MUGSHOT

WhiteShoePrincess

14 years ago

I wouldn't think so. o_o

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6439812].message }}

KimW

14 years ago

Probably,most states have what they call "right to work" laws which are really "right to fire for any reason" laws.

Of course, you say pre-conviction, does that mean the person was found guilty?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6439929].message }}

markreed757

14 years ago

It amazes me the lengths employers are willing to go. I mean are people not allowed to make mistakes.

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6440001].message }}

KimW

14 years ago

Originally Posted by markreed757

It amazes me the lengths employers are willing to go. I mean are people not allowed to make mistakes.

Uh,define mistakes?

Smoking pot should be considered a mistake.
Selling crack should not.
Involuntary manslaughter should usually be a mistake.
Intentionally murdering someone is not.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6440073].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by KimW

Uh,define mistakes?

Smoking pot should be considered a mistake.
Selling crack should not.
Involuntary manslaughter should usually be a mistake.
Intentionally murdering someone is not.

SMOKING POT is usually not an issue. The rest, or selling pot IS

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442337].message }}

KimW

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

You have it BACKWARDS! MAN do you have that backwards! *****YOU***** want the employers to be FORCED to "make a mistake".

FORGET the right to work garbage, etc.... SEVERAL industries have a decency clause that insists that you tell them about felonies, etc... and there are OLD laws that have NOTHING to do with "right to work" that say an employer could fire you for misrepresentation or exclusion of such information.

In cases of trust, sales, publicity, etc... this IS relevant.

Steve

Steve, you are mixing apples and oranges. I didn't say "right to work" laws played any part in this,but I did say that they could have,there is a difference.
Say I found the president of the company was cheating on his wife and he found out I knew. He doesn't tell me he knows, but fearful I might say something he makes up a reason to fire me. He could say that business had dropped off. That's right to work law in effect,fire for any reason.

In the OP post,they had a reason,though I think it was extremely flimsy.

Originally Posted by seasoned

Wouldn't you like to NOT be forced to do business with a person that was into PONZIES, etc? When I was a kid, MOST jobs and MOST places accepted almost any decent person almost without question.

NOW, you could have been in the industry 2 decades, or more, clean cut, go in for a WHITE COLLAR job, and they check your credit, education, criminal record, and EVEN check you for drugs as often as every 6 months!!!!! INCREDIBLE! WHY? Because they are BURNED ALL THE TIE! I once got a job because the person I replaced was found to be a felon, drug dealer, and drug user! Everyone got a nice laugh out of THAT one!

BTW for as long as I have known, it was EIGHTEEN!!!!!! 21 is a special case ONLY for alcohol and a few other things. The federal government considers ANYONE 18 or over to no longer be a minor. In fact, they often consider 17.5 to not be a minor, for convictions.

Steve

I still think the juvie records were sealed at 21 and changed when legal age changed from 21 to 18,but I could be wrong, and honestly not important enough to look it up.

Originally Posted by seasoned

SMOKING POT is usually not an issue. The rest, or selling pot IS

Steve

I think that is exactly what I said.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442473].message }}

AprilCT 14 years ago

There really should be some way to fix this if she went as far as checking with an attorney that specialized in criminal matters. I have to agree that someone that made a bad mistake in their early years and straightened out their life thereafter should not be penalized for as long as they live. I think a lot of people probably do stupid things, and hopefully there is something that can be done.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442804].message }}

Kay King 14 years ago

Pre-convicted? So you mean "arrested and charged with a crime"???

Often it depends on what you are charged with. From a human resources point of view (not a legal opinion) if you are charged with a crime that could affect your employer you'd be terminated. (sex charges, embezzlement or theft, multiple DUI's or drugs, for example).

I've known two cases where a person charged was suspended without pay until the case was resolved. If verdict was "not guilty" or charges were dismissed, they were rehired though perhaps not in the same job they had before. In one case, the person was rehired in a lesser position after 18 months when charges were dropped without prosecution.

I doubt the mugshot is the problem - it was a public announcement you were charged with a crime and that's where the issue is.
- Thanks
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
https://www.pawsofwar.org/
2024 Patriot's Award for Service to Veterans
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6440117].message }}
seasoned 14 years ago

Originally Posted by markreed757

It amazes me the lengths employers are willing to go. I mean are people not allowed to make mistakes.

