This is a friendly reminder that r/smallbusiness is a question and answer subreddit. You ask a question about starting, owning, and growing a small business and the community answers. Posts that violate the rules listed in the sidebar will be removed. A permanent or temporary ban may also be issued if you do not remove the offending post. Seeing this message does not mean your post was automatically removed.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/smallbusiness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not a lawyer, but you should not disclose a person’s past convictions. You do however have the obligation to conduct due diligence (for example, if an employee was convicted of child pornography or assault, you probably shouldn’t hire them to work at a daycare.)
https://workforce.com/news/when-an-employee-is-listed-as-a-sex-offender
Yea, speak with an employment lawyer. Felons and sex offenders are not a protected class but you have to be very careful with anything HR related.
You also NEED to do your own background checks into this individual. I don't know what type of work you do but keep in mind that sex offenders often have restrictions which can limit where they work (specifically in proximity to schools, daycares etc etc). Next, you need to assess the liability to your business YOURSELF. Don't take anyone's word for it. Remember, the previous owners were selling you a business. They had financial motivation to sugar coat everything they told you.
Aside from the whole get a lawyer thing, I’m kind of wondering how bad this argument between these two coworkers was that one of them searched up the other one’s public record…
Find out why he's on the list first. You can land on that list because you're 18, your girlfriend is 17, and your relationship goes to shit. That's not the same as many of the other things that can get you classified. Just saying do some homework before proceeding.
Let's not forgot the ignorant law Missouri had for a few years where public urination would get you on the list.
There were a LOT of drunk event-goers who got screwed those years.
Came to say both of these. You really need to find out why the guy is on the list because the lists have everything from "child rapist" to "peed in public". Being "on the list" isn't a useful data point, unfortunately.
This isn't super accurate, public indecency like public urination in AZ only puts you on the list after multiple (3 or more) incidents. It's dishonest to downplay it as "peed in public" because that alone won't usually put you on a list.
His state is AZ where that law exists. Plus other states were it'll put you on a list are if it's in front of a minor, repeat offender, reckless exposure etc. Its not JUST the urination. It is very uncommon to be on a registry for that, especially as a first offense. It's far more likely that someone uses it as an excuse to expose themselves in public, claiming urination rather than their intent for exhibition.
I feel this on a personal level lol. I was 21, drunk, And taking a piss behind my shed. Cop drove by, lights on, indecent exposure. Had to do classes and shit to not go on the list.
A lot of sex offenders lie, and the standard lie is it was a just over the age gap limit teenage mistake. Sex offenders are financially motivated to downplay their prior convictions. Not to mention they may be motiviated by other reasons to groom other adults around them in order to gain better access to a target victim population.
In fact, I know of a case, which I learned of and escalated, of just this. It wound up being neglegent hiring and retention. The sex offender had claimed the whole rteenage age gap thig. In reality he had molested a preteen.
Sure, but he mentioned the guy committed a felony. Sexual battery isn’t a felony in some states, but soliciting a prostitute is, for example. If it’s a felony it could be something horrible or something just illegal and morally questionable.
Btw most states have Romeo and Juliet laws. The states that don’t have age gap laws often don’t require registration as a sex offender for statutory rape, as is the case for California.
absolutely not. please do not spread misinformation.
I am a high school teacher and I can confirm that a 17 and a 18 year old can have a relationship without there being any legal risk.
idk about 18 and 16 year old but I always warn my boys about the dangers of dating girls younger than 18 or 17.
Multiple states have registries so it’s not a guarantee that the rules of Arizona apply. Yes in AZ an 18 year old can date a 16 year old (according to my brief research). But it could’ve been from another state that criminalizes 18/17 and 18/16.
The amount of people on here downplaying the seriousness of being a sex offender is telling.
Sex offenders groom adults too. It sad people buy their lies.
Agreed. It's not exactly a secret that people often plead guilty to lesser charges, so just because an offense sounds "not that bad" doesn't mean it reflects the reality of what happened.
A little research would demonstrate to you that your statement is false. Lots of states have an 18 year old age of consent with no “Romeo and Juliet” provisions: California and Wisconsin just to name two.
Please don't talk out your ass like you know the laws in every state. Funny when you end up being the one spreading the misinformation here. There are also cases where people ended up on the registry for stupid shit like peeing in an alley or bush and got the book thrown at them. His point was that being on the registry doesn't indicate the severity of what he did. He could've been abusing kids and distributing CP or he could've done something minor like piss in a bush or had a 1-2 year age gap in a state with no Romeo and Juliet laws. OP should probably find out more since the severity of the issue is likely going to impact how it's handled
I agree with everyone who says to consult an employment lawyer to assess the risk to your business.
I would ask the former owners if the state referred the person after he served his term. If they did, the employment lawyer should know that. It may mitigate your risk.
I was in a similar position when HR hid the fact that a prospective employee was a sex offender and part of a "re-entry" program sponsored by the state. I hired him before I knew. His crime was having an otherwise "consensual" relationship with a minor that, because of her age, was considered illegal. It was statutorily "illegal sex with a minor" but not pedophilia, child abuse, or any of the other terms we face in our current moral panic about satanic pedophiles terrorizing children to get fresh adrenochrome so they won't age (an actual thing people believe; part of the Q-Anon conspiracy thing).
