ARegularGuy Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 At the plant where I work we have a fairly new employee in a high paying position. Something set off my cat's whiskers about him so I did some research and found quite a criminal history which follows. I've left out dates and locations but rest assured these have all been confirmed by mugshots: Agg Battery Intended Harm Purchase of Cannabis Agg Battery Agg Battery Derive Support from Proceeds of Prostitute Poss of Cannabis Living Off Earnings of a Prostitute Parole Violation Check Deception Possession OF Paraphernalia Battery by Means of a Deadly Weapon Burglary Resulting in Bodily Injury Battery Resulting in Bodily Injury Possession OF Paraphernalia Criminal Possession Forged Instrument - 2nd Degree Possession of a Forgery Device Theft by Deception - Include Cold Checks Conspiracy To Commit: Dealing In Methamphetamine Manufacture/Deliver/Finance-10 Or More Grams He is currently undergoing court proceedings on the last charge, which carries 10-30 years in prison. Management does NOT know about all this. We do not do a background check when hiring. Should this information be given to management? I don't think this guy should be anywhere near this place of business. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 IMO, if anything, send an anonymous communication with verifiable data to the company, using old-fashioned snail mail. A printout of the mugshot and rap sheet should be sufficient. The bottom line is, unless you feel your life to be in immediate danger, the person's employment is really the company's business. If they don't want to do crim/credit checks, that's their prerogative. In my line of work I'd have to balance MYOB with us working as teams on dangerous equipment and how I'd feel that guy having my back on a dangerous job. I tend to leave other people's business to other people unless it impacts me personally as a threat. YMMV. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
jen1447 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Where did you get the info from? Link to post Share on other sites
Author ARegularGuy Posted September 7, 2015 Author Share Posted September 7, 2015 It's not my safety I'm concerned about. All the records are available online. Nothing was obtained illegally. Link to post Share on other sites
jen1447 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 It's not my safety I'm concerned about. All the records are available online. Nothing was obtained illegally. What sources online though? Generally a criminal history is considered legit when provided by the regional or local government body that manages criminal data, which depending on where you live and what you're looking for could be police departments of various jurisdictions, various courts, or 'public safety' entities that keep records. Third party vendors aren't always considered reliable or sufficient as proof of anything, depending on a variety of factors. Link to post Share on other sites
pink_sugar Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) It's not my safety I'm concerned about. All the records are available online. Nothing was obtained illegally. I agree with Carhill. If you're not concerned about your safety, I would worry about your own business. Your employer got themselves into this when they agreed to hire this person. It is unusual a high paying position wouldn't do a background check though. Edited September 7, 2015 by pink_sugar 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Got it Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 You can push it forward but it doesn't necessarily mean anything. Employers are not allowed to use outside background check companies like "Meghan's Law" etc. to use for employment practices. Also those items, are they convictions or arrests?, may have already been taken into consideration but due to details, dates, etc. were not used in employment practices. The US laws/EEOC have really cracked down on using any prior convictions as employment hiring. It has to show a direct and very reasonable risk of threat to the company, employees or customers. So feel free to bring forward to HR but understand it may be known and may not be considered a (big enough) issue. Also the court proceeding in process may be a biding of time of the company to see what happens. If he goes to jail then it is a mute point in their decision making responsibilities and he has lost his job to job abandonment (jail). Link to post Share on other sites
d0nnivain Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Undergoing a court proceeding means he's Innocent until proven guilty. Nothing more. If he beats the wrap, you have railroaded an innocent man. Unless what you got are certified judgments of conviction . .. which are not generally available without paying a fee . . . you have a bunch of speculation. If you give this info to management they will most likely see it more as a black mark against you for being a busybody & a kook who is not a team player. If you must pass the info on, do it anonymously but don't expect that to get any action. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
pink_sugar Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 If you give this info to management they will most likely see it more as a black mark against you for being a busybody & a kook who is not a team player. If you must pass the info on, do it anonymously but don't expect that to get any action. This is spot on. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
applej4 Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 For those who aren’t aware, the information about the man’s criminal history is available online. There is a program called Court View. Just go to the county municipal and common pleas court websites. In addition you can also search police reports online. Link to post Share on other sites