You have it BACKWARDS! MAN do you have that backwards! *****YOU***** want the employers to be FORCED to "make a mistake".

FORGET the right to work garbage, etc.... SEVERAL industries have a decency clause that insists that you tell them about felonies, etc... and there are OLD laws that have NOTHING to do with "right to work" that say an employer could fire you for misrepresentation or exclusion of such information.

In cases of trust, sales, publicity, etc... this IS relevant.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442299].message }}

MoneyMagnetMagnate

14 years ago

I was wondering the same thing as Kim - was he convicted? Or not?

There was a recent story also (Kim, will love this one) a lady who worked in the mortgages dept. of Bank of America was fired for a shoplifting conviction she got 40 years ago, when she was 18yrs old - she is 58 now - she had been working at the bank for aprox 5yrs and was an "exemplary" employee...

(and that "right to work" law is such a load of BS...)

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6440409].message }}

Kay King

14 years ago

Wrong - it was Wells Fargo that fired the woman and a few others.

Yolanda Quesada Fired From Wells Fargo For Shoplifting 40 Years Ago

Banks must be able to bond/insure employees and the laws usually prevent this in the case of a conviction no matter when it occurred.

Another example of the mudslide of new regulations that end up hurting people.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

https://www.pawsofwar.org/

2024 Patriot's Award for Service to Veterans

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6440489].message }}

MoneyMagnetMagnate

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Wrong - it was Wells Fargo that fired the woman and a few others.

Yolanda Quesada Fired From Wells Fargo For Shoplifting 40 Years Ago

Banks must be able to bond/insure employees and the laws usually prevent this in the case of a conviction no matter when it occurred.
Another example of the mudslide of new regulations that end up hurting people.

Sorry, Wells Fargo, you're right...I knew it was one of those guys...:rolleyes:
Either my mind is slipping...or I can't tell one bank from another these days!

Banks must be able to bond/insure employees and the laws usually prevent this in the case of a conviction no matter when it occurred.

Yet, Michael Milkin can wrangle and counsel on corporate trades and billion dollar real-estate deals all day long for huge fees, because he is a "consultant"? (and his 'word' is his 'bond' right? - in fact...I don't even think he is allowed to trade bonds anymore...:rolleyes

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6440804].message }}

KimW

14 years ago

Romney/obama; BOA/Wells Fargo, they are all the same.

Maybe I am missing it,but I can't find how long she worked there, but as far as it was ok to fire her because she was convicted of shoplifting that from the sounds of it,if it had happened months before would have been in juvie records and not made public.
Its one thing to make A mistake and another to have a lisst of mistakes.
This lady should have easily been able to be bonded.
The banks are just screwing with peoples lives.

Thanks

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6440955].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

I thought "juvie" records were erased at 21, not 18.

People better either get their butts off the couch and get the constitution back or accept this as the way things are. In fascism - you don't work unless "they" want you to work. Period.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6441294].message }}

KimW

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I thought "juvie" records were erased at 21, not 18.

People better either get their butts off the couch and get the constitution back or accept this as the way things are. In fascism - you don't work unless "they" want you to work. Period.

Sal, I think it was 21 when the age of bcoming a "legal adult" was 21,but I'm pretty sure that when it went to 18,so did the records.I could be wrong though. either way,is she did it at 18-20 and has no criminal record after that then its just plain ridiculous.

Thanks

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6441783].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

I thought "juvie" records were erased at 21, not 18.

People better either get their butts off the couch and get the constitution back or accept this as the way things are. In fascism - you don't work unless "they" want you to work. Period.

Wouldn't you like to NOT be forced to do business with a person that was into PONZIES, etc? When I was a kid, MOST jobs and MOST places accepted almost any decent person almost without question.

NOW, you could have been in the industry 2 decades, or more, clean cut, go in for a WHITE COLLAR job, and they check your credit, education, criminal record, and EVEN check you for drugs as often as every 6 months!!!!! INCREDIBLE! WHY? Because they are BURNED ALL THE TIE! I once got a job because the person I replaced was found to be a felon, drug dealer, and drug user! Everyone got a nice laugh out of THAT one!

