I am becoming more and more disgusted with companies being allowed to run Criminal bacground checks, credit checks, drug checks, now I hear in California they are beginning to check High school and College transcripts to see how many days you were absent to determine your reliability.
First of all if a person is convicted of a crime goes to jail serves their time and is released then a prior bad act should not in and of itself exclude them from employment oportunities.
If information is gathered it should only be used to determine employment eligibility in the following types of circumstances.
If someone is applying for a teaching position with children and a CORI is run and they come back as a sex offender then they should be excluded; if they come back as a Bank Robber let them work. If someone applies to work at a Bank and has a conviction for 18 DUI's let them work, a conviction for a Bank Robbery..Don't hire them... If someone applies for a Truck Driving position and has 6 DUI's don't hire them but if they have been convicted for stealing four cars, a boat and Robbing a bank who cares it is not relevant to their job, you got it hire them. Before you say it I know it goes to show moral character. Rah Rah Rah. Well let's take it a little further and I bet I could find some one in your lives that would say alot of bad things about you should that create exclusion based on it's face value?
First and foremost 9 times out of 10 a felony conviction will exclude you from a job opportunity so in essence you are providing dozens of people with your personal delicate information who have no obligation not to share it with others when they DONT hire you.
Second, who doesn't or has never had credit issues? Credit scores are as reliable as the people inputting the information. There are three major credit bureaus and all three will give you a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT credit score(real reliable).
Third, Massachusetts is an "at will" employment State so if you show up for work high "your fired". The testing simply puts more delicate information into the hands of people who can share it with whomever they want. On that note Alcoholism is a disease whether some of you like it or not. Failure to hire someone based on a disease is discrimination.
I can't blieve I'm going to say it but I think it's time for Govermental regulation on this issue. It's time to take some of this discriminatory power away from employers
The first step would be for DSS to make themselves available via email, this way it creates a log of the complaint which would create fear within DSS and cause them to be more responsive.
Secondly; there should be a Review Board which oversees DSS decisions. This board should be composed of a Domestic violence expert, a High ranking Police Offical a member of Town or City government an educator (teacher) and a Psychiatrist. (Notice there are 5 members). At this point you now have members who will be held responsible. Members who hold high profile positions within the community, none of whom want their name connected to a child injury tragedy. The majority rules if 3 of the 5 decide the child should be moved then the child should be moved.
My last thought. The Director of DSS should be voted in by the taxpayers of Massachusetts and not appointed by the Govenor.