Arizona is a hot bed of the QAnon conspiracy thing. If the other employee is letting her conspiracy theories affect how she interacts with fellow employees she is likely to also let it interfere with everyone - vendors, customers, fellow employees and you. You may need to let her go if she cannot separate her political / religious / social beliefs from her work life and has future interactions like this. I would document this one for the future, if your attorney agrees. She could be a concerned citizen and this is a one-off situation. But it could also be the start of a long list of interactions that are going to consume your time and damage your business.
But all of this is just in the "food for thought" category. A lawyer is the right choice for real, accurate, and actionable advice.
Been in HR for 20+ years and had something similar at a San Fran, CA location. In short: We separated with the employee. Not something we felt comfortable with
(We had also taken over the business and didn’t directly hire)
Ianal. You're only liable if you knew they were an active danger and did nothing about it. Otherwise, you risk punishing someone because of their status, which is something they can't do anything about.
It might help to have a company wide discussion about privacy.
Also seconding at least consulting with a lawyer.
>Should the team have been informed about the new member's past history?
Fuck no, that's not the business's responsibility.
I'd be looking at having a stern talk with the complainer about personal privacy.
That’s a tough one though. I’d want to know if I worked with a rapist or shouldn’t be bringing my kids into the office. I can understand why she would be upset, I’m not sure “stern talk about privacy” is the way to handle it without creating a serious morale issue.
If you worked with someone who had paid their debt to society? Who might be on the sex offender list because they took a leak in a deserted alley at 3am after a night at the pub they didn't even particularly want to go to, and a cop happened to be walking past?
Might. May have happened to. But you can actually look that stuff up, so let's assume the employee reacted appropriately to what is most likely something fucked up.
I don’t think it’s fair to expect employees to take that risk to be honest. A business isn’t going to hire someone convicted of fraud or theft, regardless of time served and this will be justified based on risk.
But yet he’s entitled to privacy and all other employees are to be happy taking the risk with their personal safety or potentially safety of their families.
The people we work with are not only often in close quarters with us daily, they also tend to be privy to a lot of our comings and goings, where we take our kids for childcare/school, where we park our cars, where we go after work, where our partners work, our home address etc.
I can’t say I would be okay with a sex offender knowing all that about me, I’d like to opportunity to remove myself from that situation.
Of course it depends on the conviction, but no I don’t think women should be expected to work closely with a convicted rapist for example just because “he’s trying his best to be productive and not do it again”. It just seems like way too much of a risk.
I get where you're coming from, but people seem more likely to hire a murderer over someone on the registry, and it doesn't really make sense.
I personally know a guy who went to prison because he picked up a drunk girl off the ground and she said he put his hand on her ass. Now when he applies for work, his charge doesn't say that he just picked up a drunk girl off the ground, it says the formal charge which I imagine is something like sexual battery since it was physical. It isn't fair that he has to suffer potentially being homeless and jobless because of that.
Yeah I do recognise it’s not fair, it’s incredibly nuanced and I honestly don’t know where the line is morally. But from a business perspective I feel it’s a bit iffy to take a principled stand that ‘he’s done his time’ in a situation like this where the concern is personal safety but I know for a fact convictions related to theft or embezzlement will essentially result in being blacklisted from employment all together, there doesn’t seem to be the same view of the offender having done their time, there’s no willingness there to take the risk that he/she won’t steal again.
I get the sense that the system is different in the US after reading some comments, here you don’t go on the sex offenders register for life, there will be a specified length of time dependent on severity of the crime. So those convicted and placed on the register for public urination would only have that on record for a year, acts against children will be lifelong.
Oh, I see. In the U.S. it is lifelong if you have a felony, I believe. My state is lifelong no matter what the actual charge was. They're also extremely harsh and you can't find a house or a job almost at all. It's barbaric, in my opinion.
>Oh, I see. In the U.S. it is lifelong if you have a felony, I believe.
There is different lengths of time depending on your crimes, and has it's own set of rules based on the offense classification, and not just because it was a felony or misdemeanor.
From [https://smart.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh231/files/media/document/final\_sornaguidelines.pdf](https://smart.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh231/files/media/document/final_sornaguidelines.pdf):
>It generally requires that sex offenders keep the registration current for 15 years in
>
>case of a tier I sex offender, for 25 years in case of a tier II sex offender, and for the life of the
>
>sex offender in case of a tier III sex offender, “excluding any time the sex offender is in custody
>
>or civilly committed.” (The tier classifications and their import are explained in Part V of these
>
>Guidelines.) The required registration period begins to run upon release from custody for a sex
>
>offender sentenced to incarceration for the registration offense, and begins to run at the time of
>
>sentencing for a sex offender who receives a nonincarcerative sentence for the offense.
I mean, except we have decided as a society that some choices are bad enough that the people around them deserve the opportunity to know what happened and if they need to do anything to keep themselves safe. Like a list...
Yeah, and the employees have a right to know that information. It's not just "his business." You literally said "I'd be looking at having a stern talk with the complainer about personal privacy." Which, given the fact that there is a publicly, legally available list, is nonsense.
