Home | Community | Message Board

Shroom Supply
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]
InvisibleBuddha5254
addict
Registered: 04/23/00
Posts: 532
Law Question/Background Check Limitations
    #5849584 - 07/12/06 03:22 AM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Ok, I need some help here. Some states have limitations on what can/cannot be in a background check. I need to know what those are, for the state of Oregon. I am trying to get a job, and have had prior job offers be rescinded because of a couple of dumb convictions from when I was 18 (im 26 now). I have googled my ass off, but all that comes up are a million websites for background checks and Icant find much pure information. I tried the state of Oregon's website, but to no avail. Just so you know I had a conviction for drug paraphenalia and one for possession of a weapon on campus (a fucking pocket knife in my college dorm) and a dismissal of possession of marijuana in another incident. I have had two job offers rescinded because of this shit and Im tired of this continuing punishment. I just had to add that in, but I really DONT want a discussion of that aspect, I just need INFORMATION. Thanks a lot everyone!


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5849770 - 07/12/06 05:23 AM (15 years, 3 months ago)

technically..irrelevant background checks are in fact illegal..but dont expect that law to be enforced ..

http://employment.findlaw.com/articles/2500.html

not only are new applicants being disqualified because of background checks..but even current employees have been fired as a result of this new power grab...

and like i said..there are no real limits on their usage either...but an applicant can refuse to give consent...and personally..i would be more than a little leery about working for some petty fascist that has to know about a swiss army knife that you owned in college...

in your case..however..it looks like you can prolly get an expungement ..

http://library.findlaw.com/2003/Jun/5/132788.html

this link is for NJ.. OR may or may not have a similar process...but you have to consult an employment attorney in your area...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5851327 - 07/12/06 06:24 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Do not listen to a single thing annapurna says regarding law. Her links are irrelevant as well. As an employer, I can refuse to hire you for any reason I wish except race, religion, gender, and maybe age. And I can always come up with something to hide that if I wanted to.

The convictions weren't dumb. You were. And you're stuck with them. What the hell are you applying for that that would come up anyway? I've never run a background check on anybody in my life. You fucked yourself. I'm sure they are much more concerned about the weapons charge, by the way


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRosettaStoned
Stranger

Registered: 05/29/06
Posts: 540
Loc: North America
Last seen: 13 years, 7 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5851333 - 07/12/06 06:27 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Zappa you are such a nice person, I just want to give you a big hug.


--------------------
"Government big enough to provide you with all you need is also big enough to take everything you have." ~ Thomas Jefferson

"Without stupid, faggy potheads we wouldn't have wars." - Zappa


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 8 years, 24 days
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5851343 - 07/12/06 06:30 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Convictions are public record. If I knew your name, I could look up those charges right now. If you have the money, try getting them expunged.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleBuddha5254
addict
Registered: 04/23/00
Posts: 532
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5851383 - 07/12/06 06:42 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

There was no need to be rude, I'm in graduate school now and need gainful employement. Would you speak that way to someone in person? I doubt it, a computer screen is a nice shield to sit behind. Ive changed my life significantly since then and dont see why I should have to suffer because of it now. I did my community service. Also Its for a job being a courier. That's right, a courier. My last job paid 11/hour and was hard ass work, because other employers did background checks, that one did not. The other job offers that got rescinded? A tutor position, and a position teaching. Thanks everyone, except for zappaworshiper


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5851438 - 07/12/06 06:56 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Yes, I do speak that way to people in person. Might I suggest a different line of work, such as construction or the restaurant business. Your past behaviour has obviously removed couriership as a potential field of employ.

I would not have been so harsh if you had owned your behaviour instead of blaming it on your "convictions". Classic self delusional mechanism is to blame the mean ole Man for what you did. None the less, you seem like a nice kid who fucked up and I wish you well. Tough love, you know.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinefireworks_godS
Sexy.Butt.McDanger
Male

Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 7 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5851796 - 07/12/06 08:55 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Owned up to his behavior? :lol: Do you personally feel as though a paraphenlia charge is justified? :wtf: A paraphenlia charge is not "fucking up", it is simply an unfortunate situation in which an unjust law has been satisified, and now the person who has clearly done nothing wrong is paying the price.

When I applied for the job I have now, two years ago, they did not utilize background checks, and I did not inform them that I had a paraphenlia charge agansit me. I got the position, am a useful and skillfull employee, and have been advancing into management. We now do use background checks, and I certainly would not have been given the oppurtunity if I had applied after that.

