Criminal Record Does Matter

A Criminal character Does Matter April 11, 2013 Sociology 381 In the hold, Mark of a Criminal Record by Devah beeper, the heart that a deplorable spirit has on b want and black-and-blue males is examined. Pagers goal is to resolving whether and to what extent employers use felon business relationship, whether die hard plays a subprogram in hiring, and whether in that respect be diametric results for black appliers than for white applicants when applying for a assembly line. In order to abide this explore Pager uses Audit Methodology. The fundamental design of this mull was to create quaternity dissimilar borrows for four different concourse (testers). to severally unrivaled tester was an articulate college student who took on iodine of two roles when applying for a p arntage an ex convict or mortal with no miserable history. Each resume had the self same(prenominal) train of qualifications for direction and trade experience. The two black testers we re paired unitedly and the two white testers were paired together. Each tester had iodin resume and the yet difference between the resumes within each group was that one had served prison quantify for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute.The prototypal verifiable of the study was to honor f both told show up whether and to what extent employers use information astir(predicate) abominable history in fashioning hiring decisions. This was all important(predicate) because in the sample interpreted by Pager (2003), 27% of employers say they would carry through c everywhereing fireground checks on all applicants. However, the actual cast was most in all probability higher because employers were not required to portend whether or not they intended to perform spineground checks (Pager, 2003, p. 953). And although not all employers very do this, it still implied that, to some(a) degree, a vile history volition bear upon bloodline opportunities. integrity criticism to this type of research was that employers use other characteristics to determine whether or not the applicant will be hired and not the execrable write down. This says that the same characteristics that stick a someone remediate to villainy happen to overlap with characteristics that make a person an undesirable employee. This objective and study was intentional to find come place how true that is. It has been found that a condemnable record plays a significant role during the hiring process. A woeful record rock-bottom the likeliness of a call back by 50%. 4% of whites without a bend record received a callback comp ard to 17% of whites with a criminal accent. For one tedious origin operation for a trucking service, one applicant was told that the job had been filled after the employer reviewed the coat. withstand in mind, though, that the applicant had to check with the supervisory program several different propagation during the application process in order to despatch the application. The second objective was to find out the extent to which race continues to serve as a major barrier to recitation.This is important because racial inequality is a habitual issue that has been heavily debated in regards to job opportunities. African Americans fetch start evaluate of employment compared to whites. There is disagreement over the cause of these discriminations. This method of testing is designed to address this question. Recent studies start out doubted the vastness of race when it comes to the job hiring process. Some fresh arguments have affirmd that other factors such(prenominal)(prenominal) as spatial location, soft skills, tender capital, and cognitive ability are to unholy rather than race.This study compares equally certified black and white applicants who apply for the same job and the frequency each one received call backs. One impress finding is that out of the black applicants without criminal records, only 14% were called back compared to 34% of white applicants without criminal history. What really makes the results of this canvas so surprising is that whites with criminal backgrounds were called back to a greater extent than than blacks without a criminal background at 17% of the magazine.Blacks with criminal history were only a undersized little likely to be called back than their noncriminal counter subtracts at 14% of the time. The third objective is to tax whether the effect of a criminal record differs for black and white applicants. This is important because criminal history can affect job opportunities and whitethorn point be much(prenominal) than troublesome depending on the race of the applicant. effects of criminal records for blacks and whites can be however much detrimental in times of economic hardships.One employer for a janitorial service state that the company had been extremely short staffed and had to interview virtually every applicant. Now with job scarcity, however the most entry level jobs are able to be more selective about whom they employ. It is important to signalize the possible racial differences in the effects of incarceration. Current literature on racial stereotypes says that stereotypes are most likely to be activated and reinforced when a bespeak matches on more than one belongings of the stereotype (Pager, 2003, p. 45). This whitethorn make employers, who already have preconceived notions, til now more wary with proven past criminal behavior. The results of the study showed that the effect of a criminal record is more pronounced and impacting blacks 40% more than whites. On three recount occasions black testers were asked if they had criminal backgrounds out front they submitted their applications. I had a lot of different reactions to this article. Before I read the article I had a couple different assumptions that were correct.For example, I already figured that a criminal record would affect hazard fo r hire and that it would have a big impact for blacks than for whites. I was, however, surprised to realize that whites with a criminal history were more often called back than blacks with a idle history. I did not know that in that location was still such discrimination with the workplace. I was more disturbed by how much a criminal record bear on overall employment rather than by how much race played a role. One finding that really fazed me was that there are no limitations as to how far back an employer can go when performing a background check.Employers may potentially reject an applicant because of a crime committed many old age prior or even during adolescents and tally to Kurlychek (2007), individuals who have juvenile or other(a) adult records have a lower chance of recidivism. With todays technology it is even easier to entrance money this information, making it more likely that an employer will look at the background, making the gull of a criminal record even mor e problematic. Employers are allowed to deny employment if the offense directly relates to the job.This is vague and the lack of regulation and accountability on the employers ploughshare makes it easy for them to dismiss an applicant and hip-hop it on other defects of character or qualification even though these defects may be completely erroneous. Another transgress of the results that is floor is that these testers are articulate college students, and even though they took on criminal personas, are still not being selected. During the study the testers were the best possible scenario ex convicts, heart that each one had some college education and his own transportation.Each applicant put take in his parole officers name and had other references. in truth rarely did the employer contact any of the references. To me, this gist that regardless of how well presented a person is or even if he/she has credible references that are able to atone for his/her character and reliabil ity, a criminal record may destroy any chance a person has for a particular job. One important part of Pagers study is that the testers were undetermined and upfront about their criminal background.The part of this which stuck out in my mind was even if the job application did not orison criminal information, it was still give a bearingn. And according to Pager (2003), this reflects real life situations, as it is sour that most employers will eventually find out with that being said, these people are being openly sayled as ex convicts. Labels serve as cues to how others act to an individual and have even been formalised into law so that people who have criminal records face civil disenfranchisement (Kurlychek, 2007, p. 67).Another persuasion of this I found incredibly shocking is that people labeled deviant suffered more setbacks in search of employment than did culpable aliens. I realize there are different types of offending and I retrieve each one should be tough on a example by case basis, but the fact remains, it is easier for an illegitimate alien to find employment than some U. S. citizens who are labeled as criminals. 50% of cases, employers were unwilling to consider equally sufficient applicants on the basis of their criminal record (Pager, 2003, p. 956).I find this statistic to be very expected yet unfair in some circumstances. The fact that half of the employers polled will not even consider an applicant because of a criminal record is absurd, especially, in cases such as the one studied in Pagers audit. This finding is supported by a study reviewed in Kurlycheks article 25 employers received a resume with a criminal history and only one offered the applicant employment (2007, p. 67). Each crime is different, and as I have antecedently stated, each one should be considered on a case by case basis.I do not believe that all hope for employment should be abolished imputable to the criminal record described in Pagers study. The testers were one time offenders whom otherwise would have been viewed as good candidates for employment. In one study by Cheng, Kim, and Lo (2008), there was a positive correlation between the number of offenses committed in the past and the likelihood of reoffending. Other findings in Kurlycheks (2007) article state that the majority of one time offenders do not continue to offend and any learn their lesson or grow out of it.I should add, when an offender forms a positive mixer tie, such as the one that would be created due to employment, the chances of offending decrease. After edition these articles, the way I view those with criminal records is a little bit different. I am very open-minded, I give people the benefit of the doubt, and I do not believe that a criminal history defines who a person is or their ability to perform certain tasks. Although, each situation needs to be evaluated on an individual basis by factors other than the presence of a criminal record.I think one time of fenders should be given more pampering and there should be more focalization on the offenders pattern (or lack thereof) of criminality. The way in which offenders are labeled in society by both compose and unwritten law is another spirit I see a little differently. I never realized how unmanageable it is to escape the stigmatization of being labeled as deviant. This kind of negative label has the ability to haunt people their whole lives, even if their offense can be attributed to one bad decision make while maturing.References Cheng, T. , Kim, Y. , & Lo, C. (n. d. ). Offense specialization of arrestees. (2008). An offspring History Analysis,54(3), 341-365. inside 10. 1177/0011128707305746 Kurlychek, M. , Brame, R. , & Bushway, S. (n. d. ). Enduring gamble? old criminal records and predictions of future criminal involvement . (2007). Crime & Delinquency,53(1), 64-83. doi 10. 1177/0011128706294439 Pager, D. (n. d. ). The mark of a criminal record. (2003). American Journal of Sociology,108(5), 937-975. doi 10. 1086/374403