HN Gopher Feed (2017-08-02) - page 1 of 10 ___________________________________________________________________
Launch HN: 70MillionJobs (YC S17) - Job board for people with
criminal records
1165 points by RBBronson123
Hi HN,My name is Richard Bronson and I'm the founder/CEO of
70MillionJobs (https://www.70millionjobs.com). Our website is the
Internet's first job board for 70 million Americans--1 in 3 adults
--with criminal records.I'm something of a domain expert in this
area because I myself have a criminal record. In the early 1990s, I
worked on Wall Street and some of what I did was illegal. For a
time I was a partner at the infamous Wolf of Wall Street firm,
Stratton Oakmont (Scorcese film). I went on to build a large
financial services firm, but despite having paid everyone back, I
ended up with a 2 year Federal prison sentence. I was guilty.I
experienced first hand how difficult it was to get on with life
after going through the "system." I served as Director at Defy
Ventures, a great non-profit in the reentry space, but was
interested in a scalable solution to ex-offender unemployment and
resultant recidivism. I felt a new, for-profit, tech-based approach
was necessary, so I launched 70MillionJobs. We're seeking "double
bottom-line" returns: make money and do social good.Like most job
boards, our business model is based upon employers paying to
advertise their jobs. We expect additional revenue to come from
municipalities, who spend tens of billions of dollars annually,
when someone is rearrested.You might not be surprised to learn that
most formerly incarcerated men and women are petrified to discuss
their background with prospective employers. So we created a "safe
haven" where all parties knew the score, and applicants could relax
knowing that jobs being offered were with companies that accepted
their pasts.Since many of our applicants don't have a laptop or
easy access to the Internet, we send out text alerts they can
easily respond to. Because most of these folks have limited work
experience and limited formal education, we plan on building a
video resume platform to accompany their resumes. In person, many
of these folks are respectful, bright and personable, so this will
show them at their best.
___________________________________________________________________
7cupsoftea - 5 hours ago
YES!!!! This is exactly the kind of innovation we need. Great work!
Let us know if we can help. We are at very beginning stages of
supporting people that are re-entering and getting folks lined up
with jobs in a safe and supportive way is a big part of that.
Again, hats off!
stillhere - 6 hours ago
Why buy a domain name for a number that will fluctuate over time?
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
My greatest pleasure will be the day I have to buy
60millionjobs.com, 50mill....
[deleted]
inetknght - 6 hours ago
> So we created a "save haven" where all parties knew the scoreDoes
that mean that employers know what offenses were committed, and how
long ago? Or does it just mean that they know that the candidate
has been convicted of something, but figuring out whether that's a
liability to the business or not needs to be discussed?
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Aside from any legal/HR consideration, we feel that everyone
deserves a second chance, so we don't discriminate based upon the
nature of the crime (but believe me, this is not an easy issue to
reconcile). Ultimately, it'll be between the applicant and
employer to resolve this. As it relates to liability to the
business, there's a federal bonding program that has existed for
decades, indemnifying employers from making at-risk hires.
Interestingly, over this period of time, only just a few claims
have every been made. The facts are that folks with jobs almost
never recidivate. In fact, studies are now showing that these
folks, for certain jobs, actually may be better employees. Hiring
them is very good business.
chrissnell - 6 hours ago
My father owns a retail business that has four stores and
employs a bunch of hourly workers. After growing up around the
business and working there in my teens and twenties, I feel
pretty confident that the risk of a second-chance felon is
probably no more than the risk of any average off-the-street
hourly worker. Bad apples show up all of the time. They steal
a little money or some inventory, get fired, and life goes on.
The risk is far greater for an ex-con: why would they risk
going back to prison and losing a good job that gave them a
second chance over a little money in the register or some
inventory?
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Your father's experience is no exception, and you're right.
Generally speaking, given the opportunity, these folks stay
out of trouble.
distortednet - 1 hours ago
First time creating an account on HN. Wanted to to say what you're
doing is important. I will be sure word gets around about this in
the appropriate circles where it would be useful.
danschumann - 5 hours ago
I'd definitely consider hiring ex-cons, as long as they had some
sort of 'come to Jesus' moment where they changed their life. I
used to do a lot of bad stuff, just didn't get caught for it (
mostly doing drugs ). I wouldn't want to hire former me, but now
that I've changed...
brndnmtthws - 6 hours ago
This is great. Not much else to say about it.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Thank you
ahallock - 4 hours ago
It may be simplistic, but I believe if you've done the time, you
should not have a criminal record hanging over your head when
trying to find employment. For a third or fourth time offender, I
may give pause, though.
javajosh - 6 hours ago
Hey Richard, love this idea. I firmly believe in the notion that
once you've paid your debt to society you should be able to
participate in society as anyone else would. That this is not the
fact is atrocious to me.Do you need a remote full-stack programmer?
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Thank you for your insight. When the dust settles, we should
talk.
devrandomguy - 3 hours ago
Another full stack dev here, I would also love to help with
something meaningful. Feel free to PM me in the future, if I
can be of assistance. Remote, from Canada, Pacific timezone.
maerF0x0 - 2 hours ago
how is doing time "repaying a debt to society"? Seems to me
incarceration is a proving ground to show you're no longer
dangerous, _then_ one can begin to repay whatever injustices
occurred?
leesalminen - 16 minutes ago
That's not how it's framed in the US. Incarceration is
purposefully made as horrible as possible (rape, beatings,
inedible food, solitary confinement) to ensure full debt
repayment prior to release.I agree, it's disgusting, but that's
the status quo.
rweba - 15 minutes ago
I just randomly came across this very relevant TED talk given by a
prison inmate yesterday:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F89eycANUrQI
definitely feel that American prison policy leans way too far on
the side of moral judgement and retribution than rehabilitation. In
my personal opinion, anyone who has served their term has already
paid for their mistakes and we, as a society, should be more
concerned with helping them get back on their feet than with
further punishing them for their mistakes.I also think the practice
of denying former felons the right to vote is completely
ridiculous. So if you commit a felony at 18, you can't vote even
when you're a 100? What kind of sense does that make?
pertymcpert - 6 hours ago
Best of luck!
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
thanks very much
sghiassy - 4 hours ago
Love the idea. Good luck!
MentallyRetired - 6 hours ago
Love it
deepnotderp - 6 hours ago
Just wanted to be another HN-er voicing my support for what you're
doing :)Good luck and i hope you're successful!
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
thank you very much
jakozaur - 6 hours ago
Isn't yet another case that startup is trying to fix systematic
screwup of law in the USA?In USA once you got criminal record, by
default it stays for rest of life with you. Implications of that
may be even more severe than actual punishment.On the other hand in
most of the European countries criminal records are limited and
after X years they disappear and you can't legally discriminate
based on that.Some ppl will do something stupid at some point in
their life and get a criminal record. Not giving them another
chance is a major problem and actually can cause a lot of damage
for everyone.
okreallywtf - 6 hours ago
Even though this shouldn't be a problem (in that I agree that
this is a policy issue in a lot of ways) I think that this could
create more momentum for a fix by bringing this issue to light.
They could potentially put themselves out of business
(eventually, not any time soon) by de-stigmatizing a criminal
record.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
amen, my brother (or sister)
yellowapple - 3 hours ago
"Not giving them another chance is a major problem and actually
can cause a lot of damage for everyone."To build on this:
disallowing them from becoming productive members of society
means that they're that much more inclined to revert to a life of
crime.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
I don't know about being "yet another case..." This is something
that has affected me, my family and many friends square on, and
I'm compelled to try to improve things. There are more and more
people like you who clearly "get it," so I have hope.
justin66 - 5 hours ago
> In USA once you got criminal record, by default it stays for
rest of life with you.You have no idea what you are talking
about.> On the other hand in most of the European countries
criminal records are limited and after X years they disappear and
you can't legally discriminate based on that.This is something
that varies state by state in the United States. In general,
misdemeanors can be removed from your record faster than felonies
and if they could they'd put a big red 'A' on your chest for sex
crimes. Some places will clean your record automatically and some
will requre you to contact the courts. But again, varies state by
state, or even county by county.
jaredhansen - 6 hours ago
>Isn't yet another case that startup is trying to fix systematic
screwup of law in the USA?Two thoughts:1) "systematic screwup of
law in the USA" is a pretty good description; another might be
"massive market opportunity"2) "startup trying to [take advantage
of market inefficiencies created by] systematic screwup of law in
the USA" is also a pretty good description of drug traffickers of
all kinds. (I'm not passing judgment; just making an
observation. The meta observation is that you can't cheat
reality, so when law gets out of whack the gap between Ideal and
Actual creates an inefficiency, which savvy entrepreneurs can
profit by bridging).
Zyst - 6 hours ago
>systematic screwup of law in the USA" is a pretty good
description; another might be "massive market opportunity"The
way Americans have the capacity to acknowledge something
intrinsically fucked up about their society, and see it as a
business opportunity regardless is something I both admire, and
despair over.
RonanTheGrey - 4 hours ago
Glad I'm not the only one that feels that way..
Wohlf - 5 hours ago
On #2, you could say the same thing about all black markets.
eizo - 6 hours ago
Hi Richard,This is a great idea with a nice social cause. Also,from
a business perspective this is a good niche and large scale. Aside
the mission and the targeted niche, how do you expect/plan to
diferentiate in your product offering?
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
We need to find a much better product market fit. This job board
was our first pass at it, but we've learned lots and look forward
to being far more engaging for our users in the future. There's
been so much great feedback here alone, I can't wait to iterate.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
I'm looking forward to hearing your feedback and am happy to answer
any questions about 70millionjobs, the challenges faced by people
with criminal records, and ideas you may have to improve our site.
forgotmyoldpw - 5 hours ago
Um, why are all of the photos on the site of African Americans?
Yes, it's true that African Americans make up 40% of the prison
population, but whites make up 39% and hispanics 19%. It seems the
images you have chosen are an unfair stereotype.
LeifCarrotson - 3 hours ago
It's both better and worse than that. The photos of the job
seekers are all African Americans, yes. But there is a photo that
includes white men and even two white women: It's behind the
"Employers" heading most of the way down the main page. Yikes.
[deleted]
nsxwolf - 6 hours ago
"Richard Bronson" is an awesome name for this. It has real
gravitas.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
lol Thank you
mcjiggerlog - 4 hours ago
Strangely similar to Richard Branson!
nsxwolf - 3 hours ago
And Charles Bronson!