The pocket knife in one's dorm charge is just as pointless, certainly not him "fucking up". I see no need to be irrational, certainly not in such an arrogant manner. :nonono:

I wish you luck on your job search. I would suggset retail, but I am not certain that your background check wouldn't interfere with that. :frown:

:earth: :sun: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you

:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleBuddha5254
addict
Registered: 04/23/00
Posts: 532
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5852687 - 07/12/06 11:46 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Well I dont consider what I did to be wrong, more a victim of the times. Have you ever done drugs? I would think so seeing as how you are a frequent contributor to a forum on a completly drug related website. but whatever


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5852900 - 07/13/06 12:24 AM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Buddha5254 said:
a victim of the times.




and now you are a victim of Zappa? yall sound like kids...

I have made many mistakes in my life, and unfortunately some of them are on my permanent record. You just have to move forward.

I've had to deal with background checks the last few years to do VOLUNTEER WORK. (children involved)

I explained the situations/mistakes (none of them involved children) and they continued to let me work for FREE.

You will get through it.

P.S. Expunging will only work for court records. Not arrests or probation records. from what I understand.


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Edited by lonestar2004 (07/13/06 12:28 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5853066 - 07/13/06 12:56 AM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Do not listen to a single thing annapurna says regarding law. Her links are irrelevant as well. As an employer, I can refuse to hire you for any reason I wish except race, religion, gender, and maybe age. And I can always come up with something to hide that if I wanted to.

The convictions weren't dumb. You were. And you're stuck with them. What the hell are you applying for that that would come up anyway? I've never run a background check on anybody in my life. You fucked yourself. I'm sure they are much more concerned about the weapons charge, by the way




fortunately..zappa doesnt make the laws..at least not yet...it would be interesting to see what kind of unemployment rate would result if he did...and BTW..heres another irrelevant link..which is more specific to california..but still useful ..

http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs16-bck.htm#3

IMAO..the following subparagraph is saying that some employers have jumped on the karl rove bandwagon.. using 9/11 as an excuse to power trip ..

Quote:

Terrorist acts of September 11, 2001, have resulted in heightened security and identity-verification strategies by employers. Potential job candidates and long-time employees alike are being examined with a new eye following September 11, 2001.




and zappa..could you pls enlighten the audience as to how a "conviction" for posession of a fucking swiss army knife would impede on ones' abilities as a courier?...damn right i dont know anything about the law..since i had no idea that you could even be convicted for that...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Edited by Annapurna1 (07/13/06 01:13 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleGabbaDj
BTH
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/01
Posts: 19,589
Loc: By The Lake
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5853152 - 07/13/06 01:16 AM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

try getting them expunged.




I did that and in your case it wouldnt be a problem.. Make a call to your local courthouse and ask to speak to a probation officer or someone in the local clerks office. All I had to do was write a letter to the judge who convicted me asking him to exponge my record because it was keeping me from getting good jobs and because I had been sooo good and not had any other incidents he did just that..

I had to do that to get a guard card so that I could get a weapons permit so that I could carry a gun. Which I never did do but I got my record exponged.

As for how legal it is, all they have to do is make you sign a release and they can look at anything they want. If you refuse to sign then interview over and you dont get the job.


--------------------
GabbaDj

FAMM.ORG          C8.com                    http://www.beatsopjefiets.com/   


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinewilshire
free radical
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/11/05
Posts: 2,421
Loc: SE PA
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5853998 - 07/13/06 10:59 AM (15 years, 3 months ago)

there are some states that have laws on the books making it unlawful to discriminate in hiring based on criminal history unrelated to job performace. i don't know about oregon. an employer however could easily hide the reason for rescinding a job offer, or find a reason that your criminal history relates to job performance.

a weapons conviction is more of a concern than a drug conviction. explain the circumstances to the right people before they run the check and you'll have a better chance.

it should be possible to have misdemeanors from 8 years ago removed from your record, but i'm not familiar with oregon law on that. talk to someone who is.


--------------------



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: fireworks_god]
    #5855316 - 07/13/06 07:04 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

fireworks_god said:
Owned up to his behavior? :lol: Do you personally feel as though a paraphenlia charge is justified? :wtf: A paraphenlia charge is not "fucking up", it is simply an unfortunate situation in which an unjust law has been satisified, and now the person who has clearly done nothing wrong is paying the price.




