And yet, this is the land where a small group of determined, brave patriots took on the mightiest nation on earth and made it taste defeat.

    We need to find our way back to the Reality Zone.

  • sbuffalonative

    When a violent criminal causes mayhem in the work place, who will be liable?

    • JDInSanD

      We’ll just blame islam. Oh wait…never mind.

  • Diversity Awareness Brigade

    Now we must hire dangerous Diversity felons.

    When our money is stolen, employees and customers assaulted, and we lose our businesses, our complaints will be deemed Extremist White Privilege Denial Hate Crimes.

  • RisingReich

    I predicted this less than three months ago on these very boards. I hate it when I’m right.
    Soon it will be illegal to have a prison with majority black population. Think I’m crazy? Better think again…

  • serious123

    Good laugh.

  • Nick A Siggers

    The benefit of forcing criminal blax onto innocent businesses is that more and more people will become educated about the inherent sub Saharan behaviors.

    The cost is obvious enough to not need mentioning.

  • JohnEngelman

    Discrimination on the basis of what correlates with race is legitimate. Felons have a high recidivism rate. The only thing that reliably reduces recidivism is age.

    During an era when jobs are scarce, and good jobs are more scarce, forbidding employers to ask about felony convictions discriminates against those who have obeyed the law.

    • Allowing US high-tech companies to hire inexpensive foreign grads instead of US citizens also discriminates against Americans who have done the right thing. Get used to it.

      • ed

        Here here! The H1B visa puts a cap on tech worker salaries. Too many white people getting good, middle income salaries, the government and the corporations couldn’t have that.

    • Thinking out loud here, how many convicted felons do we actually think will get jobs if this policy change happens? So few that it might as well be statistically zero.

      All smoke and mirrors from Obama for political brownie points and PR.

      • I’m certainly not going to go out and apply for a McJob, and the microelectronics industry here in Colorado Springs largely withered away.

        • Gertruden

          How about getting a job as a prison guard…isn’t there a federal prison in Canon City. I know there used to be one.That’s real close to Colorado Springs.

          • As an ex-con, I’d never pass the background check.

            The last time I had a steady job, I had lied about my record on the ap. They never checked.

  • Bon, From the Land of Babble

    How dare you discriminate against criminals!! They deserve a second chance to commit crimes in YOUR business or with YOUR tax dollars or against YOUR children:

    A woman who embezzled $320,000 from a California state agency was later hired by the state’s High-Speed Rail Authority — and she says nobody asked about her background. Her state job application didn’t ask whether she’d been convicted of a crime and Moore says nobody asked her. The loot included Lexus, hot tub, a gazebo, a flat-screen television, iPods, handcuffs, chains and whips

    Officials at the High-Speed Rail Authority eventually found out about Carey Renee Moore’s sensational criminal past, fired her for lying on her application and tried to keep her from receiving unemployment checks. But Moore appealed and won the benefits, noting that she didn’t lie about her past – no one ever asked her about it.

    Well that means background checks for teachers will be eliminated too. And, of course, if the employee assaults or rapes a child, the school district and school will be held liable:

    A former priest and suspected child molester left employment with the Los Angeles archdiocese to work for the L.A. Unified School District, officials confirmed Sunday.

    Los Angeles Unified has begun funding about $30 million in settlements reached with 63 children who claimed they were molested by two teachers at Miramonte Elementary School, officials said Wednesday

    About 60 additional cases remain unresolved.

    The insurance company, BTW, is refusing to pay out the settlements meaning the LAUSD will pay the entire amount.

    No wonder I haven’t gotten a raise in 10 years.

    Bon

    • Gertruden

      Remember the Willie Horton debacle? Do you know if they are still allowing convicted felons in prison that have been convicted of rape & murder out on week-end passes? Disparate Impact just a lighter version of the same with the same result being a slower tool to commit White genocide…

  • TheCogitator

    There should not be a question asking about arrests. But it is appropriate to ask about convictions. When some black rapist is hired to deliver TVs, who is going to be responsible when he rapes a white housewife? The government sure ain’t gonna be, so I guess the corporations who were not able to properly vet their employees will be.

    The rulers are determined to give to blacks what they do not deserve and will go to any foolish extreme to do that. The is an over-the-top example.

    The $64 question is how much longer are the people going to tolerate this nonsense?

    • Natassia

      That’s why white housewives should have a piece strapped to their belt when expecting a delivery. I do.

  • Chris

    I wonder if this applies to federal jobs. I’m sure Obama has convicted felons on his Secret Service detail.

  • I understand that credit ratings agencies are now looking at your Facebook associations and then adjusting your score upward or downward depending on what they find.

    • Strictly old college friends from my undergrad days 25 years ago. I doubt that’s useful to them one way or another. The only reason I started using it at all is because one of them died of cancer, and I hadn’t even known he was sick.

