Ban the Box Movement - Essay Example

? Ban the Box Ban the Box Summary: Ban the box movement is a movement which ensures that the rights of those who have been convicted are protected after they have served their sentence. This movement was a campaign which has been passed as a law in many stated of the U.S. Although there are still many arguments regarding the ban the box movement, the major concept is to provide flexibility to the criminals who have been convicted but want to reenter the society and get employed to live a better life. Once they have served their sentence, they have the rights just as the other people of the society. An inclusion in the employment application that a person has convicted a crime in his past is a lifelong restriction which would paralyze the person from starting a new life and living equally in the society. This is also a form of discrimination on the grounds of previous records. Introduction: One of the major social concerns in the modern world has been employment. People look for new ways to employ themselves and earn for their living. However, one of the many requirements of employment is the past criminal records of the person seeking the job. Many businesses in America have a section in their employment applications which asks whether the person has been trialed in court ever. This creates a social barrier between those people who have had a criminal record and those who haven’t. Even though this concept sounds justifiable, it is not. Ban the box movement carried out a campaign giving a second chance to those people who were convicted but wanted to be reemployed and stat their lives all over again, which is nothing wrong. Thus, the name of the movement refers to banning the box, which indicates criminal convictions on employment applications. Ban the box movement is important for this course because it provides the best example of achieving social equality and justice in the U.S society. The box on the employment applications has long proved to be problematic for many of those who have done wrong in their past but want to correct their lives and live as ordinary people. This box is a huge sign of discrimination and being judgmental about a person even before employing him. Thus, it is a highly relevant campaign which can prove to be beneficial for the public if successful. The number of people with a criminal record is increasing day by day in America. The prison population has also increased out of which a majority is released every day and others are sent back due to new crimes. Most of the population of prison consists of African Americans which is a challenging aspect for their communities especially regarding the restrictions of reemployment. The more people in prison demonstrate the difficulties in reemployment that a number of people face due to having a criminal record. Even if they tend to seek legal and honest employment, they suffer several barriers; discrimination and inequality being the major (Loeb, 2010). As more and more people are facing this problem, it is affecting the community negatively. The people who have been convicted in the past have families and close relatives who are free to access to their rights and enjoy equality in the society, then why not they themselves. If their families have the rights to prosper and contribute in the society, then everyone has the equal right and opportunity for employment. Employment is one of the basic attributes to live and, thus, it creates a safe community. Having an exception for those people who have had past criminal records seems unfair to many. Incarceration of an individual has led to many benefits and costs to the society such as decrease in crime rates and increase in operating costs of prisons. However, there may be a huge impact of incarceration on employment and earning of the offender after his release. One group of thinkers suggests that the employment of an ex-offender is a high risk as it gives them the tendency to recidivate and repeats their offence. However, the other group of thinkers suggests that employment may positively affect the ex-offender as he gets the chance to spend time with positive and aimed people. A majority of offenders involve in a new offence within 3 to 5 years of their release. It is because of their mental condition, the difficulties they face and the discrimination. However, even for those offenders who do not recidivate, employment becomes a major question of stress. This is due to their health and self confidence measures. The outcomes of the employment activities of these ex-offenders determines whether they are capable of entering the social community successfully or their reentry would rather be a cost to the individual, their family and the society. Incarceration affects the demand for workers form the employers and the supply of workers from the ones who will reenter (Walsh, 2009). The ban the box campaign begun in the mid 2000s. The campaign was a national campaign which was later joined in by the non-profit organizations. The campaign came into effect in regard to the increasing number of criminal convictions of people and then suffering difficulties in employment. One person was reported to say that he was facing employment problems because of two offences that he committed 20 years ago. Thus, the campaign begun and suggested to ban the box which was on the employment application asking whether the applicant has ever convicted of a crime or been sentenced. The campaign was set out to remove these sorts of questions from the initial stage of the employment applications and not judge the applicant on the basis of previous convictions. The hiring authorities should first get knowledge about the applicant’s experience, skills and expertise and later decide whether he is in a position to be hired or not. The campaign spread throughout the states such as California, Minnesota, Connecticut, New Mexico and many others. Since many people faced such issues in their societies, the campaign became a large public agenda following negative and positive aspects. A group called All of Us or None in California initiated this campaign which was later adopted and supported by the state governments in the United States after observing the growing problems with individuals having criminal records. The Governors and the Peace & Justice Community Summits held that it was a growing problem in the society which posed negative affects to the people of the society thus this campaign had to be launched. They did not say that the employers were not allowed to take information about the previous criminal records and incarcerations of the applicant; rather they stated that these records shall be taken secondary to the applicant’s skills and expertise. Moreover, they should be asked at a later stage rather in the application forms (Loury, 2008). Minnesota was the first state to ban the box and the Governor signed a bill which included two provisions to this legislation. The first provision stated that all the public employers of Minnesota were supposed to wait until the applicant was selected for the interview, and until then they were not allowed to conduct an inquiry about the criminal convictions. There was an exception for the public service jobs which