Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 30, 2024 Tue
Time: 3:19 am
Time: 3:19 am
Results for job discrimination
2 results foundAuthor: Agan, Amanda Title: Ban the Box, Criminal Records, and Statistical Discrimination: A Field Experiment Summary: "Ban-the-Box" (BTB) policies restrict employers from asking about applicants' criminal histories on job applications and are often presented as a means of reducing unemployment among black men, who disproportionately have criminal records. However, withholding information about criminal records could risk encouraging statistical discrimination: employers may make assumptions about criminality based on the applicant's race. To investigate this possibility as well as the effects of race and criminal records on employer callback rates, we sent approximately 15,000 fictitious online job applications to employers in New Jersey and New York City, in waves before and after each jurisdiction's adoption of BTB policies. Our causal effect estimates are based on a triple-differences design, which exploits the fact that many businesses' applications did not ask about records even before BTB and were thus unaffected by the law. Our results confirm that criminal records are a major barrier to employment, but they also support the concern that BTB policies encourage statistical discrimination on the basis of race. Overall, white applicants received 23% more callbacks than similar black applicants (38% more in New Jersey; 6% more in New York City; we also find that the white advantage is much larger in whiter neighborhoods). Employers that ask about criminal records are 62% more likely to call back an applicant if he has no record (45% in New Jersey; 78% in New York City) - an effect that BTB compliance necessarily eliminates. However, we find that the race gap in callbacks grows dramatically at the BTB-affected companies after the policy goes into effect. Before BTB, white applicants to BTB-affected employers received about 7% more callbacks than similar black applicants, but BTB increases this gap to 45%. Details: Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, School of Law, 2016. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: U of Michigan Law & Econ Research Paper No. 16-012 : Accessed June 28, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2795795 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2795795 Shelf Number: 139526 Keywords: Ban the BoxCriminal ConvictionsCriminal RecordsEx-offender EmploymentJob DiscriminationRacial Discrimination |
Author: Stacy, Christina Title: Ban the Box and Racial Discrimination: A Review of the Evidence and Policy Recommendations Summary: Ban-the-box policies, for which employers remove questions about criminal history from applications and delay background checks until later in the hiring process, have gained popularity in recent years. These policies are intended to give people with criminal histories the opportunity to display their qualifications in the hiring process before being assessed-and potentially rejected-based on this history. Over 150 cities and counties and 34 states and Washington, DC, have adopted ban-the-box policies (Doleac and Hansen 2016; Rodriguez and Avery 2016). Many private employers have also voluntarily adopted ban-the box-hiring policies, including Walmart, Target, the Home Depot, Bed Bath & Beyond, and Koch Industries Inc. These policies are also being applied outside the workforce context. Some universities have adopted a ban-the-box approach to school applications, and the District of Columbia's City Council recently approved a law banning the box from housing applications. Even some hospitals have voluntarily adopted ban-the-box laws (Thill, Abare, and Fox 2014). Research on ban the box has shown that it increases callback rates for people with criminal records (Agan and Starr 2016). Agan and Starr (2016) find that ban-the-box policies "effectively eliminate" the effect of having a criminal record on receiving a callback. Case studies from specific cities support these results, showing that hiring rates for people with criminal records increased after ban the box was implemented (Atkinson and Lockwood 2014; Berracasa et al. 2016). Additionally, ban the box as a social movement has drawn attention to the plight of people with criminal records and has increased awareness of the challenges they face beyond employment. But recent research has concluded that ban the box also reduces the likelihood that employers call back or hire young black and Latino men (Agan and Starr 2016; Doleac and Hansen 2016). These findings suggest that when information about a person's criminal history is not present, employers may make hiring decisions based on their perception of the likelihood that the applicant has a criminal history. Racism, harmful stereotypes, and disparities in contact with the justice system may heavily skew perceptions against young men of color. These results do not necessarily mean that ban the box should be eliminated. Additional policies, regulations, and alterations can ensure that ban the box improves employment outcomes for people with criminal histories without causing negative effects on people of color. In this report, we review the evidence on job access for people with criminal records, racial discrimination in the job market and justice system, and the history of ban the box. We also propose policy additions and alterations that may help eliminate the unintended consequences of ban the box on young black and Latino men while maintaining or improving the benefits for people with criminal records. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2017. 34p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 19, 2017 at: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/88366/ban_the_box_and_racial_discrimination_1.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/88366/ban_the_box_and_racial_discrimination_1.pdf Shelf Number: 145636 Keywords: Ban the BoxCriminal ConvictionsCriminal RecordsEx-offender EmploymentJob DiscriminationRacial Discrimination |