      Did you know your credit score will affect your insurance rates? Actuaries have discovered that people with poor credit – suprise, suprise – are also higher vehicle accident risks. Yet another reason not to buy a lot of garbage one doesn’t need.

  • NM156

    Holder’s EEOC was just reprimanded by a Federal judge for its laughable policy on correcting disparate impact felt by criminal Blacks. This must be the EEOC’s backup plan. Judicial Watch just reported two weeks ago thus: “The Obama administration’s claim that criminal background checks discriminate against minority job applicants suffered a lashing from a federal court that found the allegations “laughable,” “distorted,” “cherry-picked,” “worthless” and “an egregious example of scientific dishonesty.”

    That kind of whipping from a federal judge has got to hurt though it’s unlikely to deter the administration from spending more taxpayer dollars to file frivolous lawsuits against employers who use the checks to screen job applicants. Judicial Watch wrote about this a few weeks ago when the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, sued two large companies that screen criminal background records claiming that the checks disproportionately exclude blacks from hire.”

  • Natassia

    Richmond, VA–run by blacks for blacks. So, the city council unanimously voted to ban background checks for city government job applicants. There isn’t another municipality in the state that would go for this crap.

  • William Krapek

    Oh my God. There are black folks where I work, and of course the worst I worked with were from that race. But I’ve thanked God for years that my company does background checks because I know how deeply pathological they can go. I once worked in a convenient store “in the wild.” I got yelled at every day. I had to deal with “crazy Negro” every day. And of course there’s the noise and the thieving and the trash thrown on the ground.

    I pray to God – from my bones! – that this change does not come to my area.

  • KenelmDigby

    So, basically the US Government wants women – perhaps working in a small isolated group in close and prolonged proximity to co-workers – to work alongside convicted rapists and murderers.
    To the political class this is a price well worth paying to coddle and suck up to blacks.
    This fact alone – besides the myriads of similiar facts, tells you all you need to know about the morals, character, motivation and interests of the political class. Put bluntly, they are the epitome of evil.

  • itdoesnotmatter

    First heard about this disaster on Gretta’s Fox news show during a discussion about Obamacare, the IRS scandal, and the need for thousands of new IRS staff to handle Obamacare paper work. It’s not too much of a leap to speculate that many of these new govt hires will be black.
    Gretta was expressing concern that “ban the box” would result in the IRS hiring people with felony backgrounds. [She didn’t mention race, of course.]
    Proper background checks would prohibit convicted black felons from gaining access to your banking/IRS information and we can’t have that in this era of post-racial enlightenment, now can we?

  • Juan Outtamany

    Trust me…. you can come up with a 1000 reasons NOT to hire some one…. that are legal. I haven’t hired one of the community in years… because it always led to bad things for the company

  • Ngati Pakeha

    I guess it’s hard not to feel like Charlton Heston at the end of that famous movie where he dismounts and crumples to the sand and realizes he has in fact come ‘home’.

    • watling

      Just give it a few decades and we’ll all be crumpling to the sand, exclaiming:

      “You maniacs! You blew it up! Damn you! God damn you all to hell!”

    • Jenkem Huffington

      “You damned dirty apes!”

  • Romulus

    If Africans weren’t responsible for a disproportionate amount of crime, background checks would be a moot point. Once the first feral African either commits a felony or is derelict of duty, the administration will just blame something else. Private companies know the truth. Being forced to comply with this regime is just one more straw on the horses back.

  • KenelmDigby

    Of course, this move will only back-fire against blacks.
    Now, an employer will have absolutely no legal way of knowing if a prospective employee is a murderer/rapist/burglar/robber/thief or fraudster. But employers generally ARE privy to the information that blacks, in general, have an enormously elevated rate of criminality. So in order to preserve his life and his business, the rational thing for an employer to do is to blanket discriminate against all black porospective employees, even the non-criminal ones.
    This can be accomplished several ways ie by moving the business out of town, or by fabricating reasons why not to employ individuals, remember in this relationship the employer holds all the cards.

  • disqus_Xz3UA6obwj

    The very purpose of background checks is so you can be discriminatory in your hiring, though not by race but by moral character – EXACTLY WHAT MARTIN LUTHER KING WANTED. The hypocrite liberals need to make up their minds if they are for or against King.

    • Mergatroyd

      For hypocritical liberals, MLK is irrelevant. His purpose is and was to destroy White America and in that sense, he’s been very successful.

  • Stentorian_Commentator

    I have been involved in a few hirings and firings in my time, and even with white people, it shocks me how much the personnel specialists are on pins and needles to make sure we did not do anything to give anyone a reason to sue us. Given that any hire is essentially a crap shoot, no matter how careful you are, I can see employers doing whatever they can to avoid the legal noise from hiring a black in the first place, and that was even before the latest crap rule from BO.
    I must also comment on the subtlety of what BO’s bass turds are doing. They are forcing states to pass laws. That way, even if a federal law of that type is ruled unconstitutional, it would be difficult for any court to find such a state law unconstitutional. They are setting up this structure to insulate it from attack, and to make repeal an onerous 50-state (sorry, BO, 57-59-state) process.

