Apple reverses decision to ban felons from Campus 2 construction [u]

Posted:
in General Discussion edited April 2015
Apple on Thursday said it has reversed course on a policy that previously barred laborers from working on the Campus 2 construction site in Cupertino if they had been convicted of a felony within the last seven years [updated with response from Apple].




Company spokesman Josh Rosenstock informed The San Jose Mercury News of Apple's decision on Thursday, saying a previous requirement that barred felons from working on Campus 2 has been lifted.

Apple's policy caused a bit of a stir when it came to light last week. Unions and advocacy groups voiced their disapproval, saying at the time that construction work is an important stepping stone for many felons looking to reintegrate into the workforce. Some argued that such jobs are important in driving down California's rate of recidivism.

An Apple spokeswoman provided AppleInsider with the following statement on Thursday:
We believe in opportunity for everyone, and Apple has never had a blanket ban on hiring people with felony convictions. It recently came to our attention that, as part of a background check process unique to the Apple Campus 2 construction project, a few applicants were turned away because they had been convicted of a felony within the past seven years. We recognize that this may have excluded some people who deserve a second chance. We have now removed that restriction and instructed our contractors on the project to evaluate all applicants equally, on a case by case basis, as we would for any role at Apple.
According to Mercury News sources, Apple's ban extended beyond construction workers, though fewer than five people were turned away because of their record. The policy also held that potential workers charged but not convicted of a felony would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Apple's policy was not unorthodox within a sphere of private companies concerned with secrecy. For example, military contractors routinely apply similar hiring requirements, while other government related projects require such safeguards. The obvious difference, however, is that Apple is not (as far as we know) working on government funded projects or handling sensitive state data.

Construction at Campus 2 is coming along nicely and Apple expects to move in by 2016.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 25
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,497member

    Jesus Christ. God forbid we offend some felons now. A felony is not a minor crime:

     

    The consequences convicted felons face in most states include:

    Additionally, many job applications and rental applications ask about felony history (with the exception of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts) and answering dishonestly on them can be grounds for rejecting the application, or termination if the lie is discovered after hire. This is because most bonding companies do not issue bonds to convicted felons, which effectively bars them from certain jobs. Additionally, most landlords do not rent to convicted felons due to the risk of legal liability if the renter commits another crime.

    It is legal to discriminate against felons in hiring decisions as well as the decision to rent housing to a person, so felons can face barriers to finding both jobs and housing. A common term of parole is to avoid associating with other felons. In some neighborhoods with high rates of felony conviction, this creates a situation where many felons live with a constant threat of being arrested for violating parole.[17] Many banks refuse service to convicted felons, and some states consider a felony conviction grounds for an uncontested divorce.

    In some states, restoration of those rights depends on repayment of various fees associated with the felon's arrest, processing, and prison stay, such as restitution to victims, or outstanding fines.



     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony#United_States

     

    If a person gets their record expunged, that's a different matter altogether.

  • Reply 2 of 25
    danielswdanielsw Posts: 905member
    Good move. It's a helluva stigma to overcome when a person is trying to start over after a prison sentence. Construction work is indeed a good area for someone to prove him or her self.
  • Reply 3 of 25
    danielswdanielsw Posts: 905member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

    Jesus Christ. God forbid we offend some felons now.




    Seriously, just what the hell is wrong with you?

  • Reply 4 of 25
    I believe in second chances, too, but I would be hesitant to hire anyone with a felony on their record within the last 10 years of their conviction date. This is not a misdemeanor we're talking about here. A felony should be punitive.
  • Reply 5 of 25
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,497member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Wide with Pride View Post



    I believe in second chances, too, but I would be hesitant to hire anyone with a felony on their record within the last 10 years of their conviction date. This is not a misdemeanor we're talking about here. A felony should be punitive.



    Agreed. These are serious crimes. A conviction for a non-violent crime and if the record is expunged would be a different matter.

  • Reply 6 of 25
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,748member

    I'm 50-50 on this.  If Apple wants to implement the ban, go ahead.  If they want to give felons a chance to contribute to society, so bit it as well.  I trust that Apple knows better than I would.



    People that have been released from prison obviously need a chance to rebuild their life.  They made a mistake, they did their time, so give them a chance.  I'm cool with that.