required a background check. The second provision to the legislation was that it limited the use of an employee’s past record as an evidence against him if he is involved in any type of scandal. Activists of California started the national campaign of ban the box. Gradually the movement became more common and the laws became popular in several other states. The media played a vital role in spreading the awareness about the importance of this campaign for the well being of the society. It promoted social justice and inequality in the American society. Moreover, it gave the equal opportunities and rights to the people of the society on the basis of their skills and intellect rather than only on their criminal records; which was a crucial aspect but not in the early stage of employment. As mentioned earlier there are two groups that distinctively believe that there can be negative and positive aspects towards the employment of the incarcerated individuals. The national campaign for the ban the box movement gradually became a bill and then was passed as a law in many of the states of America who have, in effect, removed the box from the employment applications. There has been much debate and controversies over this issue regarding the risk to the society and the morality of the workplace (Toney, 2007). The opposition group spoke against the campaign which later became laws as they believed that the box was an indication for the employer to know the scope of the potential applicants. Hiring employees and accepting their criminal records would mean the high risk the tendency to recidivate. Moreover it is a risk to the customers and other workers of the business due to the morality factors and other measures. They also claim that those people who have violated the human rights of another by convicting an offence have disturbed the society and he cannot erase it and convince the society to accept his human rights when he did not respect the rights of others. The employer has the right to know what kind of a person he is hiring. There are many conflicting views about the campaign that have been emerging throughout the years. Since most states have passed the ban the box laws, there are still opposing views to this. However, the strengths of this law are that it promotes the social justice and equality in the society and gives the right to have opportunities to all the citizens. At some point, the law weakens because of the risk it poses to the society and the businesses. However, no law says that the employer does not have the right to know about the criminal records and thus he can carry out inquiries about the criminal convictions, if any. Thus, despite having opposed views, the laws are strong enough to be applied widely (Griffith, 2012). The impact of the ban the box movement has been phenomenal especially when talking about the promotion of social justice and equality in the society. The movement has been successful and immensely effective on the employment opportunities given to the ex-offenders. It gives them the courage and confidence to renter the society for their well being and betterment. These employment opportunities are favorable for rehabilitation purposes of the ex-offenders and allow them to move forward with their lives without causing cost to their families and the community. The flexible hiring policies have enabled the community to be strong and free from discrimination. There have been many states in America that have enacted this law and are successfully following it. By September 2012, there were 42 cities and 7 states that have banned the box asking whether the applicant has been through a criminal conviction or not. This increased the job opportunities, the employment rate and the reduction in the number of people who recidivate. This ban gave the applicants a chance to explain themselves rather than just ticking a box. They could explain the employer about the nature of crime, the time period and other successful rehabilitation efforts and certificates. This highly satisfied both the employer and the applicant (Spiller, 2011). Conclusively, the application and impact of the campaign seems to be very effective and impressive ever since it first started. The campaign has already been recognized and effective in many states and cities till present day. The campaign had gained much importance the day it was passed as legislation in most states. However, the campaign could be more effective if the opposition views are completely nullified and the U.S overall banns the box. The method and way the campaign gained access to the assemblies is smooth and remarkable. The literature study above suggests that the campaign was initiated by a group called All of Us or None and soon it was accepted as a national policy campaign which became legislation in most of the American states. Even though there are negative views that existed then and still exist now, the campaign has been successful in promoting its views with a positive framework for social justice and equality in the society. However there are still many states that have not applied this legislation yet and there are still ongoing confusions about the issue. The supporters of the campaign continue to express their views and focus on the well being of the society by banning the box on the application forms. I suggest that this campaign is a very effective campaign which gives reasonable points to the Assemblies to ban the box. The way the campaign initiated and its effects on the State governments have proved that the American society promotes social justice and equality amongst all and discourages degradation. Most of the people supported the campaign thus it meant that the society is free from discrimination against the people having previous criminal records and allows them to live a better life. Many of these changes have already been implemented to the state governments, and to ensure that the whole society is free from discrimination the campaign should be continued until all the states do not adopt this legislation. The future predictions suggest that there are chances that all the states will adopt this legislation because of the strengths it tends to have over the social strength. It is very likely that this movement will be successful in other places as much as it is in the current states. I learnt from this assignment that in order to promote social equality and justice amongst the people of the society it is very important to focus on such small issues such as a ‘box’ on an application form. The impact of this legislation shows that how such campaigns can change the life of the individual their family and the whole society. References Griffith, J. (2012). Redefining Black Power: Reflections on the State of Black America. City Lights Books. Loeb, P. (2010). Soul of a Citizen: Living with Conviction in Challenging Times. St. Martin’s Press. Loury, G. (2008). Race, Incarceration and American Values. MIT Press. Spiller, H. (2011). Support Programs for Ex-Offenders: A State-By-State Directory. McFarland. Toney, M. (2007). A Second Chance – For the First Time: Movement Formation Among Formerly Incarcerated People. ProQuest. Walsh, D. (2009). Employment Law for Human Resource Practice. Cengage Learning. Read More