California Amends Law Preventing Use of Juvenile Criminal History for Employment

Assembly Bill 1843 is an amendment to California Labor Code 432.7 that includes additional restrictions on employment-based inquiries into an applicant or employee’s juvenile criminal history. The new bill, effective January 1^st of next year, restricts employers from:

• Asking an applicant to disclose, either in writing or verbally, information concerning or related to an arrest, detention, processing, diversion, supervision, adjudication, or court disposition that occurred while the individual was subject to the process and jurisdiction of juvenile courts/ law.
• Seeking from any source whatsoever, or using, as a factor in determining any condition of employment (e.g., hiring, promotion, termination, decisions related to a training program, etc.), any record concerning or related to an arrest, detention, processing, diversion, supervision, adjudication, or court disposition that occurred while the individual was subject to the process and jurisdiction of juvenile courts/law.

It is important to note that previous sections of California Labor Code 432.7 allowed employers to look into certain convictions and use them in adverse action decisions if federal law required. The amendment will prevent employers from making decisions based on those preexisting portions of the labor code. This amendment may cause a conflict with preceding federal laws and/or other legal requirements that require specific screening standards for employment. We will keep an eye on this bill as it goes into effect and examine how this conflict will be handled.

You can read Assembly Bill 1843 in full here.

LA Bans the Box

On November 30th, 2016, the Los Angeles City Council passed the Fair Chance Initiative prohibiting most employers from inquiring about applicants’ criminal histories until a position at the company has been offered. The notion was approved by a 12-1 vote, making Los Angeles another of many to instill this new law.

The city’s ordinance will apply to all employers who have at least 10 or more employees on staff, with the exception of careers in fields like law enforcement and child care. The decision was made to join a growing movement in helping those with criminal records find suitable employment despite their pasts. There are now 24 states with over 150 cities who have adopted this bill.

The Fair Chance Initiative was started by the Los Angeles based organizations Homeboy Industries and All of Us or None. Both groups provide support to previously incarcerated persons, fighting for their rights to rejoin the workforce in the United States; a very applicable stance to the ‘ban the box’ law. According to the National Employment Law Project, a 2011 study discovered that reentering 100 formerly incarcerated people back in the working world would increase their lifetime earnings by $55 million. This would also save $2 million annually be keeping these employees out of the criminal justice system.

However, as mentioned in a previous blog of ours, these policies bring forth the risk of increasing discrimination, as employers who are not legally allowed to research an applicant’s criminal history may consider denying him or her because of ethnicity a loophole. This fallback on stereotyping can have an adverse affect on those seeking jobs following incarceration, but the question of morality remains. Implementing the ‘ban the box’ law has led to a large increase in the hiring of those with criminal records despite these claims.

Now that Los Angeles has joined many cities around the country in this movement, the City’s Office of Wage Standards is expected to enforce this ordinance. If any violation of the new bill is reported, the applicant filing the report may receive up to $500, so long as the allegations are upheld.

For more information on the rising ‘ban the box’ movement, visit the National Employment Law Project’s guide here.

Marijuana Legalization and its Effect on Your Drug Screening Policy

Whether you were a Trump supporter, Clinton supporter, or none of the above, the election is behind us. The results of the November ballots resulted not only in the election of Donald Trump as our president, but also the legalization of recreational marijuana use in four states in what the media is calling a big win for marijuana reform.

California, the United States’ most populous state, along with Massachusetts, Nevada, and Maine, approved the use of recreational marijuana on Tuesday, November 8^th. Overnight, the number of states permitting recreational use grew from four (Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, and Washington) to eight, doubling the amount of states in which use of marijuana is legal. So not only has the most populous state legalized marijuana, but the movement for reform has made its way out to the east coast.

Recreational use was not the only marijuana-related question on the ballot either. Medical marijuana usage was approved by three new states (Florida, North Dakota, and Arkansas), pushing the number up to a whopping 28 states. Nine different states had marijuana on the ballot, so we will talk about the impact these bills will have on your drug screening policy.

Whenever a new bill is passed relating to marijuana, we get questions about how that will impact your corporate drug screening policy. We’ve written about it in the past, and the answer remains the same as before. Until marijuana is removed from the list of Schedule I drugs under the federal Controlled Substances Act, employers should still be able to test for the substance as they see fit. That is because the states that have passed these laws permit taking adverse action if the employee is under the influence of marijuana at work.

Now some may ask, “Don’t these new laws prohibit adverse action (firing of an employee) for the off-duty use of marijuana?” The answer is yes, but determining whether it was used during work hours or after hours can be tricky. The problem lies in the testing methods used for marijuana. Unlike alcohol, there is no known threshold for impairment. Testing for marijuana, depending on the method, can detect use from as far back as 30 days. For hair tests, the window of detection is larger. Therefore, a positive result does not necessarily mean the applicant/employee is impaired. However, there is no way to be sure.

In conclusion, due to the limits of drug screening for marijuana and the drug’s inclusion in the list of Schedule I drugs under the federal Controlled Substances Act, employers can still take adverse action against employees and applicants for a positive drug test. So for now, employers can still maintain a zero-tolerance policy for the drug should they so choose. Whether the spread of this marijuana-related reform or the development of new drug screening tools will change this remains to be seen. We recommend that companies at the very least review their policies and, should they continue to enforce a zero-tolerance policy, communicate to their employees that marijuana use could still result in the termination of employment.

Separating Good Employees from Great Employees When Interviewing

The process of interviewing can become a monotonous task for employers in need of hiring, sifting through countless applications. To avoid falling into a generic routine comprised of run-of-the-mill interview questions and potentially hiring a damaging employee, take the following evaluations into consideration when interviewing in order to truly gauge an applicant’s worth.

What is their vision?

Asking an interviewee where they see themselves in 5 or 10 years leaves the door open for common, overused answers. Elaborate on this topic by asking what their professional vision within the company is. How can he or she contribute something that hasn’t been done before? An applicant who can quickly and thoroughly answer questions regarding their future, and what they can bring to the table is typically a visionary who can recognize his or her own value.

Why did they leave their previous job, and did they attempt to find a solution?

Whether or not candidates you are interviewing left their previous place of work due to inadequate pay, or problems with coworkers, asking if they’ve tried to rectify the issue at hand will allow them to show their problem solving abilities in situations that call for such skills. If the problem they faced led to them quitting the very next day, that may show their inability to cope with difficulties. However, if they are simply exploring their options within the working world, you do not want your business to be seen as a negotiation for higher pay, leveraging against their current position. Be sure applicant’s want to work for your company specifically, and are not merely weighing their odds in order to find any job they can.

What is something new they learned within the past month?

Questions pertaining to an interviewee’s self-development forces them to consider how aspects of their personal lives relate to their professional careers. Rather than listing bullets on their resumes one by one that relate only to their work history, candidates should be able to show an eagerness for growth outside of the office. Ask them to teach you something. As vague of a question as that is, it compels the interviewee to dive into their personal interests, showing their enthusiasm for learning. An applicant that takes ownership of his or her personal growth is typically one that can be trusted to successfully grow within your company.

Going above and beyond in the interviewing process can yield extremely beneficial results for employers looking to find their next great employee. Look to stray away from standard interview questions that almost all applicants can answer with ease. Candidates that can translate well to your business’s needs will manifest themselves through these unique questions by showcasing their skills and ability to think quickly on their feet.