[deleted]
Snarketing - 1 hours ago
Silicon Valley CMO with a record here - would love to offer pro
bono marketing help if needed.
aantix - 6 hours ago
Just curious, how do you know that the job postings you're listing
accept those with criminal backgrounds?Is this a list of curated
companies? Or is there something that you're parsing out that
denotes this acceptability?
hnrich - 6 hours ago
I'm curious about this as well because the two listings I clicked
on had requirements like "must be able to pass a criminal
background check" and "must have stable work history" as their
first hiring criteria.
azernik - 6 hours ago
There may be several factors going into this; for example, in the
Bay Area, positions in the city of SF are prohibited from
considering conviction history that is not "directly related" to
the job. It also suggests specific language for including this
information on job postings and corporate websites.I would love
to hear from company founders about what factors they use to
discover this information in their external job listings that are
not on jurisdictions like this.Source:
http://www.millerlawgroup.com/publications/alerts/San-Franci...
rewrew - 2 hours ago
The site as it stands doesn't, as looking at the site currently
has plenty of jobs that requires passing a criminal background
check. It appears this site is more idea than execution at this
point.
mathattack - 1 hours ago
I went on to build a large financial services firm, but despite
having paid everyone back, I ended up with a 2 year Federal prison
sentence.Ummm.... This sounds like a huge rationalization. "I'm
sorry for breaking in and robbing your house. Despite giving the
money back, I ended up going to jail."
brightball - 6 hours ago
A friend of mine finally had his record cleared of incidents from
when he was 19-20. He took courses to learn to program but even now
it's still hard for him to get a job because people want to know
about the huge gap in his employment history from when nobody would
hire him.
Mz - 4 hours ago
"Personal crisis."I was a homemaker for a lot of years. I also
happened to be too sick to hold down a job during that time, but
homemaker sounds so much better on a resume.Find a preferably
true and accurate description that is palatable to employers.
Then realize it is tough all over at the moment. LOTS of people
are having trouble getting hired at all.
wutbrodo - 3 hours ago
Do you mind if I ask if you're a woman? IIRC there's pretty
substantial hiring discrimination against men who claim to be
homemakers (because it's less common so people assume that
they're lying). The other side of the coin obviously being
that women with kids are discriminated against in hiring due to
assumptions that they'll be distracted by their family
obligations.
Mz - 3 hours ago
Yes, I am a woman. No need to ask: It is listed in my
profile.Also: I did not suggest a man call himself a
homemaker. So, I am not sure what the point of your comment
is.
wutbrodo - 9 minutes ago
> Also: I did not suggest a man call himself a homemaker.
So, I am not sure what the point of your comment is.Uh, I'm
not sure where this hostility is coming from. Just because
someone responds to your comment doesn't mean they're
disagreeing with you. I was just adding the context for
anyone who sees your comment and interprets it narrowly as
thinking that putting 'homemaker' on their resume gap is a
useful way to explain it away without understanding the
pitfall for 50% of the workforce.
Mz - 5 minutes ago
I don't see why you are calling that hostility. You could
have made the point you made here without implying I was
suggesting that some man should go with that framing.I am
quite open about my gender. Lots of people recognize that
I am female. Those that don't can easily determine my
gender by clicking into my profile. I have zero reason to
believe people will interpret my remark to mean that men
should call themselves homemakers.
joshbaptiste - 6 hours ago
Your friend just needs to say he was doing consultant work for
himself during these periods.
tomjen3 - 6 hours ago
And he can, honestly, say that he sucks at getting clients for
his consulting, but that he is good at coding.
kchoudhu - 5 hours ago
"I can't discuss who my other clients are with you, but I'd
be happy to talk to you about the challenges I faced."Proceed
to bullshit.
banned1 - 5 hours ago
"Incidents"?You mean his crimes? No need to abstract reality.
wutbrodo - 3 hours ago
Doesn't "had his record cleared" make it obvious that we're
talking about his crimes? This seems needlessly pedantic.
[deleted]
Joeboy - 6 hours ago
Possibly interesting trivia: There was an '80s British TV series
called Inside Out, about people doing what you're doing.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
really? I love British TV!
Joeboy - 3 hours ago
It's http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2674348/?ref_=fn_tt_tt_17 ,
although sadly it seems to have mostly vanished into the
analogue void. I remember it being pretty good, but I probably
had dreadful taste at the
time.http://www.rochellestevens.com/wp/wp-
content/uploads/2013/01... has a very slightly better summary
(at least enough to prove I'm not making it up).
tomjen3 - 6 hours ago
Will it be possible to limit job postings to groups of offenders?
Eg only non-violent offenders, only people who have been out for at
least x years with no new crimes, etc?
clairity - 5 hours ago
i'm also working on the jobs problem (not in your niche however)
and really don't find the idea of another job board very
compelling. can i ask why you went that route?in any case, best of
luck! it's important work to be doing.as a society, we should do
everything possible to help people who make mistakes and want to
get back on the happy path. (as a side note, i think punishment is
way out of whack. we need more carrot and less stick for low-level
offenders, and more stick and less carrot for white-collar crimes
that affect many more lives, though it seems like you got a fair
amount of stick in your case.)
Scirra_Tom - 6 minutes ago
1/3 adults with a criminal record in a developed country seems
absolutely insane to me.Edit: Well I need to get off my horse
because it seems to be similar here in the UK as well:
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2002/apr/14/workandcareers...
slice_of_life - 6 hours ago
> 1 in 3 adults?with criminal recordsI must admit I haven't ever
thought about these numbers but it strikes me as insanely high. How
can this be explained? Is it a feature of just America or is it
reproducible in other countries as well?
adventured - 6 hours ago
This is from 2002, but it makes the point:"... that almost a
third of men [in Britain] have a criminal conviction by the age
of 30, according to the Home Office. Research on men born in 1953
showed that about 30 per cent had clocked up a standard list
offence - one that is dealt with by the courts but excludes minor
motoring offences - by their thirtieth birthday. Research in
Scotland points in the same direction, suggesting that about 25
per cent of men have a record by age 24."https://www.theguardian.
com/money/2002/apr/14/workandcareers...
dsfyu404ed - 5 hours ago
Wow, and that was for people born in 1953(!!).The net cast by
law enforcement has not gotten smaller since then.
justadeveloper2 - 5 hours ago
It's easier to rule over people who live in fear, so just
make more things illegal, process people through the system,
and you get your total state without anyone raising an
eyebrow.
RonanTheGrey - 4 hours ago
Oh they raise eyebrows. The kind that come along with
thunderous applause.
danesparza - 6 hours ago
Pretty sure it's uniquely a USA issue:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_ra...
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Right you are. The US has 5% of the world's population, and 25%
of the world's incarcerated population. Per capita, more than
China, Iran, N Korea.
adventured - 6 hours ago
In fact they're not right.The parent is confusing criminal
record with incarceration duration. The UK has nearly just as
high of a criminal record ratio among adult men for example.
The difference is the US assigns far longer incarceration
times for the same crime vs the UK. Further, Europe as a
whole has a higher crime rate than the US does. [1]70 million
jobs has plenty of room for international expansion
accordingly."[2011] Contrary to common perceptions, today
both property and violent crimes (with the exception of
homicides) are more widespread in Europe than in the United
States, while the opposite was true thirty years ago. We
label this fact as the ?reversal of misfortunes?."[1]
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1889952
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Great data. Thank you for sharing. The US is also the only
country that employs solitary confinement for juvenile
inmates.
danesparza - 1 hours ago
Thanks for citing your sources! Much appreciated
HillaryBriss - 4 hours ago
Interesting paper. From the abstract: We find that the
demographic structure of the population and the
incarceration rate are important determinants of crime. Our
results suggest that a tougher incarceration policy may be
an effective way to contrast crime in Europe.if i'm reading
that right, they're suggesting that European incarceration
policies/rates/sentences (or something) are too lenient
(?). so, Europe has the opposite problem when compared to
the US?
tixocloud - 6 hours ago
This is a great initiative and hopefully will lead to a positive
change for everyone involved. Will you also be thinking about
training/education opportunities for applicants?
oliv__ - 5 hours ago
I did a double take when I read the first 4 words: Richard Branson
is in YC? Launching a job platform?Anyways, this is a great idea, I
hope you succeed!
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
What a big difference one letter can make. thanks for your
thoughts.
adventured - 6 hours ago
Great business concept and social good all in one.With the
unemployed persons per job opening at such a low present level
(~11-12 year low), I bet you see a lot of employer interest.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
There's great demand, exacerbated by our administration's crack-
down on illegal aliens
geff82 - 5 hours ago
The good thing about people with a criminal record: you know what
they did! You will never know this of the people around you who got
away not being caught. Do I know if my neighbour did not rob a bank
10 years ago? No. So working with ex-criminals can be an encounter
with honesty.
justadeveloper2 - 5 hours ago
Uh, no you don't. A lot of cases get plead down and the cops/DAs
are lazy and often don't charge people with crimes they're not
sure they can successfully prosecute. That's why there's so many
"non-violent drug offenders" in prison all over. Yeah, most of
those people were up to no good but got taken down for something
less serious.
zerg2k - 29 minutes ago
And a lot of people are forced to a plea after being
overcharged and put through a very long crippling(financially
and mentally) while for the DA/cops is just another day to go
to work
rapind - 5 hours ago
Or they only got busted for a joyride but not the 12 B&Es and
embezzlement. False signals.
greenshackle2 - 5 hours ago
Uh, you don't know what the ex-con hasn't been caught for either.
Maybe they got away with murder 10 years ago, but where only
caught for their petty theft 5 years later.
jmcdiesel - 4 hours ago
Which also undermines the usefulness of judging based on
criminal record...
aeorgnoieang - 3 hours ago
How is that? It seems reasonable to believe, all else being
equal, that someone that's been convicted of a crime has
committed more crimes than someone that hasn't been
convicted.
MentallyRetired - 6 hours ago
One of the first things I came across was "Police Officer" in
Tallahassee, FL. It's an external link. Part of the description
even says:"Have no convictions for any felony, perjury, false
statement, or domestic violence. No DUI convictions past ten years.
Other arrest histories are reviewed on a case-by-case basis."I love
the idea, but it needs a bit more work.
aeorgnoieang - 3 hours ago
What's the problem specifically with that listing?
QuotedForTruth - 3 hours ago
Its a listing that excludes candidates with felonies on a job
board specifically for candidates with felonies.
logfromblammo - 3 hours ago
The OP specifies only "criminal record", which may include
both misdemeanors and felonies, with varying degrees of
each.Some employers care about any criminal record at all,
while others care about felony convictions only. The website
itself only mentions "criminal record" and "formerly
incarcerated".Perhaps it would be prudent to make filtering
easy for "misdemeanors only" jobs and "former felons wanted"
jobs?
aeorgnoieang - 3 hours ago
I didn't see any mention of it being only for felons.