I didn't say "own up to", I said "own".  That's different.  "Fucking up"?  It sure as shit was.  You have to be an idiot to get caught.  But I think his problem is the weapons charge, which was also stupid.  Really stupid.
Quote:



When I applied for the job I have now, two years ago, they did not utilize background checks, and I did not inform them that I had a paraphenlia charge agansit me. I got the position, am a useful and skillfull employee, and have been advancing into management. We now do use background checks, and I certainly would not have been given the oppurtunity if I had applied after that.

The pocket knife in one's dorm charge is just as pointless, certainly not him "fucking up". I see no need to be irrational, certainly not in such an arrogant manner. :nonono:




It's not pointless at all.  If he didn't think he could abide by the school rules he should have gone to another school.  Or ditched the knife.  That's it.  A conviction on a weapons charge is a complete killer for couriers.  Sorry, but the courier companies have to vouch for their employees, who are allowed unfettered access to businesses which usually have security forces at the desk, for good reason.
Quote:



I wish you luck on your job search. I would suggset retail, but I am not certain that your background check wouldn't interfere with that. :frown:

:earth: :sun: :headbang: :satansmoking:
Peace. :mushroom2:




I know I'm an asshole sometimes but I thought he wasn't accepting responsibility for the fact that he is the one who fucked up.  If you can't "own" your fuck ups you can't learn from them.  And here, too, is a lesson for all young people.  Most of what you will be doing from here on out will be closing doors, not opening them.  Your potential field of action gets smaller and smaller every year.  This is not etched in stone for everyone but for most people it is very true.
I truly wish you all the best life possible.  That doesn't mean I won't jump down your neck if I feel like it though.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5855324 - 07/13/06 07:08 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Buddha5254 said:
Well I dont consider what I did to be wrong, more a victim of the times. Have you ever done drugs? I would think so seeing as how you are a frequent contributor to a forum on a completly drug related website. but whatever




Not as far as any law agency knows. You don't think you were wrong? Did you not know the rule against knives at school? Or did you think you were special?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Annapurna1]
    #5855327 - 07/13/06 07:12 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Annapurna1 said:

and zappa..could you pls enlighten the audience as to how a "conviction" for posession of a fucking swiss army knife would impede on ones' abilities as a courier?...damn right i dont know anything about the law..since i had no idea that you could even be convicted for that...




Fucked if I know how you can get convicted for such a thing. But convicted he got, or so he says. That is the killer for courier jobs. Utter death. And for good reason. Why would they hire him when there are plenty of clean applicants?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleBuddha5254
addict
Registered: 04/23/00
Posts: 532
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5855481 - 07/13/06 08:12 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

So you think I havent learned from this. you are right I did fuck up by having banned things in my college dorm room. Like a bowl and a swiss army knife. I have quit using drugs since and I have learned and changed significantly. Im in fucking grad school right now. So if there ever was a reformed criminal I am him. I just cant imagine how tough it must be for people that were convicted of a real crime. No wonder they just go back to jail.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5855986 - 07/13/06 10:47 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
ut convicted he got, or so he says. That is the killer for courier jobs. Utter death. And for good reason. Why would they hire him when there are plenty of clean applicants?




thats true about any job..not just a courier job...nor is it necessarily a "good" reason to disqualify someone either..especially when the charges are as baseless as in this case..


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMicrocosmatrix
Spiral staircasetechnician
Male

Registered: 10/20/05
Posts: 11,293
Loc: Ythan's house
Last seen: 14 years, 10 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5856152 - 07/13/06 11:36 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

I think that zappa guy's advice is probably about as reliable as a wet McDonalds bag to carry a dozen hand grenades.


--------------------
:orly:



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Microcosmatrix]
    #5857401 - 07/14/06 10:59 AM (15 years, 3 months ago)

I didn't offer any advice other than to suggest he pursue employment outside of the courier field. Which is pretty obvious since none of them will hire him. Do you guys think he should sue the courier companies that won't hire him? Get a fucking grip. He SHUT THAT DOOR. All by himself.

Micro: So what do you carry your grenades in?


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMicrocosmatrix
Spiral staircasetechnician
Male

Registered: 10/20/05
Posts: 11,293
Loc: Ythan's house
Last seen: 14 years, 10 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5857462 - 07/14/06 11:31 AM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Crown Royal bags, of course :wink:

My record is so bad I couldn't get a job delivering Pizza. Thank goodness I own my own company.


--------------------
:orly:



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 5 years, 2 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5857581 - 07/14/06 12:39 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Try to get your record expunged.