Diezel Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 It's a tough situation. Personally, that's something HR needs to be concerned with. Not random people who are googling others. He's the company's liability, not yours. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
lollipopspot Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 Management does NOT know about all this. We do not do a background check when hiring. Why don't they do a background check? It sounds as though you're in some kind of manufacturing business ("plant"). If I were a secretary or other female in particular who worked with him, I would not be happy about this info - if it's true, it sounds as though he may have been a pimp, and he sounds violent. I would anonymously let management know. I think it's protective of more vulnerable people who might work with him. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Arabella Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 This is a tough one. Sure, the newest of his crimes may be still unresolved... but the rest of them? I sure would want to know if I hired someone with that kind of background! On the same token, I'd be VERY careful how you bring this up to your manager. Like others have said, it could be a smear on your own reputation if you don't have your facts straight. I would still bring it up in a private meeting with your manager, and show what you found about his record. Do not talk without proof. Even then, all you should say is that you're concerned about what you found, and then let your manager do the talking. Link to post Share on other sites
pink_sugar Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 This is a tough one. Sure, the newest of his crimes may be still unresolved... but the rest of them? I sure would want to know if I hired someone with that kind of background! On the same token, I'd be VERY careful how you bring this up to your manager. Like others have said, it could be a smear on your own reputation if you don't have your facts straight. I would still bring it up in a private meeting with your manager, and show what you found about his record. Do not talk without proof. Even then, all you should say is that you're concerned about what you found, and then let your manager do the talking. I agree...though they don't seem too concerned if they're not doing any background checks. I mean, I've worked for places that didn't do them...usually they were small companies with only a few employees that didn't want to spend the resources. Large firms though were a different story. Link to post Share on other sites
anika99 Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 For those who aren’t aware, the information about the man’s criminal history is available online. There is a program called Court View. Just go to the county municipal and common pleas court websites. In addition you can also search police reports online. How do you know the rap sheet you pulled was for the right individual? What hard identification did you feed the program. His SIN? or his drivers license? Did you obtain his identification legitimately and legally? I know where I work, if I snooped in anyone's private employment files to get their identification or other personal information so that I could do my own background check on them I would be in really big trouble. Actually I believe our code of conduct states that individuals who breach our privacy standards will be terminated. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 IMO, since the OP mentioned the 'mugshot' and apparently knows the person on sight to match that up, and surely the employer can, if the mug shot can be tied to arrests or convictions, that would be pretty determinative as verifiable data. Take for example, this mug shot Most of us know who that is but the information in the mug shot, and the image, can be used to acquire more relevant data in publicly available records. Should the OP, if connecting the dots on the criminal history, use that data to affect an employment decision by his employer? IDK. I probably wouldn't, given what he's shared here about his personal situation. However, that's simply one opinion. IME, it's far harder to use such data *after* the person is employed versus during the hiring process but that's only a narrow experience in my industry, heavy industrial, and in California. Every place varies and we have no idea where this place is. Link to post Share on other sites
SoleMate Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 When you say criminal history, you mean convictions? This is one of the very rare cases where I might support anonymous reporting. Heck, I'd be willing to hire a lawyer simply to pass this rapsheet on to management with total cloaking of my identity (just in case he has friends in high places, which one might suspect given all stated facts). The numerous violent crimes mean that coworkers are in danger if he continues to be employed. So call an ethical lawyer and ask that your legal agent perform the service of forwarding this report to management. Link to post Share on other sites