GordonS - 3 hours ago
"Have no convictions for any felony..."
aeorgnoieang - 3 hours ago
"Job board for people with criminal records"
Danihan - 2 hours ago
Everyone with a speeding ticket has committed a
misdemeanor. The site is very obviously geared towards
people with felony records.
ryan-c - 2 hours ago
I don't know about your state, but in California,
speeding (along with most other traffic violations) is an
infraction, not a misdemeanor, and doesn't show up on a
criminal record search.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
Understood. thanks for letting us know. we're on it.
felon123 - 1 hours ago
How bout a separate site for individuals who are falsely accused of
heinous crimes(murder, rape) without evidence?
mikekij - 48 minutes ago
Hey Richard, I'm really glad to see you working on this. A family
member of mine made some mistakes, and ended up spending time in
prison. It's been really painful to watch him struggle to get a
job, even though he's paid his debts and is a genuinely good
person. I have tremendous sympathy for people in this position.If
any of your members are experts at embedded systems / firmware /
cryptography, send them my way!
TallGuyShort - 4 hours ago
>> We expect additional revenue to come from municipalities, who
spend tens of billions of dollars annually, when someone is
rearrested.I'm curious - while I agree that it also benefits the
municipalities to help former criminals reintegrate into productive
society, through what channel do you see expect this revenue to
come? I know some tax breaks exist for hiring ex-cons, but dishing
out funds to a service like this would be entirely new, right?
bduerst - 6 hours ago
Have you thought about collaborating with CEO
works?https://ceoworks.org/
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
We are currently doing just that, in NY and CA. Their NY director
of Workforce Development is on our Advisory Board.
KGIII - 4 hours ago
Are you sure those jobs all hire felons?I browsed my State and saw
jobs for physicians, pharmacists, and even a school psychiatrist.
Shivetya - 4 hours ago
was going to comment on this but will add on to yours. many
states prohibit felons and even some non felons but with criminal
records from certain fields that require occupational
licensing.do you have methods in place or planning to filter jobs
with such restrictions as not all states adhere to the same
rules.great idea btw
r0m4n0 - 6 hours ago
I ran a search and a few banking jobs came up, one of which
mentioned going through a fingerprint background check. I find it
hard to believe the US Bank in SF would take me seriously for a
teller opening if I had any sort of hangups in my background.I
guess this is more of a feature request but... It would be great if
you could filter out job postings that were likely just scraped or
aggregated from other places!Nice work btw, a great start for a
much needed service
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Thanks for your kind words. Yeah, our search algorithm needs lots
of work. It'll get there.
quadcore - 6 hours ago
Business wise: what make a company want to hire someone with a
criminal record?
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
please see response above
tapatio - 5 hours ago
They are cheaper?
ianbicking - 6 hours ago
I was curious about local jobs, so I put in "Minnesota" and get to
https://www.70millionjobs.com/search/-/Minnesota ? but then when I
put more search terms into keywords I keep getting the same results
(including keywords that I can tell have associated jobs). I'm
guessing it's falling back to ZipRecruiter entirely, but it's also
not searching those entries.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Thanks for this question. We are not yet working in Minnesota
(we're currently focused on CA and NY Metropolitan area), so
search results outside those parameters are not good. We're
working on it.
efdee - 6 hours ago
I very much like what you're doing for those of us who've made
wrong choices in the past. However, I am a little bit concerned
what drives a company to go to a site -especially made for those
people- looking for future employees.
losteric - 6 hours ago
The hardest workers are people who are (re)building their lives
from nothing... Largely immigrants and ex-cons.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
In my experience, that's a very true observation
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Great question. First of all, while we believe that there's a
morality issue here, along with good corporate citizenry,
ultimately, we have to serve a viable HR value to corporate
America. In fact, there are some 6 million jobs currently
unfilled in this country--many of the sort our applicants would
excel at. Not filling jobs costs businesses enormously. So we
hope to bring that value. At the same time, progressive companies
conscious of their corporate issue may feel (or may not) that
making an affirmative statement like this hold inherent value, as
well.
stoic - 6 hours ago
Bless you, sir.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
bless you, too
user5994461 - 5 hours ago
How come 1 in 3 adults in the USA have a criminal record?
andrew_wc_brown - 6 hours ago
I love seeing startups who can actually transform lives. Its sad
being a developer with no technical limitations but have no useful
ideas.
gressquel - 5 hours ago
There are pictures african-american people on frontpage, about and
guiding principles.People MAY be offended. Just a suggestion.
naturalgradient - 5 hours ago
What do you mean? The reality is that African-American people are
incarcerated and convincted at very high rates, in great part
thanks to policies that very specifically designed to target them
(re: war on drugs).
hwoolery - 3 hours ago
I don't think he's arguing the disparity of the rate, but
rather the implied generalization that former-convict =
African-American. Look at the statistics posted above, that is
not true. I agree, it needs redesign.
[deleted]
ghostbrainalpha - 4 hours ago
This is a beautiful project.Have you met the guys behind
https://pigeon.ly/?Are there any other problem areas related to the
criminal justice system that you are not addressing, that you think
a startup could help with?
whataretensors - 5 hours ago
Love it. Doing good and making money at the same time. What a
great idea.
flanbiscuit - 5 hours ago
quick FYI, Your og:image is broken because I just tried sharing
your site on facebook and all I saw were logos from other
companies. When I go directly to the image you set in your
og:image meta tag I get an error responsehttps://jobboardhq.blob.co
re.windows.net/assets/prod/2ttp/lo...here's a direct link to FB's
open graph debugger with your site already loaded into it:
https://developers.facebook.com/tools/debug/sharing/?q=https...
LeifCarrotson - 3 hours ago
Another broken page is your "For Formerly Incarcerated->Gain
Certification"
page:https://www.70millionjobs.com/page/CertificationI see
nothing but some share buttons, the standard header and footer,
and a blank white page. There's a Sumo login tab that slides out
of the scroll bar if you mouseover near the top right corner.It's
perhaps only caused by the Show HN DDOS/hug of death, but better
to learn now than later that the Sumo Listbuilder popup takes at
least 30-60 seconds to load. I only waited long enough to notice
it because I had to disable UBlock and reloaded watching the
Network tab of the dev tools.
wolco - 2 hours ago
I can see this concept being a huge success because it is solving a
real problem. The difficult lift is the employer buyin.
markhall - 3 hours ago
Richard, amazing idea and appreciate the candor from your personal
experience. HN is a great community to spread the word of your
launch, so thanks. Let me know how I can help
hwoolery - 6 hours ago
I love the idea, and I really want your company to succeed. I
don't really consider myself very easily offended or PC, but I
thought it seemed a little stereotypical that the first two images
in the hero were black people. I think that should be changed as
quickly as possible if you don't want to get any backlash. My two
cents : )
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
I appreciate this observation, but our prisons are predominately
filled with people of color.
hwoolery - 4 hours ago
Really? From what I understand, the number of black inmates in
prison is roughly equal to the number of white inmates (about
40%/40%). There is a large disparity in terms of the
incarceration rate of people of color, but your above statement
is not true.
arglebarnacle - 3 hours ago
Yeah, but "people of color" doesn't only refer to black
people--the other 20% are also people of color. So 60-40, and
it's true that US prisons are predominantly populated with
people of color.
banned1 - 4 hours ago
hmmm, is this correct? It seems the real proportion is 39/40/19
among Whites/Blacks/Hispanics.https://www.prisonpolicy.org/repo
rts/rates.html
24gttghh - 2 hours ago
From The Bureau of Justice Statistics, the "Prisoners in
2015" report, table 8, page 13 [0]:>Percent of sentenced
prisoners under the jurisdiction of state or federal
correctional authorities, by age, sex, race, and Hispanic
origin, December 31, 2015446,700 white male prisoners 501,300
black male prisoners 301,500 hispanic male prisoners 122,400
other male prisonersWhich means male adults of color
(925,200) make up more than double the male white adult
(446,700) state/federal prison
population.[0]https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15.pdfThe
more disturbing statistic being that 1,745/100,000 black
adults are incarcerated, compared to 317/100,000 white
adults.Female incarceration rates do not follow this same
trend identically according to the data, and they make up
only ~7% of the total correctional population.
[deleted]
dvt - 6 hours ago
This is awesome, congratulations on your launch!
cletus - 5 hours ago
I'm super-excited to see this. I really hope it works out. Thanks
for doing it.Honestly I find how this country treats those with a
felony record absolutely disgusting. The "Are you a convicted
felon?" is a scarlet letter that never seems to disappear. While
this might've originally been well-intentioned, IMHO it perpetuates
criminality as I suspect what other choices do a lot of former
felons have?There was (is?) a campaign in Massachussetts to
retroactively pardon a felony conviction for Mark Wahlberg.
Apparently this makes it difficult to, say, get liquor licenses and
so forth.Personally I"m 100% against a commutation for the rich and
famous. What we should be doing is freeing people from this stigma,
particularly when the crime was a long time ago, especially
nonviolent and likely not relevant to your job.FYI Mark Wahlberg's
felony conviction was violent and pretty egregious actually as it
was IIRC a racially-motivated attack on a Vietnamese man.
HillaryBriss - 4 hours ago
yeah, Wahlberg's crime is an interesting case -- the kind of
violent crime most people think merits a severe punishment. and
yet, he's a wealthy movie star today. American justice,
folks.oddly enough, it happened in Massachusetts of all places, a
state i expect to take this sort of hateful crime more seriously.
maybe it would nowadays. that particular violent attack happened
a while back.regarding licensing: the rumor i heard (for what
it's worth) was that Wahlberg recently wanted to become certified
as an actual officer on a local auxiliary or reserve police force
for some new show he was planning. but, as a convicted felon, he
is not eligible.
seanmcdirmid - 2 hours ago
Massachusetts...has always had a high incidence of racism. See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_busing_desegregation.
devrandomguy - 3 hours ago
Wow, that is surreal. It is hard to believe this, from Marky Mark
/ Smooth Vibrations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO9909uexu8
yequalsx - 4 hours ago
I think this is an important endeavor. In the U.S. we tend to be
too much focused on punishment and retribution. No one benefits by
preventing ex convicts from an attempt at a normal life. I hope
you succeed and wish you well.I do think you ought to remove the
phrase, "...but despite having paid everyone back..." That
phrasing comes off to me as a bit of a justification for what you
did and seems to indicate a feeling that you should not have been
sentenced. I don't know if this is your intent or if indeed such a
belief is justified. It may be off putting to some.
hirsin - 6 hours ago
I think this is awesome, and I was relieved to see the focus on
non-white collar crime. Some questions that I think are systemic to
the entire area -The companies hiring are at somewhat of an
advantage (they can hire anyone, the employees have more limited
options). How do you ensure they get a fair offer, and not, like
migrant labor, receive a below market offer? Would the marketplace
effect here help prevent that? (edit - looking at the website, duh,
it looks like you've solved this - awesome - and found good
companies.)Your revenue model is based on companies laying to get
access to these prospective employees - how do you get past the
stigma (without breaching q1 above)?I like the municipality revenue
model - it would be awesome to see them as "reverse recruiters"
we're they pay every time someone gets a job.
tomjen3 - 6 hours ago
>How do you ensure they get a fair offer, and not, like migrant
labor, receive a below market offer?This will be legal
employment, so hopefully the abuses resulting from migrant
employment won't happen, but the salary they are getting will be
below the "normal" market price, at least for a long time - and
this is a good thing, since they would otherwise not be hired at
all.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
We can't ensure they get a fair offer, other than by providing
information and access to resources to address such injustices.
