Follow by email

Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Students say, “Ban the box!”


NOTE: This post was originally published on April 6, 2016 and has been updated with new information.            

On May 26, 2017, Maryland Governor Hogan vetoed a bill that would have barred Maryland colleges from inquiring about criminal history on admission applications. Governor Hogan reasoning the bill, in its current state, was too restrictive on schools and jeopardized student safety.

If passed, Maryland would have been the first state to prohibit all colleges and universities from including questions about criminal history on their applications. Admissions offices could still inquire about criminal convictions of accepted applicants but could not withdraw an offer of admission based on the answer.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Many employment applications include the question, “Have you ever been convicted of a crime”.  For the past several years there has been a movement to have the question removed. Every year legislatures at the State, County, and City level take up the issue of whether or not to “Ban the Box”.  Advocates want job applicants to be considered for their qualifications and not rejected based on criminal past. Should the box be banned, February 2013
Currently there are 100 cities and counties that have passed legislation to have the question removed from their respective government employment applications. Twenty-one states have also passed laws-California (2013, 2010), Colorado (2012), Connecticut (2010), Delaware (2014), Georgia (2015), Hawaii (1998), Illinois (2014, 2013), Maryland (2013), Massachusetts (2010), Minnesota (2013, 2009), Nebraska (2014), New Jersey (2014), New Mexico (2010), New York (2015), Ohio (2015), Oklahoma (2016), Oregon (2015), Rhode Island (2013), Vermont (2015), Virginia (2015), and Wisconsin (2016). Seven of those states (Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, and Rhode Island) have removed the question from private employment applications as well.
            The Common App college admissions application has over 500 member education institutions and has been in use since the late 1990’s. Since the 2006-2007 admissions cycle the Common App has also included a question as to whether or not the applicant had been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony. The applicant answers yes or no and is required to submit a separate explanation if there is a conviction.
            On March 29, 2016, students from New York University (NYU) staged a sit-in to demand that the school stop receiving the criminal question data from the Common App. Although no immediate changes were made, the NYU administration and the CEO of the Common App met with the students. Much like the advocates for employment purposes, college applicants want to be considered first on their merits and not excluded because of criminal convictions.
            As the Ban the Box movement has steadily gained traction in employment circles, you can expect the issue to continue be brought up on college campuses as well.

See our blog archive for other posts relating to Ban the Box:

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Hiring in the millennial age



People between ages 18 to 34 are in the millennial generation and were projected to number 75.3 million in 2015, surpassing the projected 74.9 million Boomers (ages 51 to 69). That generational group fills the job pool and is highly sought after. Generational differences mean you need to adjust your job screening process. Below is an excerpt from an article posted on Society for Human Resource Managers, written by Angela Preston, which explains some legal issues you should be aware of when screening Millennials.
________________________________________________________________
Hiring this growing generation of workers introduces a whole new set of legal challenges to the HR department, and the background screening process is one of those challenges. These five legal lessons should provide a good starting place for making your screening program more compliant and Millennial-friendly.

Social Media Searches
Millennials love their social networks. In fact, social media in many ways defines this generation. Many have grown up with Facebook accounts and can’t remember a world without the Internet or even without Twitter. They chronicle their lives on Instagram. Some say Millennials share too freely and fail to appreciate the impact that social media posts can have on their careers. The oversharing can be tempting for hiring managers who are eager to tap into the wealth of online information…. employers are more likely to stumble upon protected class information that could get them into hot water. Employers need to make sure that any social media screening is done by those who are familiar with the legal risks—particularly anti-discrimination and privacy laws.

Digital Natives and Age Discrimination
Millennials are not direct targets for age discrimination. But here’s the rub—the hiring criteria you are using to attract Millennials might be at the expense of those older 40-somethings who are protected by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and other similar state laws. Another example is the term “digital native.” It’s the new code for a recent graduate and it’s popping up in ads where companies are looking for a person who was born and raised in the digital age. In other words, Millennials. Legal experts agree that pre-screening for digital natives is a form of thinly veiled age discrimination.

