Banning the Box!

Sadly, Tiny is wrong again. The "box" will come off the initial application for city jobs. Big deal. No one was ever excluded from applying when the box was there. Applicants will still have to explain any convictions, even for traffic violation, before they are considered for hire. Tiny also mentions "welfare applications". Nothing is going to change there. GA is not a job, so the box stays. The CalWORKs forms are for federal programs, which require the information. Same for Food Stamps. If an applicant has a drug felony conviction, they are ineligible for cash aid from federal programs. For Food Stamps, if you have a felony conviction for possession as opposed to selling, you can get Food Stamps, IF you are in or have completed a Prop 36 program. I really don't see what Tiny's so happy about.

****Sadly, Tiny is wrong again. The "box" will come off the initial application for city jobs. Big deal. No one was ever excluded from applying when the box was there. Applicants will still have to explain any convictions, even for traffic violation, before they are considered for hire. Tiny also mentions "welfare applications". Nothing is going to change there. GA is not a job, so the box stays. The CalWORKs forms are for federal programs, which require the information. Same for Food Stamps. If an applicant has a drug felony conviction, they are ineligible for cash aid from federal programs. For Food Stamps, if you have a felony conviction for possession as opposed to selling, you can get Food Stamps, IF you are in or have completed a Prop 36 program. I really don't see what Tiny's so happy about.****
Yes, the box will come off. Also, in addition to the box (which is discriminatory, mostly in that it discourages people from applying for jobs w/ City/Co.) they will not be able to obtain that info until the applicant reaches the 'finalist' stage of the hiring process. This means that 1. Many people who apply will not unfairly have their privacy infringed upon, and 2. That when someone is qualified that we can be much more sure that they will not be discriminated against because of past convictions.
Also, part of our demands were that it be REQUIRED that an interview take place with the person, so that they may explain the past conviction(s).
Most importantly, this is part of a larger trend to revamp the way that we, as a society, view past convictions and how we treat formerly incarcerated people--being that they are a rapidly growing underclass--one way or another, this society will have to deal w/ the millions and millions of people w/ past convictions and we need to change the way we do business in this area. As it stands, their is discrimination (which acts as ongoing lifelong punishment) in every facet of re-entry, creating x-tra barriers to re-building one's life--and this is and will conktinue to chabge. This is a victory and we will move onto other bay area counties.
You are wrong about the food stamps, too. Right now, you can be barred from receiving food stamps, whether you've completed a program or not, but a bill is in the works that will allow for someone who has completed a program (doesn't have to be Prop 36) to be waived--another progressive change in the making. There is alot more happening on multiple fronts, in multiple states/counties---but I won't list it all as you apparently were here more to 'dis Tiny than to comment on the issues.

If you investigate the details, you'd see, that all applicants will have to disclose past convictions in the Finalist stage--but not until then..
That means that your fear based red hearing would not happen. Not to mention that this doesn't interfere w/ already existing legislative bars to employment (i.e. like the one that you mentioned.)