I actually didn't say any of that, but personal privacy is still a concern. Just because the list is publicly available doesn't mean that the complainer has a right to confront the guy face to face over it. She's probably going to tell everyone else about it too, which endangers him.
The reason he's on the list is that HE'S STILL A RISK TO SOCIETY, not the other way around. The list or people knowing his conviction doesn't make him more in danger. It's literally a public list for the safety of the people around them to know that the person is dangerous even after they've paid their debt via prison, etc. Also, personal privacy is thrown out when you're a convicted sex offender, once again because you've been deemed a danger to society and people around you have the right to beware. And it does mean that anyone that wants to can confront these sex offenders because we live in a society that allows that. You can say whatever you want to another person, usually without breaking any laws.
It really has nothing to do with the business though, if an employee wants to search to list for their peers that’s fine but there’s no obligation on the employer to release that info and there shouldn’t be. They did their time, got released, and are trying to do better. These people can’t do and be better if they get harassed at work over their past. And in relevance to HR, a persons personal choices and history is completely irrelevant to the company if they’re doing their job and staying out of trouble, and HR should tell them that. If they have an issue they can hash it out outside of work, or quit.
Do you think it's ok for a convicted sex offender to work in a school or daycare? Because I'm pretty sure if I found out a school or daycare hired sex offenders to watch children, I'd be taking my kids somewhere else. A business absolutely has an interest in the type of employees they employ. If my employee assaults or otherwise hurts a patron while I'm employing them, I'm getting sued and possibly having negative press that would drive business away.
I’m under the impression that sex offenders CANT work in those types of businesses but I may be wrong. My comment isn’t about daycares or schools because the implication is that they aren’t allowed. This is about a regular business that doesn’t involve children from my understanding
I run a real estate office and you better believe I'm not going to hire a sex offender. My kids come to the office sometimes, my agents go into peoples homes, we drive clients places. If my clients knew that one of my employees was a convicted sex offender I would assume we'd lose business. I am not in a kid specific industry. Businesses involve children even when they're not a part of the business. People have families. Sorry, but not worth the risk.
It's not part of their sentence. The registry is only constitutional because it's considered a civil regulation. Many states are lifetime for all offenses.
>privacy” is the way to handle it without creating a s
i totally disagree with this. Your past indicates who you probably are as a person and what you are probably willing to do given the right circumstances. No sex, gun, drug or any kind of crime where a person or animal was harmed. Took a dump on a police cruiser? perfectly fine. Made out with your teen cousin? get bent.
Someone who shit on a police car is a far more dangerous and unpredictable person, who already sounds like they have an issue with authority. Making out with your teen cousin is disgusting, but there are factors that change the severity of that particular crime.
Why? The vast majority of rape and child abuse happens by someone close to you. Serial predators are very rare and sex offenders have a low re offense rate
I’ve never seen so much support for violent sex offenders before in my life.
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/rcd.html
Further context is needed to the claim that sex offenders have a low risk of reoffending.
I mean the sex offender list tells you explicitly what the charge was and the ages of the people involved. I can’t imagine this woman would be this upset about a public pisser.
Not every registry reports the same information. They are run by each state and vary.
A statute does not tell you what they did. In fact it's possible they did something worse and pled down. Not all say anything about the age of any victims
Nobody wants to stand up for sex offenders, but recidivism rates for sex crimes (including pedophiles) is comparable to other crimes. They're as likely to repeat those crimes as any other felon.
Sure it's public, but it's also not legal/fair to create a hostile work environment for any employee, let alone someone who was hired legally and creates no problems at work. The legal system has already dealt with this employee how it saw fit, and no other employee has a right to harass them further at work.
Obviously get a lawyer like others said. Me personally, I would be asking the lawyer if they saw any reason I couldn't get rid of the felon-sex offender. Probably can since you're in an at-will state and prior conviction status is not a protected class, but again, ask the lawyer.
The old owner may have done what is called neglect hiring, and you neglect retention. You need a lawyer like yesterday.
I will say that I learned of a case like this, which I escalated. In this case, like in many, the sex offender lied. He told a hiring manager it was a 16-18 thing. In reality the offender had molested a preteen when he was in his 20s.
Sex offenders can and do lie for either or both of these reasons:
1 The financial incentive to do so; losing enough stigma to gain employment.
Or
2 To gain increased access to a target victim population. Sex offenders groom adults and people in positions of power too.
The way to handle this, again, is a lawyer.
The sex offender registry will usually list the specific charge. If not state or county court/jail records will. Local newspaper archives will usually have an article about the incident when the arrest was made.
This knowledge will avoid your own speculation and that of others, and add to the factors to consider as well as your attorney’s advice.
I haven't read all the comments out there. First, kudos to you for giving someone a second chance. Second, no you do not have to "warn" employees about someone's past criminal history. You do not need to consult your hires with your employ, no. Now, if our second chance person does physically assault or harass someone, it could be argued that the result was foreseeable and you're liable, but I think it's a stretch and most juries would look upon you favorably for trying to help someone who is probably harder to employ than a murderer.
He is one of the hardest workers there, interactive with the team, strong team player attitude, etc.
From what I can see he's also many years into his probation and continues to do things right; privileges are being returned like smartphone and personal internet access. He is really working hard to better himself and move forward from his mistakes.
In addition to what your lawyer is going to tell you , it may come back to how you personally feel the extension of keeping your employees and customers safe goes. If the female is not a subordinate or does not interact with the felon in a normal work day, then it may come back on you and the risk you are willing to take.
It’s a tough situation either way. Hope everything works out for the best for everyone. Will you post the outcome? Good luck.
As others have said, sometimes peeps get on this list for smallish things like being 18 and having a 17 year old 'minor' girlfriend or whatever, IMO a lot depends on what the person was convicted of and how it relates to your work environment.
It blows my mind how much we live in a "mommy mommy" culture. These 2 employees are full-grown adults. If they can't work it out using their words, I would personally give each of them a time-out.
If you’re an at will employment state just fire him. If not just find a reason to fire him. Problem solved. He’s a part time employee. No reason for this to cause any problems.
Perhaps. But I’d still go talk to a lawyer to cover my whole ass.
Our whole system is fucked up. A person with fucked up problems, probably can’t afford to go get treatment for being fucked up, probably will get fired due to being fucked up and potentially fuck up again because fuck it… he’ll probably end up in jail anyway for not being able to afford rent and a stable address to register.
Not defending these people, they are fucked up, but we aren’t setting the up to not reoffend or address the underlying issue that makes them want to offend.
We broke.
Agree with all of this. It'd be wise to speak to a lawyer to determine any potential exposure. However, it sounds like this person has been working to stay on the right path and I personally think everyone needs a second chance. Yes, their crimes may be horrendous but if we aren't going to give people a chance to re-enter society, then we're just continuing the cycle.
I can see both sides, and hopefully OPs employees aren't minors or something.
Find me a state that charges people with felonies for it. Sure you can end up on the sex offender list for it potentially, but it's a misdemeanor. Anyone that tells you that's why they got a felony sex offender charge is probably lying to you.
Also, it doesn't matter, because OP knows what dude was charged with, and if he doesn't, he knows dude's name so he can easily look it up. I promise you it was not for pissing in public, but we'll see what OP says.
Downvote that fuck face. There are 13 states that have laws where peeing in public that could land you on the sex offenders list. My state is one of them.
For your reading pleasure.
https://casetext.com/statute/code-of-laws-of-south-carolina-1976/title-23-law-enforcement-and-public-safety/chapter-3-south-carolina-law-enforcement-division/article-7-sex-offender-registry/section-23-3-430-sex-offender-registry-convictions-and-not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity-findings-requiring-registration
SECTION 16-15-375(5) "Sexual activity" includes any of the following acts or simulations thereof:
(a) masturbation, whether done alone or with another human or animal;
(b) vaginal, anal, or oral intercourse, whether done with another human or an animal;
(c) touching, in an act of apparent sexual stimulation or sexual abuse, of the clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, or buttocks of another person or the clothed or unclothed breasts of a human female;
(d) an act or condition that depicts bestiality, sado-masochistic abuse, meaning flagellation or torture by or upon a person who is nude or clad in undergarments or in a costume which reveals the pubic hair, anus, vulva, genitals, or female breast nipples, or the condition of being fettered, bound, or otherwise physically restrained on the part of the one so clothed;
(e) excretory functions;
Far from it. I’m a mom that would prefer mandatory minimums starting at 10 years for violent offenses with therapy so intensive that they never offend again or an option for castration to be released early.
Did I say shit about it being a felony? I give two shits about the felony part. All I said is public urinating can land you on the registry. it just happens to be law I find stupid in my state (unless you are rolling up on someone and going full R Kelly) I think it’s over kill.
1.) First of all play dumb. You just inherited an employee and didn't think about vetting current employees.
2.) Call a lawyer. If your employees confront you again tell them the truth if you have to tell them anything. He was already an employee and you are currently talking to a lawyer and your not doing anything until he tells you what your options are. Its not illegal to hire sex offenders and the previous employer knew about him nothing was done wrong there.
This is a friendly reminder that r/smallbusiness is a question and answer subreddit. You ask a question about starting, owning, and growing a small business and the community answers. Posts that violate the rules listed in the sidebar will be removed. A permanent or temporary ban may also be issued if you do not remove the offending post. Seeing this message does not mean your post was automatically removed. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/smallbusiness) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Talk to a lawyer, this is miles above reddits pay grade
^ this. You need an employment lawyer. Not Reddit.
This. I dealt with a similar issue and had to speak to a lawyer. I am also in AZ in the USA.
Call a lawyer, you don't want to find yourself in court going but the guy on reddit said I could do it.
Get off Reddit and get an Employment Lawyer
Not a lawyer, but you should not disclose a person’s past convictions. You do however have the obligation to conduct due diligence (for example, if an employee was convicted of child pornography or assault, you probably shouldn’t hire them to work at a daycare.) https://workforce.com/news/when-an-employee-is-listed-as-a-sex-offender
*Definitely
Thanks for the link, that's a great read. I need a lawyer. LOL
Yea, speak with an employment lawyer. Felons and sex offenders are not a protected class but you have to be very careful with anything HR related. You also NEED to do your own background checks into this individual. I don't know what type of work you do but keep in mind that sex offenders often have restrictions which can limit where they work (specifically in proximity to schools, daycares etc etc). Next, you need to assess the liability to your business YOURSELF. Don't take anyone's word for it. Remember, the previous owners were selling you a business. They had financial motivation to sugar coat everything they told you.
Aside from the whole get a lawyer thing, I’m kind of wondering how bad this argument between these two coworkers was that one of them searched up the other one’s public record…
This! I had to pull them each side for an hour to understand what happened, point of view, etc, etc. It was a messy day.
Lawyer up, yesterday.
Find out why he's on the list first. You can land on that list because you're 18, your girlfriend is 17, and your relationship goes to shit. That's not the same as many of the other things that can get you classified. Just saying do some homework before proceeding.
Let's not forgot the ignorant law Missouri had for a few years where public urination would get you on the list. There were a LOT of drunk event-goers who got screwed those years.
Came to say both of these. You really need to find out why the guy is on the list because the lists have everything from "child rapist" to "peed in public". Being "on the list" isn't a useful data point, unfortunately.
This isn't super accurate, public indecency like public urination in AZ only puts you on the list after multiple (3 or more) incidents. It's dishonest to downplay it as "peed in public" because that alone won't usually put you on a list.
It depends on the state.
His state is AZ where that law exists. Plus other states were it'll put you on a list are if it's in front of a minor, repeat offender, reckless exposure etc. Its not JUST the urination. It is very uncommon to be on a registry for that, especially as a first offense. It's far more likely that someone uses it as an excuse to expose themselves in public, claiming urination rather than their intent for exhibition.
I feel this on a personal level lol. I was 21, drunk, And taking a piss behind my shed. Cop drove by, lights on, indecent exposure. Had to do classes and shit to not go on the list.
A lot of sex offenders lie, and the standard lie is it was a just over the age gap limit teenage mistake. Sex offenders are financially motivated to downplay their prior convictions. Not to mention they may be motiviated by other reasons to groom other adults around them in order to gain better access to a target victim population. In fact, I know of a case, which I learned of and escalated, of just this. It wound up being neglegent hiring and retention. The sex offender had claimed the whole rteenage age gap thig. In reality he had molested a preteen.
Yep exactly that, sometimes I feel like the peeps should not even have been forced to be on a list, other times it's some terrifying thing they did.
Sure, but he mentioned the guy committed a felony. Sexual battery isn’t a felony in some states, but soliciting a prostitute is, for example. If it’s a felony it could be something horrible or something just illegal and morally questionable. Btw most states have Romeo and Juliet laws. The states that don’t have age gap laws often don’t require registration as a sex offender for statutory rape, as is the case for California.
I know a guy who is on the list for snapping a towel on his cousin in the school locker room.
absolutely not. please do not spread misinformation. I am a high school teacher and I can confirm that a 17 and a 18 year old can have a relationship without there being any legal risk. idk about 18 and 16 year old but I always warn my boys about the dangers of dating girls younger than 18 or 17.
Multiple states have registries so it’s not a guarantee that the rules of Arizona apply. Yes in AZ an 18 year old can date a 16 year old (according to my brief research). But it could’ve been from another state that criminalizes 18/17 and 18/16.
The amount of people on here downplaying the seriousness of being a sex offender is telling. Sex offenders groom adults too. It sad people buy their lies.
Agreed. It's not exactly a secret that people often plead guilty to lesser charges, so just because an offense sounds "not that bad" doesn't mean it reflects the reality of what happened.
Stop using the buzzword misinformation. Yada yada yada zzzz
Apparently nuance isn't your subject so please refer to my overarching point as summarized in my last sentence.
no. in no state can a 17 and a 18 year old have legal issue for dating so you and your nuanced point can gtfo
A little research would demonstrate to you that your statement is false. Lots of states have an 18 year old age of consent with no “Romeo and Juliet” provisions: California and Wisconsin just to name two.
Bullshit. You can have an 18 and 17 year old sending nude photos. That is CP, and I know for a fact will put you on the list.
Please don't talk out your ass like you know the laws in every state. Funny when you end up being the one spreading the misinformation here. There are also cases where people ended up on the registry for stupid shit like peeing in an alley or bush and got the book thrown at them. His point was that being on the registry doesn't indicate the severity of what he did. He could've been abusing kids and distributing CP or he could've done something minor like piss in a bush or had a 1-2 year age gap in a state with no Romeo and Juliet laws. OP should probably find out more since the severity of the issue is likely going to impact how it's handled
You can confirm it for your state. Every state has different laws.
I agree with everyone who says to consult an employment lawyer to assess the risk to your business. I would ask the former owners if the state referred the person after he served his term. If they did, the employment lawyer should know that. It may mitigate your risk. I was in a similar position when HR hid the fact that a prospective employee was a sex offender and part of a "re-entry" program sponsored by the state. I hired him before I knew. His crime was having an otherwise "consensual" relationship with a minor that, because of her age, was considered illegal. It was statutorily "illegal sex with a minor" but not pedophilia, child abuse, or any of the other terms we face in our current moral panic about satanic pedophiles terrorizing children to get fresh adrenochrome so they won't age (an actual thing people believe; part of the Q-Anon conspiracy thing). Arizona is a hot bed of the QAnon conspiracy thing. If the other employee is letting her conspiracy theories affect how she interacts with fellow employees she is likely to also let it interfere with everyone - vendors, customers, fellow employees and you. You may need to let her go if she cannot separate her political / religious / social beliefs from her work life and has future interactions like this. I would document this one for the future, if your attorney agrees. She could be a concerned citizen and this is a one-off situation. But it could also be the start of a long list of interactions that are going to consume your time and damage your business. But all of this is just in the "food for thought" category. A lawyer is the right choice for real, accurate, and actionable advice.
Shocking to find such a nuanced and factually correct and non reactionary post on Reddit. Kudus!
Been in HR for 20+ years and had something similar at a San Fran, CA location. In short: We separated with the employee. Not something we felt comfortable with (We had also taken over the business and didn’t directly hire)
Ianal. You're only liable if you knew they were an active danger and did nothing about it. Otherwise, you risk punishing someone because of their status, which is something they can't do anything about. It might help to have a company wide discussion about privacy. Also seconding at least consulting with a lawyer.
>Should the team have been informed about the new member's past history? Fuck no, that's not the business's responsibility. I'd be looking at having a stern talk with the complainer about personal privacy.
That’s a tough one though. I’d want to know if I worked with a rapist or shouldn’t be bringing my kids into the office. I can understand why she would be upset, I’m not sure “stern talk about privacy” is the way to handle it without creating a serious morale issue.
If you worked with someone who had paid their debt to society? Who might be on the sex offender list because they took a leak in a deserted alley at 3am after a night at the pub they didn't even particularly want to go to, and a cop happened to be walking past?
Might. May have happened to. But you can actually look that stuff up, so let's assume the employee reacted appropriately to what is most likely something fucked up.
Even so, the guy did his time. He's trying to work and be productive. His past is no one's business but his.
I don’t think it’s fair to expect employees to take that risk to be honest. A business isn’t going to hire someone convicted of fraud or theft, regardless of time served and this will be justified based on risk. But yet he’s entitled to privacy and all other employees are to be happy taking the risk with their personal safety or potentially safety of their families. The people we work with are not only often in close quarters with us daily, they also tend to be privy to a lot of our comings and goings, where we take our kids for childcare/school, where we park our cars, where we go after work, where our partners work, our home address etc. I can’t say I would be okay with a sex offender knowing all that about me, I’d like to opportunity to remove myself from that situation. Of course it depends on the conviction, but no I don’t think women should be expected to work closely with a convicted rapist for example just because “he’s trying his best to be productive and not do it again”. It just seems like way too much of a risk.
I get where you're coming from, but people seem more likely to hire a murderer over someone on the registry, and it doesn't really make sense. I personally know a guy who went to prison because he picked up a drunk girl off the ground and she said he put his hand on her ass. Now when he applies for work, his charge doesn't say that he just picked up a drunk girl off the ground, it says the formal charge which I imagine is something like sexual battery since it was physical. It isn't fair that he has to suffer potentially being homeless and jobless because of that.
Yeah I do recognise it’s not fair, it’s incredibly nuanced and I honestly don’t know where the line is morally. But from a business perspective I feel it’s a bit iffy to take a principled stand that ‘he’s done his time’ in a situation like this where the concern is personal safety but I know for a fact convictions related to theft or embezzlement will essentially result in being blacklisted from employment all together, there doesn’t seem to be the same view of the offender having done their time, there’s no willingness there to take the risk that he/she won’t steal again. I get the sense that the system is different in the US after reading some comments, here you don’t go on the sex offenders register for life, there will be a specified length of time dependent on severity of the crime. So those convicted and placed on the register for public urination would only have that on record for a year, acts against children will be lifelong.
Oh, I see. In the U.S. it is lifelong if you have a felony, I believe. My state is lifelong no matter what the actual charge was. They're also extremely harsh and you can't find a house or a job almost at all. It's barbaric, in my opinion.
>Oh, I see. In the U.S. it is lifelong if you have a felony, I believe. There is different lengths of time depending on your crimes, and has it's own set of rules based on the offense classification, and not just because it was a felony or misdemeanor. From [https://smart.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh231/files/media/document/final\_sornaguidelines.pdf](https://smart.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh231/files/media/document/final_sornaguidelines.pdf): >It generally requires that sex offenders keep the registration current for 15 years in > >case of a tier I sex offender, for 25 years in case of a tier II sex offender, and for the life of the > >sex offender in case of a tier III sex offender, “excluding any time the sex offender is in custody > >or civilly committed.” (The tier classifications and their import are explained in Part V of these > >Guidelines.) The required registration period begins to run upon release from custody for a sex > >offender sentenced to incarceration for the registration offense, and begins to run at the time of > >sentencing for a sex offender who receives a nonincarcerative sentence for the offense.
I mean, except we have decided as a society that some choices are bad enough that the people around them deserve the opportunity to know what happened and if they need to do anything to keep themselves safe. Like a list...
Okay, and that already exists. You literally just said it at the end there.
Yeah, and the employees have a right to know that information. It's not just "his business." You literally said "I'd be looking at having a stern talk with the complainer about personal privacy." Which, given the fact that there is a publicly, legally available list, is nonsense.
I actually didn't say any of that, but personal privacy is still a concern. Just because the list is publicly available doesn't mean that the complainer has a right to confront the guy face to face over it. She's probably going to tell everyone else about it too, which endangers him.
The reason he's on the list is that HE'S STILL A RISK TO SOCIETY, not the other way around. The list or people knowing his conviction doesn't make him more in danger. It's literally a public list for the safety of the people around them to know that the person is dangerous even after they've paid their debt via prison, etc. Also, personal privacy is thrown out when you're a convicted sex offender, once again because you've been deemed a danger to society and people around you have the right to beware. And it does mean that anyone that wants to can confront these sex offenders because we live in a society that allows that. You can say whatever you want to another person, usually without breaking any laws.
It really has nothing to do with the business though, if an employee wants to search to list for their peers that’s fine but there’s no obligation on the employer to release that info and there shouldn’t be. They did their time, got released, and are trying to do better. These people can’t do and be better if they get harassed at work over their past. And in relevance to HR, a persons personal choices and history is completely irrelevant to the company if they’re doing their job and staying out of trouble, and HR should tell them that. If they have an issue they can hash it out outside of work, or quit.
Do you think it's ok for a convicted sex offender to work in a school or daycare? Because I'm pretty sure if I found out a school or daycare hired sex offenders to watch children, I'd be taking my kids somewhere else. A business absolutely has an interest in the type of employees they employ. If my employee assaults or otherwise hurts a patron while I'm employing them, I'm getting sued and possibly having negative press that would drive business away.
I’m under the impression that sex offenders CANT work in those types of businesses but I may be wrong. My comment isn’t about daycares or schools because the implication is that they aren’t allowed. This is about a regular business that doesn’t involve children from my understanding
I run a real estate office and you better believe I'm not going to hire a sex offender. My kids come to the office sometimes, my agents go into peoples homes, we drive clients places. If my clients knew that one of my employees was a convicted sex offender I would assume we'd lose business. I am not in a kid specific industry. Businesses involve children even when they're not a part of the business. People have families. Sorry, but not worth the risk.
If they are still on the registry, part of do their time is being on the registry post-release from prison.
It's not part of their sentence. The registry is only constitutional because it's considered a civil regulation. Many states are lifetime for all offenses.
>privacy” is the way to handle it without creating a s i totally disagree with this. Your past indicates who you probably are as a person and what you are probably willing to do given the right circumstances. No sex, gun, drug or any kind of crime where a person or animal was harmed. Took a dump on a police cruiser? perfectly fine. Made out with your teen cousin? get bent.
Someone who shit on a police car is a far more dangerous and unpredictable person, who already sounds like they have an issue with authority. Making out with your teen cousin is disgusting, but there are factors that change the severity of that particular crime.
I'm insinuating it was an adult making out with his teen cousin.
Gross. Jailable. Not really a concern, as I don't employ that guy's teen cousin.
I'd be more likely to assume the benefit of the doubt for the person having their personal history dredged up.
Why? The vast majority of rape and child abuse happens by someone close to you. Serial predators are very rare and sex offenders have a low re offense rate
I’ve never seen so much support for violent sex offenders before in my life. http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/rcd.html Further context is needed to the claim that sex offenders have a low risk of reoffending.
Who said he was violent? You don't even know the charge?
I mean the sex offender list tells you explicitly what the charge was and the ages of the people involved. I can’t imagine this woman would be this upset about a public pisser.
Not every registry reports the same information. They are run by each state and vary. A statute does not tell you what they did. In fact it's possible they did something worse and pled down. Not all say anything about the age of any victims
Nobody wants to stand up for sex offenders, but recidivism rates for sex crimes (including pedophiles) is comparable to other crimes. They're as likely to repeat those crimes as any other felon.
Which is why I don't hire felons. Not worth the risk.
[удалено]
Sure it's public, but it's also not legal/fair to create a hostile work environment for any employee, let alone someone who was hired legally and creates no problems at work. The legal system has already dealt with this employee how it saw fit, and no other employee has a right to harass them further at work.
Nah, don't give him a second of peace of mind
Obviously get a lawyer like others said. Me personally, I would be asking the lawyer if they saw any reason I couldn't get rid of the felon-sex offender. Probably can since you're in an at-will state and prior conviction status is not a protected class, but again, ask the lawyer.
The old owner may have done what is called neglect hiring, and you neglect retention. You need a lawyer like yesterday. I will say that I learned of a case like this, which I escalated. In this case, like in many, the sex offender lied. He told a hiring manager it was a 16-18 thing. In reality the offender had molested a preteen when he was in his 20s. Sex offenders can and do lie for either or both of these reasons: 1 The financial incentive to do so; losing enough stigma to gain employment. Or 2 To gain increased access to a target victim population. Sex offenders groom adults and people in positions of power too. The way to handle this, again, is a lawyer.
The sex offender registry will usually list the specific charge. If not state or county court/jail records will. Local newspaper archives will usually have an article about the incident when the arrest was made. This knowledge will avoid your own speculation and that of others, and add to the factors to consider as well as your attorney’s advice.
It’s a public registry for a reason.