I judge our success one job at a time, and one repaired family
at a time.
hirsin - 6 hours ago
Oof - unsolicited advice, but that combined with your
acknowledgement of racism in the system will have some people
calling you the plantation market. Even though you're not
saying it explicitly, what I just read is that implicitly
your revenue model is based on giving companies access to a
below market cost labor force that's predominantly POC. While
I lean towards the idea that its better they have access to a
job than not, I think it's also vital to pursue full wages,
rather than partial wages despite their debt to society being
paid.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
Not below market at all. There's great demand for this
labor, and it's driving wages up, if anything. The real
effective response, I think, is providing training for jobs
that pay much more than minimum wage. That's something
we're working on, at scale. More on this at a later date.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Negative bias towards those with records--along with a healthy
dose of racism--is certainly at play, but I see the zeitgeist
moving swiftly in the right direction. But it's a challenge, for
sure.
spraak - 6 hours ago
> along with a healthy dose of racismEr, when is racism ever
healthy?
dajohnson89 - 5 hours ago
See definition 4https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/healthy
nkrisc - 2 hours ago
A "healthy dose" of something negative is bit of a sarcastic
idiom. More generally a "healthy" dose could be described as
one that is not lacking in any way.
ianleeclark - 5 hours ago
It means a significant amount of racism.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
good point. never.
vogt - 5 hours ago
this is cool. you should get in touch with Pigeonly (YC W15).
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
I'm very familiar with those folks, thanks.
triangleman - 5 hours ago
In a past job I was responsible for hiring a few warehouse workers,
and in one case I was actually relieved to find that the applicant
was on probation for a drug charge, and was required to submit to
weekly urine tests. Basically the state was paying to guarantee
that this worker was staying clean, and so I was pretty confident
about hiring him. I wonder if other employers would be interested
in that kind of info as well.
pm90 - 4 hours ago
Great point. I think the problem is that employers often use
boilerplate conditions, and requirements are more stringent than
the job would require.
splintercell - 5 hours ago
Considering the number of friends who repeatedly and confidently
pass state mandated drug tests, I would not trust that at all.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
Very interesting take on this
killjoywashere - 46 minutes ago
Urinalysis as a service has got to be a thing already. Probably
a partnership deal. Maybe LabCorp or Quest. Just stay away from
Theranos :) If not, we could probably russle you up a chemist
if you're willing to front the immunoassays and mass
spectrometer. Or microfluidics. Then Theranos might be
interested...
Invictus0 - 6 hours ago
Do you employ people with criminal records?As an employer, I want
to hire the best people so my company can be successful. Why would
I hire anyone from your site when there are plenty of other
candidates elsewhere?Do you think people will try to use your site
to disqualify potential hires (i.e. use it as a do-not-hire list so
those registered with the site can specifically be avoided)? How
will you prevent this from occurring?Why would a company that
doesn't care about criminal records advertise with you? Wouldn't it
make more sense for them to advertise on a generic job board, take
the best resumes, and sort out criminal history issues as they
arise?Does your site allow employers to see what a job seeker's
crime was, or any other info related to that that other job boards
wouldn't provide?
someguy101010 - 6 hours ago
"As an employer, I want to hire the best people so my company can
be successful. Why would I hire anyone from your site when there
are plenty of other candidates elsewhere?"Not associated with
that company but one reason to hire a convict is that you get a
pretty decent tax break[0] out of
it[0]https://www.doleta.gov/business/incentives/opptax/
DanBC - 5 hours ago
> Why would I hire anyone from your site when there are plenty of
other candidates elsewhere?Someone with criminal record has
something to prove, so will be grateful for the job and work
hard.
angersock - 6 hours ago
Why would having a criminal record automatically preclude you
from hiring these folks?Hell, Hans Reiser wrote a great
filesystem and he murdered his wife. John Draper and Kevin
Mitnick would probably both be good hires for certain roles.
Steve Jobs could've been easily arrested for drug use.
newsreader - 4 hours ago
Former career criminal here. Spent 19 years of my adult life in a
combination of jail and prison. Longest stint was for 14
consecutive years. Been working in IT for the last 17 years, mostly
as a developer. Had a very hard time getting my foot in the door;
was denied employment more than once because of my record. Not sure
that my current employer is even aware that I have a record, and to
be honest I have no plans to reveal that part of my life. Also,
knowing that my criminal activities would have life-long
consequences was never a deterrent. One thing I know for sure: I?m
not what I used to be. Today I live a peaceful and productive life
with my wife, enjoy the company of family and friends, and try to
stay up-to-date with technology.I think that what you are doing is
a good thing an applaud you for it.
austenallred - 2 hours ago
Don't you have to reveal that you're a felon by law?I ask because
we have a student in our CS academy who is in a very similar
situation.
seanmcdirmid - 2 hours ago
Depends on the state. In some, they aren't even allowed to ask
(they have to run a background check to find out).
newsreader - 2 hours ago
It probably depends by state. I was required to reveal I was a
felon while on parole. Once I was off parole I no longer had
this requirement but... I was constantly faced with the
question on my job applications. My approach was always not to
lie and only answer the questions asked, adding "will discuss
during interview if needed". Twice I made it to the interview
only to be rejected after the nature of my crimes were
revealed. On two separate occasions I was offered employment,
started work, and was later let go because of my felony
conviction.
oh_sigh - 2 hours ago
What kind of crimes were you committing?
newsreader - 2 hours ago
Burglaries, armed robberies, stealing cars, dealing drugs. Did
it all as a gang member of an East LA gang -- that's where I
got started.
mrskeltal - 2 hours ago
How did you manage to leave the gang life?
newsreader - 2 hours ago
Got tired. Really tired. Asked God for help. He did --
can't explain it any other way. I tried to change many
times before but always came back to my old life style.
ileze - 55 minutes ago
Sadly, 'round these parts you'll get more tolerance for
your status as a felon, then for that of having religious
beliefs.
briandear - 53 minutes ago
Thanks for sharing this. A compelling story. I am glad
you were able to survive and thrive. Inspiring stuff.
chris_wot - 3 hours ago
I'm sorry to hear of the issues you had getting employment. Must
have been awful getting a job, hell when I left my last company
with few references it was hard enough... I can only imagine how
tough it must have been getting out of jail!
newsreader - 2 hours ago
It was very tough getting my first job. I been with my current
employer for more than 10 years, and will probably retire from
here. Many people don't believe that people change. I know for
sure that people change -- unfortunately not always for the
better.
w8rbt - 5 hours ago
State and federal governments do not get as much tax revenue either
because these people are not earning at their full potential. So
basically, it hurts everyone involved as well as society as a
whole.
jjnoakes - 5 hours ago
Is that true? I don't know much about macroeconomics but it seems
to me that even though these folks aren't earning at their full
potential, the jobs are being done by someone.In other words, if
these folks were earning more, someone else wouldn't be doing
that job, so the overall earning that the set number of jobs
would support wouldn't change one way or the other from the tax
revenue point of view.(Not advocating for or against these folks
being able to work at their full potential, just trying to look
at the tax revenue argument objectively).
aero142 - 5 hours ago
This is fixed pie thinking and it's not a good way to look at
the economy and jobs. If this large block of people were
earning more, they would be spending more. That means more
restaurant jobs, home builders, baby sitters, etc. It's not a
perfect one to one that jobs will increase with spending, but
it's closer to that than the fixed number of jobs view you are
putting out.
jjnoakes - 4 hours ago
> If this large block of people were earning more, they would
be spending moreNothing I said disputed that.
xenadu02 - 5 hours ago
Economics isn't a zero-sum game. People with better jobs spend
more money to buy more products, including a lot of the
products startups would very much like to sell. An ex-con
working minimum wage isn't ordering Muchery, using Instacart,
or taking Lyft rides. An ex-con working in frontend development
very well might use those services.This generates economic
activity across the entire chain, enriching everyone along the
way. All of these people end up paying more taxes. Collectively
the increase in activity can cause retailers, suppliers, and
manufacturers to hire to keep up with demand further feeding
the cycle.IIRC the research shows ex-cons are far less likely
to re-offend in the future if they land a good job. How many
kids looking forward to $130k/yr jobs would choose to join a
gang instead?There's also the deadweight loss of criminal
prosecution and jailing offenders. It generates a few legal and
prison guard jobs but most of the taxes spent in the criminal
justice system don't contribute constructively to society the
same way building new bridges, subway systems, or funding
science research does.
jjnoakes - 4 hours ago
> Economics isn't a zero-sum game. People with better jobs
spend more money to buy more productsNothing I said suggested
otherwise.
singhrac - 4 hours ago
Well, sort of. You said "the jobs are being done by someone
else", but that's not quite true - that person having to do
that job means they can't do another job, etc. I think your
argument only makes sense if there's a large pool of low-
skilled workers looking for jobs with clean backgrounds
(which might be true, but possibly isn't in that area/job
area).Here are some examples:1. A former felon is unable to
work a low paying job at a library, because they have a
background check. Someone else takes that job - but only if
they couldn't find a higher paying job. In this case tax
revenue doesn't change.2. A former felon has a unique skill
(e.g. manufacturing specialty welding machines), that it is
impossible to find someone to replace. That business
opportunity goes by, and in this case tax revenue
decreases.
kevinnk - 4 hours ago
> if these folks were earning more, someone else wouldn't
be doing that job, so the overall earning that the set
number of jobs would support wouldn't change one way or the
other from the tax revenue point of view.That's exactly
what "zero sum" means.
azundo - 4 hours ago
> the overall earning that the set number of jobs would
support wouldn't changeClaiming that there is a set number
of jobs and the overall earning wouldn't change with more
productive labor is suggesting a zero-sum game.
nkoren - 5 hours ago
This is not how economics works. Here's a good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy
dang - 4 hours ago
We detached this subthread from
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14911995 and marked it off-
topic.
pm90 - 5 hours ago
So I have mixed feelings about this situation. On the one hand,
if the sentences were for drug possession, yes, I think its
really shitty to incarcerate people for that. But if their felony
was due to burglary or something more serious/violent, I do think
they deserve the punishment.I also agree that once the sentence
has been served, people should not be punished any further,
except where the occupation requires a clean record. e.g. I would
be OK with pharmacies requiring no arrest for drugs etc. as a
condition for employment, or drivers without DWI convictions
etc.I guess my point is: its not a purely economic decision. Sure
you're losing tax revenue, but that's because you're:1)
Protecting society from a person who has demonstrates some lack
of understanding/acceptance of its rules.2) Cause significant
discomfort/pain to the perpetrator of the crime so that they
realize the consequences of breaking the law and hopefully never
do it again.
Mz - 4 hours ago
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-
checker/wp/2015/04/...The US has about 4.4 percent of the
global population and about 22 percent of the global prison
population. So either we are seriously fucking up as a country
and incapable of producing decent human beings, or our entire
justice system is broken.Something needs to be done differently
at the systemic level that doesn't involved holding every
individual fucked over by the U.S. personally accountable for
being crushed under the wheels of the goddamn system.
dragonwriter - 4 hours ago
> The US has about 4.4 percent of the global population and
about 22 percent of the global prison population. So either
we are seriously fucking up as a country and incapable of
producing decent human beings, or our entire justice system
is broken.Note that that's not an exclusive or; both can be
true, and it's even plausible that there's a positive
feedback loop between the two?that is, we have worse people
because of our massive imprisonment, and can't get political
support to end mass imprisonment because people correctly
fear the near-term results given the way in which those in in
prison are socialized (and even often preferring more
imprisonment from perfectly legitimate fears of the way many
people not in prison are socialized due to our mass
imprisonment system.)Which isn't to say we shouldn't bite the
bullet and end the system, but just that we'll have lots of
near term problems when we do and lots of political
difficulty in actually doing it.
[deleted]
Mz - 4 hours ago
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/apr/03/identity-
the...The tickets had something else in common.
Brownsville, the South Bronx, East Harlem, Bed-Stuy (at
least eight years ago, when the ticket was issued), all of
them are neighborhoods with large black or Hispanic, and
very small white, populations. It was then that it became
clear to me: the reason for the tickets wasn?t that these
Lisa Davises were petty criminals.If you are the wrong
color and live in the wrong part of town, you get
criminalized for existing. Then when something does go
really wrong, you can be railroaded.Derreck Hamilton* was a
black kid guilty of minor bullshit who spent years and
years in prison for a murder he did not commit (because
some asshole cop was out to get him and he got railroaded).
So, acting like not sending poor, non-whites to prison for
basically existing somehow will make life scarier is
basically racist bullshit. Or perhaps simply clueless about
how things work in this country.*
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/20/derrick-
hamilto...
blablabla123 - 4 hours ago
Yeah same here. On the one hand people deserve a second chance
and it just happens that someone can get sucked into a stupid
situation.On the other hand when someone boldly ignored certain
moral rules, will the person continue to do so? I think it's
pretty serious when someone else had to suffer because of that.
jsmthrowaway - 4 hours ago
> will the person continue to do so?That is the fundamental
question of the sentencing phase of a trial (which is why if
you?re unfamiliar with criminal trials, that they?re
basically ?retrying? a defendant they?ve already found guilty
might seem weird), and I agree with the other commenters that
it should stop there. Holding people back from regular
employment directly causes recidivism. Unemployment and crime
are correlated. You can?t just pull people out of society
because they erred once, and this is why convictions with
priors are worse than without; that question is being
answered for you.You want fewer people in prison and safer
communities? Let felons work, fire them when they don?t, or
they?ll get the money in other ways. It?s genuinely as simple
as that. Beside the DUI crowd, half the minimum security
inmates I spent time with were there for check fraud, petty
theft, and other crimes to feed themselves or their kids.
Many had priors, sometimes several, making one guy I met who
had passed a $750 bad check stare down the barrel of a ten
stretch.Think about this: upon my conviction I lost the
ability to both vote and leave the country. I have both back
now (with effort), but even looking at this situation
macroeconomically, what is that saying about even first time
offenders?
placeybordeaux - 4 hours ago
Whats the point of a judge handing out a sentence if society
heaps on a constant amount of extra punishment afterwords?
mytherin - 4 hours ago
Do you really think preventing people from getting jobs makes
them less likely to commit crimes in the future? To me it seems
the opposite is much more likely. If people are unable to make
an honest living they will be forced to commit crimes to make
ends meet.The prison sentence is the punishment for the crime.
After people are let out of prison they should be reintegrated
into society.
[deleted]
losteverything - 3 hours ago
Is anyone elses reaction "What will they think of next?"Anyone also
surprised at the scope of positive and admission-comments?Anyway,
best of luck!!
RBBronson123 - 3 hours ago
thank you. And yeah, the number and intelligence of the comments
has been incredibly gratifying. it does my heart real good.
[deleted]
adalyz - 5 hours ago
very interesting concept, all the best :-), hope it picks up, we
need more love in our society
jitix - 4 hours ago
Awesome idea! And a noble cause. But one word of advice - since
this is a niche market you guys should focus on natural growth and
profitability instead of getting too much VC money to fuel
explosive growth.
adventist - 4 hours ago
I don't understand how 30% of Americans is a niche market? Can
you elaborate some more?
wutbrodo - 3 hours ago
Because this 30% can't hire themselves, and they need companies
to participate. This is a two-sided market, and "Companies
willing to go out of their way to hire more felons" _is_
something of a niche market (unfortunately, given that the
status quo is probably significant underhiring of people with
records, to everyone's detriment).
jitix - 3 hours ago
Its niche because the idea can be easily replicated by the
incumbents in the industry. And it will be hard to scale at a
global scale because the perception about ex-cons varies a lot
in different countries.As such the profits wont be able to keep
up with VCs expectations if they invest 100s of millions of
dollars. OP has a great first mover advantage and knowledge of
the market, and they can capitalize that but the idea isn't
worth billions.
freeslugs - 6 hours ago
Can you sort by criminal record? e.g. Only white collar crimes.
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
No, we believe everyone deserves a second chance. It's a
challenging moral quandary, I admit, but I for one am no one to
pass judgement.
BearGoesChirp - 5 hours ago
What about cases such as people who commit crimes against
children? Would at the very least you say they don't deserve a
second chance at working with children?
dsfyu404ed - 5 hours ago
If you have a resume you can typically find a local newspaper
report of whatever the crime was even if their name is John
smith.That said, local newspaper stuff is a horrible source of
information. "Mr. Doe was charged with the entire book"
routinely turns into a plea deal for the smallest charge on the
list.
adnam - 6 hours ago
I wish we heard more stories like these. It might dissuade people
from getting involved in drugs in the first place.
fhood - 6 hours ago
No, it probably will not dissuade people all that effectively.
That logic is part of the problem.
adnam - 6 hours ago
Well if nothing can be done to dissuade people from criminality
we might as well not bother having a criminal justice system
and put up with it.
fhood - 5 hours ago
The best way to dissuade people from criminal behaviors (in
my opinion) is to make the impetus for the behaviors less
attractive.
adnam - 5 hours ago
The best way to stop people doing bad things they want to
do is the fear of certain and severe punishment. "Getting
involved" is not something that you do by "mistake", you
have to want to do it first. The only "mistake" is
believing you won't get caught, presumable because so few
do.
fhood - 5 hours ago
I genuinely feel that that is not an ethical approach,
nor is it any more effective than removing the
temptation/ ability to commit certain crimes. In some
cases, I agree, severe punishment needs to be codified
into the law, but that represents a tiny minority of
crimes committed in the US.
adnam - 5 hours ago
I think it's quite ethical, because it removes the burden
from law-abiding people. There's also evidence to show
that punishment works as a deterrent when applied as
uniformly as possible, hence saving people from falling
into the misery of criminality.
DanBC - 5 hours ago
> The best way to stop people doing bad things they want
to do is the fear of certain and severe punishment.There
is no evidence that's true. People still take drugs in
countries with the death penalty.
adnam - 5 hours ago
There's plenty of evidence that tough sentencing reduces
crime - do your own research.Of course, some people are
so selfish and impulsive not much will deter them, but at
least they're off the streets where they can make life
miserable for the rest of us.
bovermyer - 5 hours ago
Your first statement there belies the fact that you know
nothing about psychology. I'd suggest going to your local
library and reading up on reward and punishment as it
relates to behavioral design in a society.
adnam - 5 hours ago
It's always so exciting to have my knowledge of
Psychology called into question by a "DevOps engineer" in
Minneapolis.
bovermyer - 5 hours ago
See! You can read! Go find that library.
adnam - 4 hours ago
Heh, you changed it to "Digital Manager of Operations ".
Much classier ;-)
bovermyer - 4 hours ago
More current, considering my job changed. I hadn't
changed it in two years. Probably wouldn't have changed
it for another few years if you hadn't reminded me that
profile descriptions exist.
pavel_lishin - 4 hours ago
I do happen know the technical term for this particular
bullshit argument you're throwing out: ad hominem, with a
light sprinkling of appeal to authority, since you're
implying he has none due to his job title.
KingMob - 5 hours ago
I have a master's in psychology from Columbia, and I
happen to agree that you're ignorant.
pavel_lishin - 5 hours ago
I forget the technical term for the bullshit argument you're
throwing out - "if we can't have X, then clearly you support
the polar opposite of X!"Moving on, the actual reasonable
conclusion here is to be smarter about what we deem a
criminal act or not.Why is getting caught smoking a joint
something that can ruin your career for a decade, while
drinking a beer on the sidewalk is a wrist-slap?
joeblubaugh - 6 hours ago
Or maybe it ought to convince us that we shouldn't make it so
hard for people with minor criminal records to get back into
society?
anthonybsd - 5 hours ago
You realize that you can acquire a criminal record for something
as innocuous as urinating on your own private property right?
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
Your comment is very insightful. I was in prison with lots of
folks who: 1. Dealt pot. Now widely decriminalized. 2. Cheated
on their taxes. I don't know a business person who doesn't
fudge their T&E. 3. DWI/Drunk driving. Who among us hasn't
driven, having had that extra glass of wine. Morality is
frequently not as black-and-white as we'd wish it conveniently
be. We are human. We screw up. There should be ramifications
for our transgressions. But a life sentence! That's the
punishment, effectively, that's meted out. How evolved does
that make us, as a society?
dang - 5 hours ago
We detached this subthread from
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14911995 and marked it off-
topic.
adnam - 5 hours ago
How is this off-topic? Do you mean "off message"?
dang - 5 hours ago
'Dissuading people from using drugs in the first place' is
pretty far from the topic of a job board for felons. There's
a connection, but it's a generic one. We've learned that
generic tangents aren't good for discussion here.This is
standard HN moderation. When a subthread veers away from the
original topic and also toward something more generic and/or
ideological, we moderate the subthread as off topic. That
caveat is important, since off-topic tangents can also be
whimsical and sometimes more interesting than the original
discussion. But in the internal model of HN, 'generic' and
'interesting' are incompatible, and the generic stuff tends
to take over the concrete if you let it (and 10x more when
the material is flammable). Therefore we don't let it.
adnam - 5 hours ago
Thank you for the explanation. Since I have your attention
momentarily, would it be possible to delete my entire HN
history from the beginning of time? Posts and comments.