Got it Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Why don't they do a background check? It sounds as though you're in some kind of manufacturing business ("plant"). If I were a secretary or other female in particular who worked with him, I would not be happy about this info - if it's true, it sounds as though he may have been a pimp, and he sounds violent. I would anonymously let management know. I think it's protective of more vulnerable people who might work with him. A number of companies don't do background checks. They don't see the ROI on them, depending on the turnover/size the technology to handle it, and/or don't see it as essential for the position. One can't assume that if someone was a "pimp" that would even be allowed to factor in on hiring them. Just like someone can have a domestic violence conviction but it does not apply to being considered impactful for hiring. Link to post Share on other sites
applej4 Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 So call an ethical lawyer and ask that your legal agent perform the service of forwarding this report to management. Huh? So an employee should hire a lawyer to inform management about the criminal background of another employee? Something very wrong with that picture. Link to post Share on other sites
SoleMate Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 One can't assume that if someone was a "pimp" that would even be allowed to factor in on hiring them. Just like someone can have a domestic violence conviction but it does not apply to being considered impactful for hiring. "Allowed"? By whom? I know of no jurisdiction in the US where consideration of felony convictions in hiring is disallowed by law (or by common sense or best practice). On the contrary, the employer's duty to maintain a safe workplace would tend to create a duty to take reasonable steps to ascertain violent tendencies. As to whether domestic violence is considered important and relevant, I'm sure some employers couldn't care less or even consider it a big laugh. However, many will consider a DV felony an impediment to employment, as they should. (DV can also be a misdemeanor and can be trivial, whereas the multiple aggravated batteries with enhancements of the OP's post cannot be trivialized.) Pimping is a felony in all 50 states. It is usually enforced with violence. Aggravated battery with intended harm is a serious violent felony. As a minimum, everybody around this person should be aware of what he's capable of. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
stillafool Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I think you should mind your own business and stop snooping on employees who make more money than you. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Tayla Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 solemate, you are correct. Due diligence in hiring at some corporate and govt jobs require back round checks and sometimes even credit checks. These results can be used to decline hire or dismiss /terminate. And its all legal. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
jen1447 Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 I think it's important to distinguish that these typical 'mugshot' sites feature just that - mugshots. Mugshots are generated when a person is arrested. Arrests don't count toward a person's public criminal record. Only criminal convictions do. Meaning that an employer can't lawfully screen potential employees based on having been arrested for suspicion of pimping, only on a conviction for pimping. (That's why arrest records generally aren't public and why you typically get mugshots in Google searches from third party sites.) Information used to search for criminal records in most cases in the US is simply name, date of birth, and sex. (Race us also an optional search criteria.) Criminal convictions are a matter of pubic record and anyone can lawfully obtain those records, although some states put restrictions on who can do the obtaining. Generally background screening companies will be licensed to do so in states where it's limited, and they're who companies often turn to for that service everywhere, among other hiring related matters like credential and reference verification, etc. Seems likely to me that if OP turned over his info to his employer, it was more or less convincing, and the employer took an interest, they'd conduct their own background investigation using reputable sources to make a determination. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
SoleMate Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 Good point, jen, about being clearer whether these are convictions or just charges. Big difference. Link to post Share on other sites
Got it Posted September 9, 2015 Share Posted September 9, 2015 "Allowed"? By whom? I know of no jurisdiction in the US where consideration of felony convictions in hiring is disallowed by law (or by common sense or best practice). On the contrary, the employer's duty to maintain a safe workplace would tend to create a duty to take reasonable steps to ascertain violent tendencies. As to whether domestic violence is considered important and relevant, I'm sure some employers couldn't care less or even consider it a big laugh. However, many will consider a DV felony an impediment to employment, as they should. (DV can also be a misdemeanor and can be trivial, whereas the multiple aggravated batteries with enhancements of the OP's post cannot be trivialized.) Pimping is a felony in all 50 states. It is usually enforced with violence. Aggravated battery with intended harm is a serious violent felony. As a minimum, everybody around this person should be aware of what he's capable of. Actually yes the EEOC and DOL have focused on this and have gone after companies for making such wide sweeping policies like you indicated above. There has been a major focus the last few years on criminal background discrimination. For example: State Laws on Use of Arrests and Convictions in Employment | Nolo.com Maybe you aren't fully up to speed with the employment law landscape? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts