DOB2RTO wrote:Felonies did not disqualify applicants before, but now that seems to have change. There was a B/O NOE last year and it said felonies will disqualify you. These jobs are safety sensitive, and I guess fear of lawsuits from hiring a felon who attacks a customer, or fellow employee had this come into effect. As others said, just come clean, and see what happens.
[SOAPBOX MODE ON] So I guess that someone who bounced a $51 check in NJ 20 years ago would be disqualified... I only bring this up because NJ law 20 years ago had the crossover from disorderly persons offense to felony at $50.00 (now it is at a WHOPPING $200.00).
I know an employer(a major telecom company) that actually FIRED an employee I once worked with that had 25 years of unblemished service because they did a random background check on her, and 21 years ago she plead guilty to bouncing a $55 check (at the time a felony in NJ) (it was by accident, but it was much cheaper for her to plead guilty and pay a $50 fine than to spend $10K for a lawyer to have a trial). The HR people were steadfast in thier rule about criminal records (Oh, and by the way, she was charged even though she made good on the check as soon as she found out about the error. NJ law states that if the check is on a closed account (she used an old checkbook by mistake) even if you make good on the check, you are STILL Guilty!!!).
It Irks me when bureaucrats can't use good judgement when making hire/fire decisions, but instead follow a rulebook to the letter...
I could see using a felony against someone if it was something like armed robbery or rape or attempted murder, but using the broad term of ANY felony (which in many states (like the above case) can be a relatively minor offence) as disqualifier is just STUPID!!! [SOAPBOX MODE OFF]