I appreciated Sheryl Jaffee Halpern’s On Topic article concerning the EEOC’s aggressive pursuit of some companies over the use of criminal conviction records in making hiring decisions (“EEOC: Using arrest or conviction records in hiring decisions requires caution,” Nov. 20). Ironically, two days earlier our court reporting company had also been advised by our labor counsel about the Commission’s doggedness on this matter in the face of repeated losses in court. As best I can tell from the article, the agency’s goal is to stop the use of screening results in hiring for positions that don’t have an obvious connection to the handling of money, sensitive documents, or other goods that are subject to theft. That is: Screen your cashiers but not your forklift operators.
So I was also struck by the November 25 article, “Six Flags Hit Hard By Verdict.” To recap, a guest of the theme park was attacked and beaten, apparently at random, outside the Six Flags entrance by four of the park’s employees. Oh, and these workers just happened to be gang members. No mention was made of the men’s criminal records, nor of Six Flags’ screening policies, but the irony of these two articles wasn’t lost on me: Ignore the EEOC’s warnings about the use of criminal background screening and risk the disruptions and legal fees attendant to being hauled into court at the whim of the agency; heed those warnings and risk the maiming of one of your customers and a $35M verdict against you.