Driving Records
Apparently Millennials don’t like to drive. According to AARP, Millennials drive around 25 percent less than their counterparts did just eight years ago. If a licensed driver with a clean driving record is your target, you might actually be eliminating a significant number of prospective Millennial applicants. That might not be a big deal, but like all parts of a pre-employment background check, you want to make sure that the information you are seeking is relevant to the job at hand. Before you run a motor vehicle report (MVR) on an applicant, you should be asking yourself why? Is a clean driving record a bona fide job requirement?

Credit
Millennials, more than any other generation, tend to rely less on traditional bank loans and credit cards. They are more likely to use cash, and as a group they actually spend less than Generation X or Baby Boomers. They tend to borrow less, which some experts think is related to their large amount of student loan debt. Credit is already a slippery slope, with many states prohibiting use of credit for pre-employment screening.

Job History and Verifications
Millennials job hop. According to Data Facts blog, “a whopping 91% of them don’t expect to stay at a job for longer than 3 years.” They are mobile, more likely to move to large urban areas and are less motivated by pay. Their priorities are different from those who came before them and will move on in order to find more meaningful work.

Also about millennials affect on the work force is our March 2017 post Customer service in the millennial age


Monday, May 8, 2017

What’s in your wallet?



The salary question

The movement to remove the criminal history question from employment applications has been steadily gaining popularity over the last several years. Ban the Box (referring to the checkbox asking if an applicant has ever been convicted of a crime) laws have been enacted by cities, counties, and states. Most affect only government applications but a few apply to the private sector. They are currently 26 states and 150 cities and counties. Maryland is one of those states and the laws applies to state government applications only. While it is not against federal employment laws (past bills in Congress have failed) the EEOC strongly encourages employers not to base hiring decisions based on the applicant’s criminal history.

Another interview question under scrutiny is the salary question-“What is your current and/or most recent salary?” Proponents feel that asking the question will help correct salary disparities by not basing offers on past pay. Arguing that pay should be offered for the position, based on market values, not the person. Employers feel that the new laws are more government intrusion that affects hiring and hurts their overall business.

The attention to this question comes from the equal pay for women campaign, which is gaining popularity on political platforms. Women earn roughly 80 cents per dollar compared to men based on information form the U.S. Census bureau. This pay disparity tends to follow a woman throughout her career when new salary offers are based on current or past history.

Pay equity laws

As with Ban the Box, once the wave starts rolling it does not take long for cities and states to follow suit. The National Conference of State Legislatures lists 43 states with equal pay laws that prohibit discriminating between the sexes. However, Massachusetts was the first to enact a law that specifically prohibits paying a woman less than a man.

In August 2016, the Governor of Massachusetts signed into law the Pay Equity Act, which will take effect July 1, 2018. Under this law it will be illegal for employers: to pay men and women differently for comparable work, screen applicants based on past salaries, contact the applicant’s former company reference salary, and restricting employees from discussing their salaries.

After Massachusetts big cities quickly passed laws. Philadelphia became the first to enact such a law, which was to take effect in January 2017, but is delaying implementation awaiting a federal ruling on a petition to block the law. In April 2017, New York City barred employers from inquiring about salary information.

This issue is gaining attention at the federal level as well. In September of 2016 the Pay Equity for All Act of 2016 was introduced to the United States House of Representatives and is still in committee. The original proposal would make it illegal to screen prospective employees based on their previous wages or salary histories; ask for previous wages or salary; or fire or retaliate against any current or prospective employee because the employee opposed disclosing salary information.

Maryland’s equal pay act took effect October 1, 2016 when The Equal Pay for Equal Work Act of 2016 was enacted. The law applies to employers of any size and extends protections to gender identity as well as sex and bars employers from prohibiting employees from discussing or disclosing wages or those of another employee. The full law can be found at Maryland Equal Pay for Equal Work 
  
See our blog archive for more Ban the box and hiring discrimination posts: