HRD forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Criminals welcome, but not long-term unemployed

Notify me of new replies via email
HC Online | 23 Oct 2012, 12:00 AM Agree 0
Would you rather hire someone with a criminal record, or a history of unemployment? It seems the latter scares HR more.
  • Dan | 23 Oct 2012, 03:27 PM Agree 0
    If your process allows the employment of a candidate who has spent time in jail, it typically indicates that the candidate's convicted fellony would not impact their ability to perform the role for which they are applying, thus likely are a potential successful worker

    However, if your process allows those who have not been able to secure work for 2 years for no other reason than 'bad luck' then its likely they do not have the ability to perform the role, and you're making the correct decision.

    Although this is almost using inductive logic, it still takes the sheen off the otherwise attractive title of the article =P
  • Max | 23 Oct 2012, 04:23 PM Agree 0
    Having been unemployed myself more than once over the lifetime of my career I'd like to think I'd be more inclined to hire someone with two years of unemployment.
  • QLDHR | 18 Apr 2013, 05:11 PM Agree 0
    It would come down to their merits in performing the inherent requirements of the role and of course, ensuring that the candidate who has spent time in jail doesn't have a conviction that would impact on their ability to perform in the role i.e. convicted of fraud, applying for a Finance position?

    The two factors should not come up as a determining factor in whether or not they can perform the role other than as stated above.
Post a reply