Also, Zappa is correct. Every time someone breaks the law, they accept whatever consequences might come with what you are doing. It is not a matter of whether the law is right or wrong; it is a matter of weighing the harms and benefits one receives when breaking the law. We are all adults here and we have to reap the rewards (and punishments) for every action we take part in.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleHank, FTW
Looking for the Answer

Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Redstorm]
    #5857592 - 07/14/06 12:43 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

I keep mine in a basketball, so nobody can find them.


--------------------
Capliberty:

"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "

:rofl:


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Microcosmatrix]
    #5857618 - 07/14/06 12:56 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Do you guys think he should sue the courier companies that won't hire him?




he should definitely consider it if he might have a case under OR state law ..

Quote:

there are some states that have laws on the books making it unlawful to discriminate in hiring based on criminal history unrelated to job performace.




zappa is wrong as usual..and employers are well aware that they could be sued in such cases...as such..they typically dont bother to call until after the candidate has passed the security screening...but the fact that they didnt keep their mouths shut suggests that this may not be so in oregon...

i also have a couple of ?s for the original poster ..

1) did the employer (orally.. on application form.. etc) expressly state that a prior criminal record would automatically disqualify a candidate?

2) more importantly..did you lie or not tell the whole truth when asked about the said criminal records?...

i should also comment that on all the job applications ive had to fill out..they only asked about felony convictions...maybe in mass their not allowed to discriminate because of frivolous charges...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Redstorm]
    #5857646 - 07/14/06 01:10 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Redstorm said:
Try to get your record expunged.

Also, Zappa is correct. Every time someone breaks the law, they accept whatever consequences might come with what you are doing. It is not a matter of whether the law is right or wrong; it is a matter of weighing the harms and benefits one receives when breaking the law. We are all adults here and we have to reap the rewards (and punishments) for every action we take part in.




no..zappa is wrong..the consequences for breaking the law are to be determined by the courts..not corporations...to allow the private sector to continue punishment after the fact will only create recidivism at the taxpayers' expense...as such..some states have laws that restrict the power of an employer to discriminate on such grounds..and more are prolly needed...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Annapurna1]
    #5857856 - 07/14/06 02:26 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Your notion of what criteria companies can use for hiring is quaint indeed. Day care providers are required by law to screen their employees. Bars are required by law to vet bouncers. Courier companies are obligated to screen their couriers since they are allowed to cruise past security. I am allowed to not hire you because I don't like the mole on your nose. Fat ugly chicks cannot work as showgirls. The list goes on and on and on. As usual, you are totally wrong about everything, which is what my original post was about. That anna's legal advice is useless and dangerous. Because she knows nothing of law


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMicrocosmatrix
Spiral staircasetechnician
Male

Registered: 10/20/05
Posts: 11,293
Loc: Ythan's house
Last seen: 14 years, 10 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5857870 - 07/14/06 02:29 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Such a cute little rivalry going on here..

Have some flowers you two!



--------------------
:orly:



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleBuddha5254
addict
Registered: 04/23/00
Posts: 532
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5857897 - 07/14/06 02:36 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Well whatever I went I signed my contracts today. they only look back 5 years so Im covered, thank god. Im originally from NC where they are a little more draconian about it. ALso, I just want to also state that I completely understand why some jobs do background checks. Especially schools. I wouldnt want someone with my charges working with my kids to be honest. Now I can make a decent living and pay my way through school! Thanks to everyone that was of assistance!


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Buddha5254]
    #5857917 - 07/14/06 02:41 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Good luck to you. You seem like a good guy who did dumb shit once.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5858219 - 07/14/06 04:17 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Your notion of what criteria companies can use for hiring is quaint indeed. Day care providers are required by law to screen their employees. Bars are required by law to vet bouncers. Courier companies are obligated to screen their couriers since they are allowed to cruise past security. I am allowed to not hire you because I don't like the mole on your nose. Fat ugly chicks cannot work as showgirls. The list goes on and on and on. As usual, you are totally wrong about everything, which is what my original post was about. That anna's legal advice is useless and dangerous. Because she knows nothing of law




first of all..i dont have a law degree..so complaints that i dont anything about the law might have some validity...OTOH..you dont have to know anything about the law to know that its for the courts to punish criminals and not ppl like zappa...and most readers could prolly agree that letting the zappas of this world get their way would both undermine the authourity of the existing legal system and create more crime...let alone the fact that zappa cant even produce a link..not even to a right-wing moonbat page..to back up any of his bullshit...

second of all..zappa has again tried to put words into my mouth by misrepresenting my earlier posts...so ill repost my lynx for your convenience ..

http://employment.findlaw.com/articles/2500.html

Quote:

Background checks may be necessary for certain jobs. These include jobs involving security or trade secrets. Checks should be made fairly and without bias. They should concern only issues relating to performance of the specific job. Checks that unnecessarily pry into private information or that employ unreasonable methods of data gathering may subject an employer to tort liability.




http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs16-bck.htm#3

Quote:

In California, criminal histories or "rap sheets" compiled by law enforcement agencies are not public record. Only certain employers such as public utilities, law enforcement, security guard firms, and child care facilities have access to this information. (California Penal Code ยงยง11105, 13300) With the advent of computerized court records and arrest information, however, there are private companies that compile virtual "rap sheets."

