公平机会法案失败?雇主雇佣有犯罪记录的人

IF 3.5 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Criminology & Public Policy Pub Date : 2023-11-22 DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12655
Sharon S. Oselin, Justine G. M. Ross, Qingfang Wang, Wei Kang
{"title":"公平机会法案失败?雇主雇佣有犯罪记录的人","authors":"Sharon S. Oselin,&nbsp;Justine G. M. Ross,&nbsp;Qingfang Wang,&nbsp;Wei Kang","doi":"10.1111/1745-9133.12655","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Research summary</h3>\n \n <p>We examine the efficacy of the California Fair Chance Act (CFCA) policy—legislative stipulations regarding employers’ hiring of individuals with criminal records—on practices and outcomes in two Southern California counties during 2021. We rely on survey and experiment data with 542 hiring decision makers to investigate employer and personal compliance with the CFCA, whether applicant appeals affect employers’ willingness to hire them, and heterogeneity in treatment effects across firms and industries. Close to 80% of hiring decision makers violate the CFCA by obtaining background information before they extend an offer, appeals have a minimal impact on hiring outcomes, and firm-level characteristics continue to shape hiring practices to some extent.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>Although certain firms comply with the relatively new CFCA, most employers violate it by seeking applicant criminal background information, a practice that has profound consequences for those with criminal records as well as other disadvantaged groups. This finding underscores the discrepancy between de jure and de facto policy practices. Better statewide enforcement of the CFCA coupled with increased employer educational training could help reform it and improve policy adherence. Given it is a young policy, future research should continue to assess the CFCA's efficacy over time.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47902,"journal":{"name":"Criminology & Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1745-9133.12655","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fair Chance Act failures? Employers’ hiring of people with criminal records\",\"authors\":\"Sharon S. Oselin,&nbsp;Justine G. M. Ross,&nbsp;Qingfang Wang,&nbsp;Wei Kang\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1745-9133.12655\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Research summary</h3>\\n \\n <p>We examine the efficacy of the California Fair Chance Act (CFCA) policy—legislative stipulations regarding employers’ hiring of individuals with criminal records—on practices and outcomes in two Southern California counties during 2021. We rely on survey and experiment data with 542 hiring decision makers to investigate employer and personal compliance with the CFCA, whether applicant appeals affect employers’ willingness to hire them, and heterogeneity in treatment effects across firms and industries. Close to 80% of hiring decision makers violate the CFCA by obtaining background information before they extend an offer, appeals have a minimal impact on hiring outcomes, and firm-level characteristics continue to shape hiring practices to some extent.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Although certain firms comply with the relatively new CFCA, most employers violate it by seeking applicant criminal background information, a practice that has profound consequences for those with criminal records as well as other disadvantaged groups. This finding underscores the discrepancy between de jure and de facto policy practices. Better statewide enforcement of the CFCA coupled with increased employer educational training could help reform it and improve policy adherence. Given it is a young policy, future research should continue to assess the CFCA's efficacy over time.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47902,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Criminology & Public Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1745-9133.12655\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Criminology & Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9133.12655\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminology & Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9133.12655","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们考察了《加州公平机会法》(CFCA)政策-立法规定关于雇主雇用有犯罪记录的个人的有效性-关于2021年南加州两个县的做法和结果。我们依靠对542名招聘决策者的调查和实验数据来调查雇主和个人对CFCA的遵守情况,申请人的申诉是否会影响雇主雇用他们的意愿,以及不同公司和行业对待他们的效果的异质性。近80%的招聘决策者违反了CFCA,在提供offer之前获取背景信息,上诉对招聘结果的影响微乎其微,公司层面的特征在某种程度上继续影响着招聘行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Fair Chance Act failures? Employers’ hiring of people with criminal records

Research summary

We examine the efficacy of the California Fair Chance Act (CFCA) policy—legislative stipulations regarding employers’ hiring of individuals with criminal records—on practices and outcomes in two Southern California counties during 2021. We rely on survey and experiment data with 542 hiring decision makers to investigate employer and personal compliance with the CFCA, whether applicant appeals affect employers’ willingness to hire them, and heterogeneity in treatment effects across firms and industries. Close to 80% of hiring decision makers violate the CFCA by obtaining background information before they extend an offer, appeals have a minimal impact on hiring outcomes, and firm-level characteristics continue to shape hiring practices to some extent.

Policy implications

Although certain firms comply with the relatively new CFCA, most employers violate it by seeking applicant criminal background information, a practice that has profound consequences for those with criminal records as well as other disadvantaged groups. This finding underscores the discrepancy between de jure and de facto policy practices. Better statewide enforcement of the CFCA coupled with increased employer educational training could help reform it and improve policy adherence. Given it is a young policy, future research should continue to assess the CFCA's efficacy over time.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Criminology & Public Policy
Criminology & Public Policy CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
6.50%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Criminology & Public Policy is interdisciplinary in nature, devoted to policy discussions of criminology research findings. Focusing on the study of criminal justice policy and practice, the central objective of the journal is to strengthen the role of research findings in the formulation of crime and justice policy by publishing empirically based, policy focused articles.
期刊最新文献
Short‐term evaluation of Cure Violence St. Louis: Challenges, triumphs, and lessons learned Situational crime prevention as a harm mitigation policy for active shooter incidents Locked up and awaiting trial: Testing the criminogenic and punitive effects of spending a week or more in pretrial detention Lessons learned from Dread darknet communities: How and why are fraudsters targeting the elderly to be victims or accomplices? Direct incentives may increase employment of people with criminal records
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1