    Not all felonies are equal though. I certainly wouldn't want someone that was convicted of murder, rape, child molestation, or some other brutal crime working on my property.  Someone convicted for lesser-crimes, etc... I'm okay with it.  People made mistakes and paid for it.  They knew if they screw up again, kiss any kind of future opportunities goodbye though.

  • Reply 7 of 25
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

    Jesus Christ. God forbid we offend some felons now. A felony is not a minor crime:

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony#United_States

     

    If a person gets their record expunged, that's a different matter altogether.


     

     

    This was all fine and dandy when a felony actually meant something. Originally felonies included serious crimes like robbery, murder, rape, and arson.

     

    Nowadays there are thousands of things labeled a felony. Peeing in public or not paying your taxes on time can get you a felony conviction in some states. Further, once you do the time and pay the fine that should be it.

  • Reply 8 of 25
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,294member
    Wiser heads prevail. Thank you
  • Reply 9 of 25
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,497member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TBell View Post

     

     

     

    This was all fine and dandy when a felony actually meant something. Originally felonies included serious crimes like robbery, murder, rape, and arson.

     

    Nowadays there are thousands of things labeled a felony. Peeing in public or not paying your taxes on time can get you a felony conviction in some states. Further, once you do the time and pay the fine that should be it.


     

    I suppose this is relevant:  http://felonyguide.com/California-Felony.php

  • Reply 10 of 25
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Wide with Pride View Post



    I believe in second chances, too, but I would be hesitant to hire anyone with a felony on their record within the last 10 years of their conviction date. This is not a misdemeanor we're talking about here. A felony should be punitive.

     

     

    It is punitive. They were punished by doing time, being on probation afterwards, and probably paying a fine. If they are not fit to be back in society, then don't put them back in. Further, there are hundreds if not thousands of non-violent was to get a felony.

  • Reply 11 of 25

    Good.

  • Reply 12 of 25
    tbelltbell Posts: 3,146member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

     

    I suppose this is relevant:  http://felonyguide.com/California-Felony.php


     

     

    Sure it is relevant, but not conclusive. Felonies can be from all 50 states and federal as well.

  • Reply 13 of 25
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,497member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TBell View Post

     

     

     

    Sure it is relevant, but not conclusive. Felonies can be from all 50 states and federal as well.




    Since the story refers to construction in California, I believe it's completely relevant.

  • Reply 14 of 25
    gerardgerard Posts: 49member
    Good show Apple; now we can move on. The contractors are not in the business of hiring disruptive workers. The article did state applicants will be evaluated on a case by case basis. I'm assuming someone felt a good candidate was disqualified because of the previous requirement and went to the press about it.
  • Reply 15 of 25
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,330member

    Since the story refers to construction in California, I believe it's completely relevant.

    One felony is possession. Just that.
  • Reply 16 of 25
    If we believe in a legal system designed to *rehabilitate* criminals, this is definitely the right response from Apple.
    I believe in second chances, too, but I would be hesitant to hire anyone with a felony on their record within the last 10 years of their conviction date. This is not a misdemeanor we're talking about here. A felony should be punitive.

    It *is* punitive while they are serving time, public service, paying fines for their crime. Once they've moved beyond that and society prevents them from pursuing honest work and reforming we're now exploring a punitive that adds incentive for people to turn back to crime. It's one thing in a sensitive scenario such as teaching, but quite another in construction.
  • Reply 17 of 25
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member

    Good, a poor policy all around.

     

    Now a specific crime, such as hacking, might be a very good disqualifier for a job inside their security division (or not...) but from running a backhoe? Because of a catchall "felony"? Not at all. And some one NOT convicted and just under indictment? Really a bad idea. "innocent until..."?

     

    So I was glad to read this: "and Apple has never had a blanket ban on hiring people with felony convictions...", so they needed to correct an error in their system for Campus 2, which they have done. Good.

  • Reply 18 of 25
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,497member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post





    One felony is possession. Just that.



    Non-violent crimes are different.

  • Reply 19 of 25
    focherfocher Posts: 645member
    I believe in second chances, too, but I would be hesitant to hire anyone with a felony on their record within the last 10 years of their conviction date. This is not a misdemeanor we're talking about here. A felony should be punitive.
    isnt the prison sentence the punitive part.

    Seems to irrational to force people to live on the fringe. It's a serious contributor to recidivism.
  • Reply 20 of 25
    Will Mr. Cook be addressing this too?
Sign In or Register to comment.