Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

newmoon23 t1_jecr1bk wrote

Actually nevermind, I’ll show you.

> The fact of an arrest does not establish that criminal conduct has occurred. Arrest records are not probative of criminal conduct, as stated in the Commission's 1990 policy statement on Arrest Records. However, an employer may act based on evidence of conduct that disqualifies an individual for a particular position.

The only thing I see in EEOC guidelines is that employers are supposed to treat people with similar convictions in a similar manner. Nothing prohibits or even necessarily discourages employers from refusing to hire people with pending charges.

3

EarendilHalfElf t1_jecraxv wrote

That is correct. As you showed yourself, an arrest isn't a valid reason and in application - in many states, refusing a job on the basis of an unrelated conviction can be grounds for discrimination.

0

newmoon23 t1_jecrj3c wrote

But they CAN use an arrest as a reason not to hire someone if they determine that the alleged conduct makes the applicant a bad fit for the position.

2

EarendilHalfElf t1_jecrnc0 wrote

Solely for an arrest - in most cases no. For a conviction, yes - they can.

0

Masty1985 t1_jedw4ag wrote

You do realize that employers don't need to tell you why they aren't hiring you, right? If I have a job opening and 10 people apply, I'm not calling the other 9 with a specific reason why they aren't hired.

2