BTW for as long as I have known, it was EIGHTEEN!!!!!! 21 is a special case ONLY for alcohol and a few other things. The federal government considers ANYONE 18 or over to no longer be a minor. In fact, they often consider 17.5 to not be a minor, for convictions.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442330].message }}

kenmichaels

14 years ago

correct me if i am wrong, but don't job applications have an area that
specifically asks if you have ever been convicted of a crime.

and if you say no, and it is really a yes, regardless of the length of time
its grounds for dismissal.. and it clearly states so in the application

its been a while since i had to fill one out, so i am not sure if that question is still in them
or not.

Thanks

Signature

Selling Ain't for Sissies!

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442189].message }}

KimW

14 years ago

Its been a while since I filled out an application too,and last I remembered it did have an area that asks,but it usually added that a yes did not disqualify you for a job.( course,that may have been just BS,who knows).

But unless I missed it, I didn't see in the article where it said that was what happened.
I would say lying in any part of an application would be grounds for dismissal,unless your a banker or a politician,in which case you get extra points.

Thanks

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442217].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Kimw,

Last I knew, you STILL needed a reason to fire someone. And firing someone because you are afraid they may say something is DUMB! What is then to stop them from doing so?

And HOW do you know what the OP said was flimsy? If I had such a thing, my options would be curtailed, and my employer might then fire me. Security clearance? NOPE! police record searches? NOPE! Access to sensitive data? Maybe not. That could mean my whole career, at least for most others, could be down the toilet!

Steve

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442873].message }}

KimW

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Kimw,

Last I knew, you STILL needed a reason to fire someone. And firing someone because you are afraid they may say something is DUMB! What is then to stop them from doing so?

And HOW do you know what the OP said was flimsy? If I had such a thing, my options would be curtailed, and my employer might then fire me. Security clearance? NOPE! police record searches? NOPE! Access to sensitive data? Maybe not. That could mean my whole career, at least for most others, could be down the toilet!

Steve

You lost me this time Steve.
Its late and I'm not going to bother looking it up,but there are many states that allow discharge without cause. And they almost all claim to be "right to work" states.
That was the point of my first post in this thread and that is still my point.
Now,I admit the example I made up was a bad one,but it was also to show the insanity of what they are allowed to do.

And I didn't say what the OP said was flimsy,I said the reason the lady got fired in the story the OP referenced was flimsy,and I stand by that statement too. If she had a history of criminal behavior,it wouldn't be flimsy,but a minor crime,and most of the time shoplifting is considered a minor crime unless its something of high value, 49 years ago is very flimsy.

We probably hung out with different crowds in our high school days Steve, but being dared to steal a pack of cigarettes or a 6 pack of beer was pretty normal when and where I grew up. That didn't mean we all grew up to be hardened criminals,it meant we were fairly normal teenagers trying to learn to be macho in the time period.

If everyone wanted to judge me by what I did 40 years ago,which by the way would put me right at 18 years old, then probably none of you would have anything to do with me.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442895].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by KimW

You lost me this time Steve.
Its late and I'm not going to bother looking it up,but there are many states that allow discharge without cause. And they almost all claim to be "right to work" states.
That was the point of my first post in this thread and that is still my point.
Now,I admit the example I made up was a bad one,but it was also to show the insanity of what they are allowed to do.

And I didn't say what the OP said was flimsy,I said the reason the lady got fired in the story the OP referenced was flimsy,and I stand by that statement too. If she had a history of criminal behavior,it wouldn't be flimsy,but a minor crime,and most of the time shoplifting is considered a minor crime unless its something of high value, 49 years ago is very flimsy.

We probably hung out with different crowds in our high school days Steve, but being dared to steal a pack of cigarettes or a 6 pack of beer was pretty normal when and where I grew up. That didn't mean we all grew up to be hardened criminals,it meant we were fairly normal teenagers trying to learn to be macho in the time period.

If everyone wanted to judge me by what I did 40 years ago,which by the way would put me right at 18 years old, then probably none of you would have anything to do with me.

I wouldn't necessarily hire all my friends to do a given task. It would be based on the task.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6442912].message }}

Kay King

14 years ago

Kim - I think it said the woman worked at Wells Fargo for 5 years.

She was 18 when convicted - not juvie.

It's not mentioned how the question was answered on her application for employment - and I find that weird. Wondering if it's one of those pesky details that would harm the focus of the story which is "poor woman - bad bank".