[deleted]
KingMob - 5 hours ago
HN doesn't usually get trolls, so they probably don't have a
category for it.But you're welcome here if you can argue your
point instead of throwing out one-liners.
adnam - 5 hours ago
I simply have a point of view that you happen to disagree
with.
KingMob - 1 hours ago
Nonsense. I disagree with many people on HN. The problem
here is you lack the courage of your convictions to
actually debate anybody.
milesvp - 5 hours ago
That is the absolute wrong takeaway here. It's about being overly
harshly punished for mistakes in their youths. I've heard very
similar stories from public defenders that have nothing to do
with drugs, but with common punishment escalations that are hard
to avoid when you're poor, and people surely can't avoid being
poor.Minor fine goes unpaid because this month the electric bill
is more important.Leads to more fines.Leads to license
suspencion.Leads to driving while license suspended.Leads to
license suspension.Leads to driving while license suspended.Leads
to felony jail time.Don't get me wrong, there are choices made at
each stage of escalation, and often all that's needed is to show
up to court, dressed in your sunday best and respectfully explain
situation to the judge, and the chain can be broken, but being
poor leads to a lot of suboptimal decisions that could make it
difficult or impossible to deal with any of this until there is
no choice, and a felony conviction often ends up as the
escalation that can't be putoff any longer.
adnam - 5 hours ago
"Leads to license suspencion. Leads to driving while license
suspended." Or, like, don't drive without a license.
milesvp - 4 hours ago
Sure, you can lose your job because you can't get to your
job, or you can???I'm sorry what alternative are you
offering? We live in a society where driving is most
necessary for those who can least afford it. I think you may
grossly misunderstand how difficult life is for people
struggling to get by.You are right, that poor choices can
lead someone to a scenario where there are no good choices
though. Most of this chain can be broken by just taking some
time to take care of their life, but that is not always as
simple as it sounds. Right now I personally have
societal+familial+work obligations that total 17+hrs daily
and I'm lucky to get 6hrs sleep, 3 uninterrupted. I am not
poor, and I'm lucky to have a very flexible job, so I could
take time to deal a minor fine so it didn't escalate past
early court escalations, but I'm not sure I'd be able to
trivially take time off to deal with a court appearance if I
had a more demanding job, I don't have a lot of flexibility
elsewhere to borrow from.Never forget that it's easy to judge
someone's actions from outside, but in their same mental
state and reality constraints, you may make the same
decisions.
DanBC - 5 hours ago
leads to job loss. you want them to work, right?
adnam - 5 hours ago
However did anybody work before the invention of the
internal combustion engine? rolls eyes
KingMob - 5 hours ago
However did the past become the present? rolls eyesCities
were structured so that people lived closer to work. On
the farm, you lived and worked there. In cities,
factories only employed people nearby because anyone
farther away couldn't easily/affordably get to
work.Unfortunately, with the spread of highways, suburbs,
and cheap gas, American society rearranged itself around
everyone having a car, so now having one puts you at a
disadvantage.Please either contribute comments of
substance or wit, and reserve the trolling for 4chan.
adnam - 5 hours ago
Having an opinion which which you disagree is not
"trolling".
KingMob - 1 hours ago
Spewing one-liners to stir people up while refusing to
debate is trolling.
geofft - 5 hours ago
The internal combustion engine was invented in the 1860s
or so.Do you know how the poorest demographic in America
before the 1860s worked?
[deleted]
milesvp - 4 hours ago
Economics changed. Right now the most affordable housing
is furthest from job centers. Last time I compared apt
prices where I live pricing was such that living within
walking distance of downtown was priced such that pricing
for similar apts 10 miles away had a delta greater than
the cost of owning a car and commuting. God forbid you
live in a city like LA that has no downtown because of
freeway sprawl.
sctb - 24 minutes ago
We detached this subthread from
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14912550 and marked
it off-topic.
SophosQ - 5 hours ago
Yes, thanks to shorter distances and the horse-cart. I
assure you it's more expensive to own a horse in an urban
environment.
[deleted]
NoCoastCoder - 5 hours ago
Leads to losing job...
justadeveloper2 - 5 hours ago
Meh, you gotta do what you gotta do. You think for one
second that if I had my license revoked that I wouldn't drive
to get to work to support my family? You're a statist if you
think driver's licenses prove you are a good driver--they're
bullshit, just like all those little tags and stickers are
bullshit. And a man can only eat so much bullshit.
tomxor - 5 hours ago
pfft... reduce your statement to "or like just follow the
rules stupid" you really missed the point... fundamentally
why do you think people do something like stealing food?
because they don't know stealing is wrong? or because they
are fucking hungry and are poor?
KingMob - 5 hours ago
If you're an American, there are huge parts of the country
where lacking a car is infeasible.But for the sake of
argument, let's say you shutter your car. You can spend a ton
of time walking to, and waiting on, public buses, time you
can't use to study for a degree, or be with your kids. Maybe
you rely on a friend's car, but then you miss out on last-
minute shift opportunities, and your friend's transport
problems become your problems, too, so if they're sick, you
miss a shift and risk getting fired.You're so out-of-touch,
I'm surprised you didn't just say "Let them Uber to work,
then."
adnam - 2 hours ago
I'm not American, thankfully
justin66 - 5 hours ago
This presents an interesting dilemma here for an ex-con. Most
people can eventually get their records expunged after they're out
for a while, at which point we as a society demand that they start
responding "no" to the questions about having a criminal record
during the interview process. It's dishonest but it's how the legal
system works.If you're an ex-con who will eventually get his record
expunged, is there any risk to participating in a job board like
this? I'm guessing it is pretty small, and the advantages presented
by the site will be worth it. Still, it's ironic that eventually
users will probably be in a position (after expungement) where it
is not in their interest to use the site anymore. I wonder if, when
this site is successful, it will eventually want to team up with a
more conventional job site to move some of those users over. Just a
thought.
xenadu02 - 4 hours ago
Remember that many states do not allow expunging records no
matter how old (eg: Texas). For some people a conviction will
follow them literally for the rest of their lives.
justin66 - 4 hours ago
If I remember correctly Texas has at least one thing that can
be done, an ex-con can petition the court to seal their
records, which is similar in effect. (a pre-employment
background screening place cannot report expunged or sealed
records) I don't really know what the politics are like in
Texas but I suspect getting that done isn't easy...
ams6110 - 3 hours ago
Like a lot of legal matters, it's probably more dependent on
whether you can afford to have it done.
gertef - 2 hours ago
What's dishonest (and what's demanded?) about honestly stating
that one has no criminal record (since the record was deleted)?
vkou - 1 hours ago
Change the wording of the question slightly, and answering 'No'
to it becomes dishonest.The change in wording may be illegal,
but good luck proving that to anyone who cares.
tajen - 3 hours ago
...or team up with rehabilitation organizations. Unfortunately
there's no shortage of ex-prisonners in USA: About one third of
the people in age of working.
austenallred - 6 hours ago
I would imagine the difficult aspect of this two-sided market would
be employers.Not to be obtuse, but what incentive would an employer
have to hire someone with criminal records?
someguy101010 - 6 hours ago
I commented this somewhere else, but I figured I would drop this
link here for you too,
https://www.doleta.gov/business/incentives/opptax/. You can get
a pretty decent tax break if you hire a felon.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
very true
burkaman - 6 hours ago
They have an incentive to hire someone, and often can't find
qualified candidates through traditional channels.In purely
economic terms, I'm willing to bet some people with criminal
records are willing to work for less than someone with the same
qualifications and a clean record.
austenallred - 6 hours ago
Hmm, so moneyball/arbitrage based on criminal history?That's
interesting; would be curious to hear if there's another side
of the story as well.
mst - 6 hours ago
Also, given employee churn and training costs are a thing -
if ex-con workers are more likely to stay because it's harder
for them to get a job elsewhere, you're more likely to keep
the better ones.Whether/how the math works there I dunno, it
just occurred to me as another possible factor.
dodgycrooks - 5 hours ago
Can you filter candididates by the type of crime they did?I'd be
fine with hiring people previously incarcerated for drugs offenses
and other minor crimes.However, there's no way I'm hiring any
rapists or pedophiles, or other such scum.
sharemywin - 6 hours ago
seems like a lot of what you'll need to do is on the employer
education. please excuse my ignorance, I hope their not offensive,
I'm just trying to help.1. is there any extra liability for the
employer if they knowingly hire someone formerly incarcerated and
they commit a crime while working for them.2. aren't some kind of
tax credits for hiring formerly incarcerated incarcerated people.3.
is it only w2 or do you allow 1099 opportunities.
darrenf - 6 hours ago
In the UK, Timpson[0] are a well known example of a national
employer not only willing to hire ex-offenders but one that does so
proudly, and indeed offer training to prisoners before they are
even released. They have tried to convince other companies to
follow their lead but with limited success. That said, we also have
Clean Sheet[1] through which employers can expressly publicise
their willingness to employ ex-offenders.I find it extremely
admirable. Best of luck with your approach.[0] See for example this
archived blog post:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150222003545/http://www.timpso... or
a search for "Timpson ex-offenders"
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=timpson+ex-offenders[1]
http://cleansheet.org.uk/
coetry - 3 hours ago
The work that you are doing warms my heart and I wish you the best
of growth and prosperity.
artur_makly - 4 hours ago
for branding, i would consider not using a fixed # in the name - as
that will fluctuate. instead consider the spirit of the idea :
perhaps "SecondChances.io" or better.. keep up the good work!
lbhnact - 6 hours ago
Just want to add support. One of my childhood friends has a felony
from when he was an overly-rambunctious teenager that he still gets
punished for - including being kicked off AirBnB - for something he
stole more than 20 years ago. Despite this, he's a very successful
leader in mental health services management.So many people deserve
a chance to redeem themselves from being 'branded', yet are denied
the exact opportunities that would allow them to do so. This
problem goes back a long, long ways.[1]Anything you can do to help
is great. Best of luck![1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branded_Man
xenadu02 - 4 hours ago
Unfortunately some states (eg: Texas) don't allow you to expunge
a felony no matter how long ago it was. My sister-in-law's HS
boyfriend was a criminal jerk and she got caught up and charged
as an accessory for something stupid (theft IIRC). She fully
admits she was rebelling by going after a bad-boy. She had a
public defender who met with her once and told her to take the
deal to get probation. Unfortunately the plea was for a
felony.It's been 20 years, she's married to a good guy and has a
baby... yet that black mark still comes up on her record.
jsmthrowaway - 4 hours ago
Arizona, too, and you?ll find that?s common in tough-on-crime
red states. I can petition to have mine ?set aside,? but it
sticks. I?m fortunate enough to have a great career in the
Valley, but it comes up all the time as the upthread comment
pointed out.We are looking into gubernatorial pardon (Arizona
has a decent process) but not holding my breath.
ryandrake - 3 hours ago
This is a pretty common American attitude found in many "non
red" states as well: As soon as someone commits a crime--any
crime and just once--they become a criminal. It's as if their
species permanently changed from human to something else.
