Re: Background Checks

[Graham Toal <gtoal () UTPA EDU>]

> A quick sanity check for your process:  What would you do if
> the check discovered that your top programmer, who has been
> an outstanding performer and highly trusted for the last 25
> years, got busted for selling drugs to an undercover cop when
> they were in college?

IMHO if someone has served their sentence and is no longer on
parole, they have fulfilled their debt to society and should
be treated the same as anyone else, otherwise when does the
punishment stop?  US culture seems to want to punish people
for life for any indiscretion... you can't rehabilitate people
if they're turned down for every job they apply for as soon
as you see that they once had a conviction, regardless of
how long ago it was, what it was for, or whether they have
sincerely reformed.

So another question to ask is "If the background check does
turn up something, should you even care?".  (Of course the
answer is "it depends", and like many things in life should
be handled on a case by case basis with common sense; one of
the dangers of working out all the rules in advance is that
you get stuck in the evil 'zero tolerance' trap which is
often worse than the crime)

My personal feeling is that I wouldn't put someone who has
a psychological problem in an area that would offer temptation
(eg a child molester near children, a kleptomaniac in a shop,
a compulsive liar in the whitehouse), but only because crimes
that stem from psychological problems are likely to reoccur.
Whereas 'regular' crimes of opportunity are very likely not
going to reoccur (at least in the sort of person we're likely
to want to employ in a university, i.e. intelligent and
educated) after a period in prison, which I'm assured is a
strong disincentive to ever doing it again.


Graham