Seems a bit silly to me if she has been law abiding for 40 years. However, I know a man who was fired after 14 years of employment as an engineer when it was discovered he had lied about his educational credentials when he applied for the job.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog

***

https://www.pawsofwar.org/

2024 Patriot's Award for Service to Veterans

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6443526].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Kim - I think it said the woman worked at Wells Fargo for 5 years.

She was 18 when convicted - not juvie.

It's not mentioned how the question was answered on her application for employment - and I find that weird. Wondering if it's one of those pesky details that would harm the focus of the story which is "poor woman - bad bank".

Seems a bit silly to me if she has been law abiding for 40 years. However, I know a man who was fired after 14 years of employment as an engineer when it was discovered he had lied about his educational credentials when he applied for the job.

I worked at two banks recently. Not saying which, but 2 of the biggest. BOTH had relatively minor things that could get you fired. They openly said so! BOTH had background checks. And yeah, the law SPECIFICALLY provides for termination if ANY lie is found in your resume. That includes education. That is interesting because i you have been doing a good job for decades WHO CARES where you learned it? STILL, it is considered material.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6444317].message }}

KimW

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kay King

Kim - I think it said the woman worked at Wells Fargo for 5 years.

She was 18 when convicted - not juvie.

It's not mentioned how the question was answered on her application for employment - and I find that weird. Wondering if it's one of those pesky details that would harm the focus of the story which is "poor woman - bad bank".

Seems a bit silly to me if she has been law abiding for 40 years. However, I know a man who was fired after 14 years of employment as an engineer when it was discovered he had lied about his educational credentials when he applied for the job.

Kay,
That is one of the main disputes with Steve and I right now.At least I think it is.
WHen becoming an adult was changed from 21 to 16,that is when I think the record being sealed changed from 21 to 18. To me ,its the only logical way of doing it. Take this: legal age of adulthood is 21. I a9 18 and commit a minor crime. According to the law I an not an adult yet(not 21) so I can only be tried as a juvie, if anyone else has a different way it would work I am all ears.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Read A Post.
Subscribe to a Newsletter
KimWinfrey.Com

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6444706].message }}

Kay King 14 years ago

I thought that depended on state laws. Don't know - didn't commit crimes as a juvie:p
- Thanks
- 2 replies
Signature

Saving one dog will not change the world - but the world changes forever for that one dog
***
https://www.pawsofwar.org/
2024 Patriot's Award for Service to Veterans
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6444763].message }}
- KimW 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  I thought that depended on state laws. Don't know - didn't commit crimes as a juvie:p
  
  You may be right,not an expert in that field.
  Drinking was not legal til you turned 21 when I grew up so I can't say I din't break any laws. Technically smoking cigarettes was not legal til 21,so there is another law I broke. Driving a car (by yourself) wasn't legal til you were 16, I broke another law. SO I did break a few laws.
  
  Even though,I didn't have a juvie record, But then back then we had police with a real sense of civil duty and the knowledge that beating with a club and giving a criminal record isnt always the best course of action.
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  Read A Post.
  Subscribe to a Newsletter
  KimWinfrey.Com
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6445664].message }}
- seasoned 14 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by Kay King
  
  I thought that depended on state laws. Don't know - didn't commit crimes as a juvie:p
  
  For crimes, I think it is federal. STILL, 18 is the highest for almost ANYTHING! The lowest could be like 15 r so, for marriage, etc... But 18 is the highest.
  
  Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6446509].message }}

Kurt

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Kimw,

Last I knew, you STILL needed a reason to fire someone. And firing someone because you are afraid they may say something is DUMB! What is then to stop them from doing so?

And HOW do you know what the OP said was flimsy? If I had such a thing, my options would be curtailed, and my employer might then fire me. Security clearance? NOPE! police record searches? NOPE! Access to sensitive data? Maybe not. That could mean my whole career, at least for most others, could be down the toilet!

Steve

WRONG!!! In most states (right to work states) you can be fired for NO REASON. However, you can't be fired for the WRONG reason. This is why if you're an employer in these states you should never say why a person was fired.

[ 1 ] Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6443590].message }}

MUGSHOT

Trending Topics

It's already mid January...

Is cheap tipping more than just bad manners...

Why scaling ads is harder than before (accounts vs creatives)

Nostalgia: Help me remember this internet marketer's name

How can I create effective prompts for generating product ad images with AI?