Employers need to use caution in checking criminal records. Information offered to the public by web-based information brokers is not always accurate or up to date. This violates both federal and California law when reported as such. Also, in California, an employer may not inquire about a marijuana conviction that is more than two years old.




i dont know the specifics of laws in different states..but its very obvious that employers dont have plenary power to diaqualify a candidate for reasons not relevant to the job (so no..ugly chix (skinny as well as fat) cant be showgirls.. and convicted rapists cant be child-care workers)...but i will concede that such laws are difficult to enforce ("reported as such") ..if you dont like the mole on my nose (assuming the job in question isnt a makeup model)..then you could always just say there were more qualified candidates and i would believe you...

in this case..however..it sounds like the original poster is able to document a legally questionable grounds for disqualification...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5858223 - 07/14/06 04:18 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

zappaisgod said:
Good luck to you. You seem like a good guy who did dumb shit once.




you seem like a guy thats still doing dumb shit...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Annapurna1]
    #5858298 - 07/14/06 04:46 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Annapurna1 said:


you seem like a guy thats still doing dumb shit...




What? Calling you out? I don't think so.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Annapurna1]
    #5858322 - 07/14/06 04:53 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Banned for flaming. See you in three days.



Phred


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineMicrocosmatrix
Spiral staircasetechnician
Male

Registered: 10/20/05
Posts: 11,293
Loc: Ythan's house
Last seen: 14 years, 10 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: zappaisgod]
    #5858327 - 07/14/06 04:55 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

You're too abrasive. Fuck the law. I don't give 2 cents whether or not they find me suitable for delivering some jackass some papers.

The "system" ignores the fact that people can change over the years. "Law and order" is such a flawed concept both in design and practice it's not even worth trying to illustrate all the ways.


--------------------
:orly:



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinezappaisgod
horrid asshole

Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 5 years, 4 months
Re: Law Question/Background Check Limitations [Re: Microcosmatrix]
    #5858392 - 07/14/06 05:25 PM (15 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Microcosmatrix said:
You're too abrasive. Fuck the law. I don't give 2 cents whether or not they find me suitable for delivering some jackass some papers.

The "system" ignores the fact that people can change over the years. "Law and order" is such a flawed concept both in design and practice it's not even worth trying to illustrate all the ways.




What "system"? You own your own company? Do you hire people? DON'T YOU THINK YOU SHOULD GET TO CHOOSE WHO YOU CAN HIRE? You can ignore it. I can ignore it. To think that you HAVE to ignore it is just so mindbogglingly ridiculous as to make me wonder if I have any chance whatsoever of educating you. And I know couriership is some jackass delivering papers. But, and this is something you just can't seem to get at all, they get to breeze past security in secure buildings. They have to be clean. It is not at all inappropriate to disqualify someone for any record at all.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Politicians who support the Right to Carry law
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 2,532 32 05/02/03 07:14 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* Bush Pissed at aCanada's Proposed marijuana decriminal law mjshroomer 2,032 18 05/09/03 09:33 PM
by Prisoner#1
* Ed Rosenthal (Pot Grow God) Convicted of Three Felonies!! Jammer 1,712 11 02/11/03 04:52 PM
by Jammer
* dealing with law enforcement ChromeCrow 1,339 4 08/26/02 04:29 AM
by Lana
* a question for all of you............... Psilocybeingzz 498 5 05/16/03 06:54 PM
by luvdemshrooms
* Bush Signs 'Born Alive' Act Into Law
( 1 2 all )
Ellis Dee 4,703 38 08/29/02 03:25 PM
by Innvertigo
* morality and the law
( 1 2 all )
hongomon 2,069 33 11/20/02 04:08 PM
by BleaK
* Interesting E-mail....and it all checks out
( 1 2 all )
wmammoth 3,828 25 12/16/02 06:20 PM
by Evolving

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
2,366 topic views. 2 members, 1 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.038 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 16 queries.