  • Mergatroyd

    Does that mean I (as a white) can join LaRaza and they’ll fight for my civil rights too?

  • Yale2001

    Their is absolutely no other reason to push this agenda unless you want it easier to cheat and allow more criminal, illegal votes. Period.

  • Gotsumpnferya

    Isn’t character as a job prerequisite what backround checks are designed for ?
    It’s not an employer’s requirement to hire a person with a criminal backround .
    More moaning about entitlement .

    • MBlanc46

      But insisting on good character discriminates against blacks.

  • MBlanc46

    Yep, they’ve got you coming and going. You have to hire them. You can’t fire them.

    • FormerlyEdNY

      And we wonder why US based businesses outsource manufacturing and service sector jobs overseas whenever possible. Ok, the government tells me I have to hire a lazy, thieving, rude, obnoxious black that has a hard time showing up for work except for on payday, then I am outsourcing that job over seas where I don’t have to comply with such BS regulation. Now, even less jobs for blacks and everyone else.

      • MBlanc46

        There’s certainly something to what you say. I abhor outsourcing, but it’s hard to criticize people who don’t want to have control over their own enterprises.

  • SFLBIB

    That’s because those who push PC never suffer the consequences of their actions.

  • SFLBIB

    I think you got the picture.

  • SFLBIB

    Hold on, podnah. Hispanics are chameleons: they are white when PC needs it, and of color when that is convenient.

  • merrick04

    Here’s a thought. If you don’t have a criminal record, you don’t have anything to worry about. And if you do, the public has a right to know about it if you’re around them or their homes as part of your job.

    I don’t want somebody that’s been in prison for robbery laying carpet in my home (especially if I’m not there). I don’t want somebody that’s been in prison for child molesting working at my grandkids school. I don’t want somebody that’s been in prison for rape working as a janitor in a building where my daughter is working late.

    I don’t need to go on, you get the idea.

  • Jacobite2

    No, no, no, no! Black criminals have more rights that law-abiding white citizens. So do law-abiding blacks, Asians, perverts, illegal aliens, and Native Americans. Aleuts, Area 51 escapees, and Pacific Islanders are in line, but I haven’t heard anything lately.

  • Apostle Bishop

    Wow. Really? So if a person commits a crime when they’re 18 years old and then turns their life around, they shouldn’t have the same opportunities as everyone else? Judge not lest you be judged and by what measure you use, it will be measured back to you.

  • Apostle Bishop

    They’re not called coloreds anymore. They don’t pick cotton either. But since you know how to use a computer and the internet you probably already knew how racist that statement is. May God bless you with a plethora of half black grand babies.

  • Apostle Bishop

    Did anyone read the part that stated:

    should utilize conviction records only after evaluating the nature of the job, the severity of the conviction, the time elapsed since the conviction and the applicant’s rehabilitative efforts.”

    I am an ex-con and an ex-felon. I discharged my parole in 2006. Since then I have not been active in any criminal activity nor have I been in trouble for anything bigger than a traffic violation. Here it is 2014 and 8 years have passed since I discharged my parole and 15 years have passed since I committed a felony. Why shouldn’t I; who’s changed his life around and realized the error of his ways; have the same opportunity as any other law abiding citizen to provide for my family and climb the corporate ladder? Why should I or anyone else be judged for something that we’ve already done time for?

    What happens when ignorant people operate in fear and ignore common sense is that they reject the fact that they are responsible for the betterment of their own society. To reject people who have made a mistake and paid for it, just because they made a mistake in no way betters society. What it does is eliminate hope for the person who desires to change and needs an opportunity. Then what else do they have to fall back on? I’ve heard it a hundred times from people I know. “They won’t hire me because of my background.” “I can’t find a job.” “What am I gonna do?” “I have to feed my family.” Then because of an unforgiving society who refused to assist a man or woman attempting to turn a new leaf, they return to the only thing they know. They rob you, they burglarize your houses, they sell drugs, etc. Is it right? No. But I don’t think anyone on this page would be so righteous as to just live like a bum on the street and starve rather than commit a crime and eat.

    I see a lot of crimes being committed on this page. The crime of racism. I heard someone say recently that racism died in the 80’s. Apparently they don’t know WhiteRose88. I’m not angry that some of you people are racist. I’m not offended by your ignorant white ideals. I pity you because you’re pitiful. You’re a dying breed and thank God for that. I’m half white and my white grandma used to be racist until all her grand babies came out Mexican, Black and Indian. I pray that God bless every white racist person with a whole bunch of racially diversified offspring. Then you will either see the ignorance of your hatred and the beauty of differences or you’ll die pissed off and all alone.