by Nick Fishman
I just read this article in the Wall Street Journal and am extremely impressed with the GOSO initiative (Get Out Stay and Staying Out) pioneered by former Revlon executive, Mark Goldsmith. GOSO is a non-profit organization designed to help young inmates (age 18-24) in New York-area prisons become productive members of society following their release. He helps counsel them on how to find jobs and how to stay out of trouble once they are released and he’s getting tremendous results. There is only a 10% recidivism rate among those enrolled in Mr. Goldsmith’s program. Compare that to a national recidivism rate of 66%. Mr. Goldsmith’s efforts are indeed admirable and so are the efforts of these young people who realize the value of this program.
A commonly help misconception of the general public is that Consumer Reporting Agencies (those who execute background checks), do so to prevent those with criminal records from attaining gainful employment. Our job is to provide employers with the information they need to make informed decisions about the people they wish to hire. I also think we should support the efforts of organizations such as GOSO. One thing I would like to see GOSO do is come up with some sort of certificate that can be shared with potential employers when these people look for jobs. It would be a good way for a those with criminal records to say, “I’ve made mistakes, but look what I’ve done to better myself”. Perhaps, those that would automatically be rejected from jobs could use the certificate to demonstrate their worthiness for employment.
Read the full story . . .
This entry was posted
on Thursday, March 20th, 2008 at 10:03 am and is filed under Articles.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Subscribe to our podcast!
May 9th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
[...] We have said it before, but I’ll say it again; “We believe there is a job out there for everyone.” However, an employer has the right to know the backgrounds of their applicants. This suit will set off an interesting EEOC Title VII debate, however the employer in this case has certain rights. The article claims that because Mr. Nash is a minority he was discriminated against due to his felony conviction. I am not here to debate whether or not this is true, I know nothing about this employer, its policy’s or its management. What I do know is this; The weight and gravity of the offense must be taken into account. Just because another employee has an older conviction does not mean the convictions are equal. If the other employee has a 1990 Felony DUI and Mr. Nash has an offense dealing with a breach of trust, dishonesty or perhaps violence, it would be weighed differently. [...]