They're not a human that made a bad decision, they are an
"other". Since this new thing they have become is not human,
all kinds of inhumane and terrible things can be done to them
and justified, including permanent removal of rights,
brutalization and rape in prison, permanent loss of
employability and access to normal livelihood. All of these
things are seen as OK because it's a criminal we're talking
about, not an actual person.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
I will surely look into this. Thanks for sharing.
justadeveloper2 - 5 hours ago
As someone who broke a whole lot of laws in his late teens and
got off pretty easy for all of it, I wholeheartedly agree. They
could have thrown the book at me but they didn't. Also, it helps
if you don't confess to anything and hire a good attorney even if
you end up taking a plea.Let's face it, America sucks in a ton of
ways and the biggest crooks are bankers and people in finance--
they stole billions and got away with it over and over again. So
nothing else quite compares except maybe whatever goes on with
the CIA and drugs.
pm90 - 4 hours ago
While I agree there are bigger crooks who go unpunished, the
solution is not to let the smaller crooks go free, but to also
catch the bigger ones. BTW just to be clear, I'm not advocating
harsher punishment, just equal punishment.
jaclaz - 4 hours ago
The issue is not with the severity of punishment, it is with
the continuity of punishment.This is from G.K.Chesterton,
around 1907, "The Perpetuation of Punishment":https://books.g
oogle.it/books?id=QtWvMclbR9YC&pg=PA504H7CQ#v...
Unbeliever69 - 28 minutes ago
Bravo.The REAL problem, however, is the quality of jobs available
to felons. If this board is filled with nothing more than labor and
call-center jobs then, you've only solved part of the problem. The
true goal is to connect felons with sympathetic employers in ALL
manner of jobs. There is nothing like a felony to destroy a
person's sense of self-worth and the system is completely rigged
against a felon. This is bigger than a technological problem. It is
a problem of humanity and forgiveness.
glitcher - 3 hours ago
Testing out the Job Search functionality, there seems to be some
room for improvement for returning more relevant results first.
Doing a quick test against a keyword search for "developer", I
would much rather see all results with developer in the job title
first. Instead seeing a lot of top results that are not relevant,
some which I can't find a form of the word "develop" anywhere in
the full job description, much less the job title.Great concept and
great start!
RBBronson123 - 2 hours ago
Yeah, the job search functionality needs lots of work. Like
pretty much all job boards, we engage in scraping of other sites
(along with our own jobs). While we try to filter based on
geography, job type and "second-chance friendly," we get results
that don't conform. Like you, I see all that needs improvement,
and promise to make it much better. Please make sure to check in
periodically and share what we can be doing better.
iagooar - 6 hours ago
Love what you are doing. This is the kind of startup I love to see
being pushed forward.With lower entry barriers for tech startups,
one would expect to see more startups that fight for a better
world, instead of startups who fight for selling your data faster,
or detecting your face better to overlay a duckface on top of
it.This is why seeing a startup like yours makes me hopeful.Wish
you best of luck!
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Thanks so much for your kind words! I appreciate it.
always_learning - 6 hours ago
Minor things like small drug offences etc. fine but major crimes?
No.
TallGuyShort - 4 hours ago
So are you of the opinion that people who commit major crimes
should just be unemployed for life, and no effort should be made
to cater to their job search? You don't realize that's a recipe
for virtually guaranteed repeat offenders?
RonanTheGrey - 4 hours ago
There will always be a segment of society that were bullied as
kids and get their rocks off being as cruel as possible to
those they believe deserve it.People like that are not part of
this conversation.
rhencke - 3 hours ago
But, the comment you addressed is talking about people who
commit major crimes.That is not the same group you are
referring to.
efficax - 6 hours ago
p.s. it's a safe haven.
dang - 6 hours ago
Ah yes. Typo fixed. Thanks!
angersock - 6 hours ago
This is really cool, and I hope that your platform takes off! The
SMS integration for texting is also a nice touch. :)One thing I
wonder about is if folks in our industry would be more willing to
have an felon of some variety working with them than somebody who's
been tarred with the racist/sexist/conservative label?
banned1 - 4 hours ago
Same question I had! Likely answer is YES (at least on HN boards
and opinions to drive appearances, maybe not hiring for real).
dalbasal - 5 hours ago
Important (and inglorious) work. I wish you the best Richard,
genuinely.
tatotato - 23 minutes ago
Goodness! This seems like an amazing opportunity - I have charges
that will never go away under New Zealand's Clean Slate Act for
buying from Silk Road when I was 17 years of age. This is truly
progressive.
sagivo - 6 hours ago
happy to see you made it to YC, good luck!
RBBronson123 - 5 hours ago
thank you The YC experience has been great and everyone's been
very supportive
ictoan - 6 hours ago
Hi Richard, great idea. I'm a UX designer and want to throw out
some suggestions on how to improve the experience of the
site.First, use more cheerful/positive messages/visuals. It was a
joykill when I checked out your website and there's a sad guy
placing his hand on the forehead. Show what's possible. How
successful people can be once they get a job.. rather than their
current state (unemployment). Don't focus on the current stat,
focus on the future desirable state.Also, you need to put more
focus on the jobs. List featured jobs to draw people in. Just list
some jobs below the search. This will engage the user to explore
the site.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
You are so right on all your comments. Soon we'll be re-doing the
entire site. Perhaps we can talk in several weeks?
iandanforth - 5 hours ago
I'd add that framing the hiring decision as charity ("giving
someone a second chance") could be improved. I'd go for more of
a "diamond in the rough" angle."Find talent everyone else is
missing."
rewrew - 2 hours ago
This should be the site's tagline!
wavefunction - 4 hours ago
Fantastic suggestions for these folks!
RBBronson123 - 3 hours ago
agreed!
Unbeliever69 - 22 minutes ago
Absolutely, I think many people would be surprised about the
quantity of highly-educated, high-experienced, highly-
talented felons there are in our society that are exactly
just that, "Diamonds in the rough."
dayve - 5 hours ago
In line with that, I think you could also put up a blog section
for testimonials, in the near future. IMHO, People need to read
stories of how 70million Jobs has helped successful candidates,
as that will build confidence in the system.
xenadu02 - 5 hours ago
I'd also get testimonials from employers too: "70MillionJobs
helped us XYZ"
lostlogin - 4 hours ago
In line with advertising success of employers, do any
states off employers incentives to hire convicted felons?
Tax breaks or similar? If so, advertising this advantage
may help. This approach is used by some governments but I'm
unfamiliar with what happens in the US, and have really
only seen depressing stories previously. Edit: tax breaks
are mentioned, found it. It's attractive to employers so
it's good it's there.
Mz - 4 hours ago
In addition to the above great ideas, here are some stats for
you:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-
checker/wp/2015/04/...The US has about 4.4 percent of the global
population and about 22 percent of the global prison
population.The numbers are more startling using a different
measure in the report: the prison population rate. Criminologists
say this is a reliable way to compare incarceration practices
between countries.The United States had the highest prison
population rate in the world, at 716 per 100,000 people. More
than half of the countries and territories had rates below 150
per 100,000. The United States had a much higher rate compared to
other developed countries: about six times Canada?s rate, between
six to nine times Western European countries, and between two to
10 times Northern European countries.So, I will suggest you work
hard to frame it as "Many American citizens have a criminal
record for the crime of being an American citizen. The system is
broken and many people with criminal records really don't deserve
to have them at all."In other words, don't tell them "give a
criminal a second chance." Tell them that many people with
criminal records simply shouldn't have them and you are making a
terrible mistake to hold that against them, both in practical
terms by cutting out talent from the hiring pool for specious
reasons, and in moral terms because you are denying someone an
opportunity to recover from having been shafted by a broken
system to begin with.FYI: I'm a copywriter by trade.
will_brown - 3 hours ago
>In other words, don't tell them "give a criminal a second
chance." Tell them that many people with criminal records
simply shouldn't have them...That's a very interesting
approach, but I believe a hard sell to potential employer. As
true as it may be, an employer is more likely to appreciate the
individual who says this is my background, this is what I
learned and this is my vision of my own future...rather than,
it's not my fault, I'm a societal statistic.In fact, despite
the ideas of US prison overcrowding and for profit drive
conviction rates...I'd argue the opposite, that it's very
likely the employer has already hired individuals who have
committed various "crimes" and could but simply don't have
records.I know it's stance but all you need to do it look at
the number of reported crimes (serious, not victimless like
many would argue about drug possession) and the total prison
population.Example:prison population = ~ 2.2M inmatesEvery year
in the US 60,000 children are sexually abused; ~220,000 adults
sexually abused or raped; ~19,000 military members experience
unwanted sexual contact. [1]US prisons only seem over crowded
until you see the number of violent crimes in the country, it
basically works out to a sexual assault/rape every 90 seconds,
it's pretty disturbing.[1] https://www.rainn.org/statistics
/scope-problem
Mz - 2 hours ago
Suggesting that the website frame it that way in no way
suggests individuals should frame it that way. How an
individual frames it should be highly context dependent.As
long as they aren't an ongoing threat to anyone, they deserve
a job. In fact, having a job will make most of them less of a
threat to society. "I need my job" is an excellent reason to
behave. "The system has fucked me and it makes no difference
what I do, I remain fucked" is an excellent reason to quit
bothering to try.
webninja - 28 minutes ago
You can become a registered sex offender in many states after
a public urination citation. In my home state, you can get a
DUI as a 100% sober driver if your alcoholic girlfriend or
passenger brought an opened container of alcohol. It's
possible that the violent crimes are overly broad as well and
include things like "mean looks".
chris_wot - 3 hours ago
Not everyone in prison is there because of violent crime.
will_brown - 1 hours ago
Just because I believe the number of reported violent
crimes suggests our prison population is underpopulated,
doesn't mean I don't also believe the system may currently
be overpopulated with the wrong sorts.That's why I used
numbers for sex crimes only, but more broadly we have ~2.2M
inmates and 1.2M reported violent crimes per year, throwing
out all non violent offenders it would still be hard to
conclude our prisons are overfilled unless All cases had a
max sentence of 1 year.
Mz - 1 hours ago
From your original comment:In fact, despite the ideas of
US prison overcrowding and for profit drive conviction
rates...I'd argue the opposite, that it's very likely the
employer has already hired individuals who have committed
various "crimes" and could but simply don't have
records.So, basically, you think everyone is violent
criminal scum, and are happy to only discriminate against
the ones who have a record as violent criminal scum. Your
argument is broken no matter how I try to view it.See
also: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14913259
will_brown - 56 minutes ago
Based on anything I stated how do you conclude I "think
all criminals are violent scum"?I'm an attorney, have
defended people accused of crimes, and I too have a
criminal record, so please check your bias.What I wrote
is about a hypocritical practice that hiring managers
engage in (rejection out right) when the reality is other
employees they have hired and even themselves have
engaged in the same acts, they just don't have a record
as a result.Further, I suggest given the opportunity it
might be better to say "hey, I have a criminal record for
possession of marijuana, if you haven't personally
experimented, you probably know someone who has or even
voted for a President who has, Unfortunately I have a
record as a result and I feel I have to acknowledge it as
a courtesy to you" that might be more powerful than the
original suggestion of "it shouldn't have happened...".
