Criminal Record Questions, Statistical Discrimination, and Equity in a “Ban the Box” Era

Fighting labor market discrimination with ban the box (BTB): Are there racial implications?

“…Recently, researchers have proposed a number of suggestions to improve the situation for ex‐offenders in the labor market (Agan, ; Sugie, ; Vuolo et al, ). These suggestions include improving existing records and eliminating misleading information from the internet, such as information on arrests that never led to convictions.…”

“…While these suggestions all have merit, researchers must continue their analyses of labor market practices with and without BTB policies and the impact on both ex‐offenders and nonoffenders. In addition, as Sugie () reminds us, arguments for and against BTB are not so clear cut; that is, perhaps the best solution lays in the middle. Eliminating BTB and giving access to any type of records employers might want just because of concerns they will apply statistical discrimination when screening applicants might not be the best route (Apel, ).…”

“…Although a major milestone because it established “business necessity” as the only reason for denying employment to ex‐offenders, the Supreme Court decision in Griggs v. Duke Power Co . (1971) left employers with a great deal of discretion in assessing and demonstrating the nature of such necessity (Harris & Keller, ; Sugie, ; Zapata, ). As a result, courts have, on many occasions, allowed discrimination against ex‐offenders, especially former drug offenders, for a variety of jobs (Zapata, ).…”

Policy Implications About Properties of Arrest Risk Across Populations of Provisional Employees With and Without a Criminal Record

“…The scholarship pertinent to prediction of criminal conduct in employment settings spans basic and applied research and provides a rich and important context for the range of issues that should be considered by use of official records of arrests or convictions by potential employers. Careful and original empirical research directly bearing on some of these questions, such as the article by Samuel DeWitt, Shawn Bushway, Garima Siwach, and Megan Kurlychek (, this issue) and the recent series of papers focused on use of arrest and conviction data in the employment context (Blumstein and Nakamura, ; Bushway, Nieuwbeerta, and Blokaland, ; Denver, Siwach, and Bushway, ; Kurlycheck, Brame, and Bushway, , ; Pager, Western, and Sugie, ; Sugie, ), are significant contributions to this important criminological line of research. As intended by their authors, the findings from these studies stimulate a host of legal, ethical, and empirical questions pertinent to public policy to which criminological research is well positioned to contribute.…”

In Pursuit of Standards for Ban the Box Policies

“…In another policy essay, Naomi Sugie (, this issue) raises several questions that are bound to complicate discussions about Ban the Box. For example, she asks how employers or lawmakers will determine whether a criminal history is “job related,” what specific time limits will be appropriate for consideration of past convictions, and whether criminal history questions are to be standardized across industries.…”