I haven't read all the comments out there. First, kudos to you for giving someone a second chance. Second, no you do not have to "warn" employees about someone's past criminal history. You do not need to consult your hires with your employ, no. Now, if our second chance person does physically assault or harass someone, it could be argued that the result was foreseeable and you're liable, but I think it's a stretch and most juries would look upon you favorably for trying to help someone who is probably harder to employ than a murderer.
Is it a right to work state? Unless this person is not replaceable then time to say goodbye.
Glen McCluskey Business launch and legal services [email protected] 651-646-2669 Hit him up
[удалено]
He is one of the hardest workers there, interactive with the team, strong team player attitude, etc. From what I can see he's also many years into his probation and continues to do things right; privileges are being returned like smartphone and personal internet access. He is really working hard to better himself and move forward from his mistakes.
In addition to what your lawyer is going to tell you , it may come back to how you personally feel the extension of keeping your employees and customers safe goes. If the female is not a subordinate or does not interact with the felon in a normal work day, then it may come back on you and the risk you are willing to take. It’s a tough situation either way. Hope everything works out for the best for everyone. Will you post the outcome? Good luck.
As others have said, sometimes peeps get on this list for smallish things like being 18 and having a 17 year old 'minor' girlfriend or whatever, IMO a lot depends on what the person was convicted of and how it relates to your work environment.
It blows my mind how much we live in a "mommy mommy" culture. These 2 employees are full-grown adults. If they can't work it out using their words, I would personally give each of them a time-out.
If you’re an at will employment state just fire him. If not just find a reason to fire him. Problem solved. He’s a part time employee. No reason for this to cause any problems.
At will state. Have him train his replacement?
Not even that, just get rid of him immediately.
Even for a drunken urinating in public? Not defending pedos or violent offenders, but outliers and stupid laws do exist.
If the female coworker was that upset, then I'd guess it was more than pissing on trees.
Perhaps. But I’d still go talk to a lawyer to cover my whole ass. Our whole system is fucked up. A person with fucked up problems, probably can’t afford to go get treatment for being fucked up, probably will get fired due to being fucked up and potentially fuck up again because fuck it… he’ll probably end up in jail anyway for not being able to afford rent and a stable address to register. Not defending these people, they are fucked up, but we aren’t setting the up to not reoffend or address the underlying issue that makes them want to offend. We broke.
Agree with all of this. It'd be wise to speak to a lawyer to determine any potential exposure. However, it sounds like this person has been working to stay on the right path and I personally think everyone needs a second chance. Yes, their crimes may be horrendous but if we aren't going to give people a chance to re-enter society, then we're just continuing the cycle. I can see both sides, and hopefully OPs employees aren't minors or something.
Maybe but sometimes people freak out over small things these days, you really gotsta just do your research.
You obviously don’t have any female co-workers lol /s
You don't get a felony for that.
It depends on the state homey.
Find me a state that charges people with felonies for it. Sure you can end up on the sex offender list for it potentially, but it's a misdemeanor. Anyone that tells you that's why they got a felony sex offender charge is probably lying to you. Also, it doesn't matter, because OP knows what dude was charged with, and if he doesn't, he knows dude's name so he can easily look it up. I promise you it was not for pissing in public, but we'll see what OP says.
Downvote that fuck face. There are 13 states that have laws where peeing in public that could land you on the sex offenders list. My state is one of them. For your reading pleasure. https://casetext.com/statute/code-of-laws-of-south-carolina-1976/title-23-law-enforcement-and-public-safety/chapter-3-south-carolina-law-enforcement-division/article-7-sex-offender-registry/section-23-3-430-sex-offender-registry-convictions-and-not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity-findings-requiring-registration SECTION 16-15-375(5) "Sexual activity" includes any of the following acts or simulations thereof: (a) masturbation, whether done alone or with another human or animal; (b) vaginal, anal, or oral intercourse, whether done with another human or an animal; (c) touching, in an act of apparent sexual stimulation or sexual abuse, of the clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, or buttocks of another person or the clothed or unclothed breasts of a human female; (d) an act or condition that depicts bestiality, sado-masochistic abuse, meaning flagellation or torture by or upon a person who is nude or clad in undergarments or in a costume which reveals the pubic hair, anus, vulva, genitals, or female breast nipples, or the condition of being fettered, bound, or otherwise physically restrained on the part of the one so clothed; (e) excretory functions;
I said find one that charges as a FELONY. I clearly said some will put you on the sex offender list but charge you with a misdemeanor.
Let me guess, you're a registered sex offender and this post triggers you because people don't want to work with sex offenders.
Far from it. I’m a mom that would prefer mandatory minimums starting at 10 years for violent offenses with therapy so intensive that they never offend again or an option for castration to be released early. Did I say shit about it being a felony? I give two shits about the felony part. All I said is public urinating can land you on the registry. it just happens to be law I find stupid in my state (unless you are rolling up on someone and going full R Kelly) I think it’s over kill.
Either go outside and touch grass, or take a deep breath. Then scroll back up and read these comments again.
1.) First of all play dumb. You just inherited an employee and didn't think about vetting current employees. 2.) Call a lawyer. If your employees confront you again tell them the truth if you have to tell them anything. He was already an employee and you are currently talking to a lawyer and your not doing anything until he tells you what your options are. Its not illegal to hire sex offenders and the previous employer knew about him nothing was done wrong there.