But maybe I'm way off and such a suggestion some how
projects an opinion I believe all criminals as scum, but
I assure you I don't have such a low view of myself.
Mz - 28 minutes ago
I don't have any bias to check. I am basing my
conclusions on your remarks. Perhaps those conclusions
are inaccurate. But it is your framing that seems to come
from an assumption of guilt.This is neither accurate, nor
effective marketing.For some years, I was close to
someone who spent three years in prison for their
political activism and was questioned under torture. For
this reason, I am keenly aware that whenever a corrupt
government is overthrown, the first thing that happens is
all the prisoners are set free on the assumption that
they are political prisoners.An awful lot of Americans
are in jail for being "the wrong kind of people." I have
spent the last 5.5 years on the receiving end of
ridiculous, toxic classism and sexism. It has made me
keenly aware of the systemic forces that make it
impossible to become the "right kind of person" for an
awful lot of people whose only real crime was being born
at all.A) When the system is this fucked up, yes, society
needs to find an effective, constructive means to give
its victims a pass, a do-over, and let time sort out
which ones will make good use of a second chance and
which won't.B) Affirming their fundamental innocence is a
better marketing strategy than suggesting to employers
"your firm is already full of wolves in sheep's clothing,
so might as well hire more wolves."I don't have the link
handy, but I read a good piece by a white guy who talked
about his epiphany about racism and part of what he said
was that there were countless times in his youth that he
actually broke the law, was caught by the police and
basically told "Go home before you hurt yourself, son."
Had he been another color, he would have gone to jail for
what are merely youthful indiscretions for privileged
white males.It does not help to tell people he is just as
guilty as the colored people who got arrested. It is much
more effective to say they are just as innocent as him,
but got shafted. It makes them more trustworthy in the
eyes of most people and it is a more dignified treatment
of people whose dignity is one of the victims of their
crime of being born one of the wrong people.I hope that
makes some sense. I am not at my best at the moment.
dmoy - 2 hours ago
Even stronger - the majority of people in prison are not
there because of violent crime.
felon123 - 2 hours ago
How bout a separate site for those falsely accused of heinous
crimes without any evidence(like Brian banks)
nulagrithom - 6 hours ago
I went through an IT technical degree at a community college. Three
of my classmates were timing their graduation to the year their
felony fell off background checks.These guys spent 5 years grinding
it out at whatever shit job would hire them just to spend 2 more in
school + working with the hope of getting a simple rack & stack
job, all because of some mistake they made in their late
teens/early twenties. It was the exact same story 3 times, and all
involving drug offenses.It really gave me a different perspective
on the situation. I don't think these 3 people should've been
sidelined for 7 years. They could've been productive members of
society well before that. Keeping them out of the
skilled/professional workforce is painful.This could be a huge
untapped pool of candidates, as long as companies are willing to
take the risk. I hope it takes off.
RBBronson123 - 6 hours ago
Thank you for sharing that. It's a common story. Attitudes are
changing quickly, so I hold out hope. I very much appreciate your
support.
brooklyn_ashey - 58 minutes ago
It would be so great if attitudes were changing quickly in a
positive direction. In tech, it is still impossible to get your
first job after a career change as a woman, a person of color,
or a person over say 35. Many of these people fall into one or
all three of these categories. In addition to that, they have
this ridiculous other hurdle to clear, and tech is still trying
to figure out if women can do any technical work at all. It is
great that people are making resources like this-- and for
veterans, but I'm afraid that without penalties or major
financial advantages for companies supporting "equality" and
"diversity" it's gonna take longer than anyone actually has
before homelessness. i wish we could find a way to get
financial penalties/incentives for moral action to amplify the
voices of the marginalized in tech. Ideas? Any takers on a
partnership toward this? I'm fed up with companies not being
held to account on this score. I may have to join Rosie
O'Donnel's womens' party, since it seems it may take that kind
of measure.
civilian - 42 minutes ago
Tech is far less sexist and racist than you think it is. This
article isn't about tech specifically, but I think it does
demonstrate that if anyone, there is positive-sexism [ed: for
women] happening when it comes to recruitment in western
workplaces. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-
recruitment-tria...Right now the demographic make up of
companies don't match the population, that's true, but these
companies do tend to match the demographics of trained
programmers. The difference in demographics is from people
choosing not to enter tech. If you want to fix the problem,
work on training pipelines into tech.The best way to
summarize our different viewpoints is probably "Wanting
Equality of Opportunity vs. wanting Equality of Outcome".
And-- you assume that if the outcome of tech-demographics is
different than the population, then it must be due to
racism/sexism. There are other cultural and socio-economic
factors that influence the demographics of tech.
leesalminen - 36 minutes ago
> positive-sexismWhat does that even mean? Isn't all sexism
bad?
civilian - 30 minutes ago
Sexism in favor of the people we're talking about. So,
mainsteam thought views women as being the oppressed
ones, but the study shows that women tend to get hired at
a higher rate than men, simply by having a female
name.Another example of positive-racism-- being a white
dude visiting China, I got into night clubs without
paying. :-/ But cab drivers also consistently added
50-100% onto the fare.
leesalminen - 11 minutes ago
Maybe it'd be worded better as "reverse sexism"?Implying
that it's "positive" doesn't do any social justice but
incites the us vs them, 0 sum game train of thought.
[deleted]
Danihan - 2 hours ago
>Attitudes are changing quicklyAre they now? Tell me, which
political party is planning on decriminalizing drug offenses?
jstanley - 2 hours ago
Just because political parties haven't kept up doesn't mean
attitudes aren't changing quickly.In fact, if attitudes are
changing fast enough, you'd expect political parties to be
notably behind the curve.
Danihan - 1 hours ago
Only about 10% of people support legalizing harder drugs.
They will remain illegal, and people will continue getting
felonies.So... I don't believe that "these attitudes are
changing quickly."http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/drug
legalization2.png
raarts - 1 hours ago
Man, just admit your comment was snarky and be done with
it!
Danihan - 58 minutes ago
It's not snarky, it's just reality. These felonies in
question are either from violent crimes, which will
always be illegal and a stain on someone's record, or
from possessing hard drugs / selling drugs / or
committing crimes associated with the black market due to
the war on drugs. Obviously, from what I posted, the
harder drugs will likely always be illegal and most
people continue to support that.We aren't "making
progress" when 90% of people surveyed want to physically
put me in a cage for years for having a few hits of LSD
in my pocket, or for selling steroids to gym buddies.
RickS - 2 hours ago
In addition to being needlessly snarky, you're effectively
saying "progress doesn't count unless it goes all the
way".That's bullshit.Attitudes regarding whether people
should be jailed for substance abuse, and whether people are
permanently morally tarnished for same, are loosening over
time in the same way that gay rights, etc, have.Just because
it isn't the dem's top campaign promise doesn't mean it isn't
making progress.
Danihan - 1 hours ago
I didn't say it had to be all or nothing. I'm asking to
see ANY political progress towards decriminalizing drugs,
particularly drugs besides marijuana, which isn't the drug
that is generally causing these felony records.
__jal - 2 hours ago
Unnecessarily bitchy defeatism aside, the answer to your
question is the Democratic Party[1].[1] https://www.washingto
npost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/08/01/cory-...
briandear - 57 minutes ago
Republican Rand Paul.. http://reason.com/blog/2016/01/15
/rand-paul-says-pot-prohibi...Suggesting the Democrat party
wants to decriminalize drugs and drug offenses isn?t
entirely accurate. Some people in both parties would like
to see that happen.States with vast Democrat majorities
haven?t decriminalized drug offenses. Some states have to
some degree, but you have to ask, when Democrats has the
White House, House and Senate, they could have acted, but
didn?t ? even when they had a super-majority.My point isn?t
that Republicans are better, but the Democrat Party has had
chances, but they failed to act, so the parent comment is
correct ? no party is actually doing anything when given
the chance ? just a few isolated people.
Danihan - 1 hours ago
It's neither, just correcting misconceptions. It's tiring
to constantly hear people saying we're "making progress"
while we continue to perpetuate the same policy problems
that have obviously caused issues for decades and
decades.Correct me if I'm wrong but the bill you mentioned
only seems to deal with marijuana, which I don't think is
how most people get drug felonies.
Mtinie - 1 hours ago
It may not be most, but according to statistics[1] from
2015, marijuana accounted for 24% of the drug case
sentences. Reducing or eliminating these would be a major
step in the right direction and would in my book count as
"making progress".1 -
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-
and-pu... (top of page 9)
Danihan - 1 hours ago
Another tepid form of progress is fewer "mandatory
minimum" sentences, on page 8. That's nice to see at
least, thank you for the PDF.
jsmthrowaway - 22 minutes ago
> Correct me if I'm wrong but the bill you mentioned only
seems to deal with marijuana, which I don't think is how
most people get drug felonies.You'd be surprised. Lots of
weed? Cash? Baggies? Scale? Intent. Felony. Civil
forfeiture (State of California v. A bag of $25,000 in
cash). Go directly to Chino. Do not pass go.It's usually
the intent to distribute that ends people, and that does
happen a lot with marijuana. Simple possession is easier
to wiggle out of these days, depending on where you are
and if it isn't much. Over a half ounce of marijuana in
Virginia used to be a few years in prison (not sure if it
still is). I'm carrying over a half ounce on my person
right now and it'd be fine. Jurisdiction sucks.
zkms - 1 hours ago
This does not affect anyone who is affected by the
criminalisation of non-marijuana drugs. This is just a "the
drug war is fine, it just needs to have minor parameters
tweaked" law, not an end to drug criminalisation.
malandrew - 1 hours ago
With the immigration crackdowns by the Trump administration, we've
seen more and more stories about labor shortages in agricultural
jobs often performed by immigrants. The problem has reached the
point where wages have been increasing. Do those with criminal
records consider these jobs? Why or why not?I would imagine that
agricultural jobs would be low-risk for those types of employers
since those with criminal records are unlikely to be interacting
with customers or exposed to high value inventory. Both of which
are characteristics of a job that would give employers pause about
hiring someone with a criminal record.
Co_Reentry - 4 hours ago
Richard,Thanks for your effort in the reentry space! The struggle
for returning citizens is real and constant and I love seeing
things like this on HN. At one point I worked for a company
apploi.com that had a similar business model but targeting a
different demographic. I would love to share some things I learned
from that experience. I also started a similar venture
corestaffing.us that is hyper-focused on the Baltimore/Washington
area. Let me know if you are interested in chatting!