Banning the Box: the struggle to undo the discrimination, and continued punishment of people with criminal convictions

A young mother waits in line to apply for Cal Works, the basic public assistance available to families in need. As she fills out the application, she comes upon the fatal question: "Have you ever been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony by a criminal or military court? List all convictions. Attach additional sheets if necessary." A few years ago, she was charged with possession of a controlled substance. She will never again be eligible for benefits.

To a person with a conviction in their past, the question might as well read "ex-cons need not apply." Found on an increasing number of applications for jobs, housing, scholarships, loans, and even basic public assistance, "the box" has become one of the most significant barriers facing the more than 50 million people in the United States who have a criminal record that will show up on a routine background check.

Even after having paid fines, completed community service, and served time in prison or jail, people with convictions are forced to disclose the past over and over and over. For those who are working to get their lives back on track, and oftentimes, trying to recover from histories of abuse, neglect, imprisonment, or addiction, "the box" represents a continuation of the punishment and marginalization they are desperately working to leave behind.

The problem impacts the whole community. In a country that relies on incarceration as a response to just about every problem—be it poverty, homelessness, violence, or addiction—the United States locks up more people than any other nation, and therefore releases more people from prison each year—more than 650,000 per year (120,000 per year in L.A. County alone). And with a job market that increasingly locks out people with convictions, it is no wonder that nearly 70% of people who come home from California prisons return with one year of their release. Until we can stop our government’s incarceration binge, the successful reintegration of people coming home is of paramount importance to our families, neighborhoods, and economy.

In an effort to address the injustice, and sheer stupidity, of public policies that unnecessarily block the successful reintegration of people with criminal convictions, a grassroots group of former prisoners, calling themselves "All of Us or None," launched a national campaign to "Ban the Box" from applications for employment, housing, student loans, and public assistance. In southern California, the campaign got going in February of 2006, when All of Us or None members petitioned the City and the County of Los Angeles to adopt resolutions that would postpone any consideration of conviction history until later in the hiring process, after a persons’ qualifications had been fully considered and they’ve had the opportunity of a face-to-face interview.

The logic is drawn from the lived experience of hundreds of former prisoners who say that when they have to check a box revealing prior convictions on an initial application, they are never called back by the employer, whereas if they do not reveal this information up front, they are much more likely to be seriously considered for the job. Their experiences were confirmed by a University of Wisconsin report that found that people with felony records are twice as likely to be denied employment as people without past criminal records, and when race was added as a factor, the disparity was even more devastating for people of color. A 2003 study of employer attitudes and practices right here in Los Angeles revealed that only 20% of the 619 companies surveyed would hire a person with a conviction.

The Ban the Box campaign in Los Angeles took off most quickly at the County level, when Supervisor Yvonne Burke introduced a Motion called the Fair Employment Resolution, that would remove the criminal conviction question from L.A. applications, and postpone any consideration of prior convictions until the end of the hiring process. Rather than make a decision right away, the Board of Supervisors directed the Human Resources Department to study the feasibility of moving or removing the question, and to determine what the impact would be on the County’s hiring process. A few months later, the HR Department came back with an unfavorable report, recommending that the County leave the box exactly where it is. It was a strange conclusion, given that the report had concluded that removing the question from the application would not cost the County any money; would not lengthen the hiring process or cause other administrative difficulties; and would not cause public safety concerns, as background checks for sensitive jobs would still be conducted. So why recommend to not make the change? Almost immediately, Board members began to generate justifications. Some argued that removing the question would be unfair to applicants, giving false hope. Others argued that there was no way to prove the question was leading to discrimination, or deterring qualified applicants. But most couldn’t come up with any reason at all, and simply projected the classic bureaucratic response: better to just leave things the way they are.

But organizers in support of the Resolution were not swayed by a negative report, and set out to gather hundreds of letters of support from individuals and groups, flooding the offices of the Board Supervisors with faxes and phone calls in support of the Resolution, and designing an independent study in conjunction with Tarzana Treatment Centers, to document the "chilling effect" of the criminal conviction question, and show the scope of the problem of employment discrimination facing Angelinos with criminal convictions. By the time of the November 21st public hearing, the room was packed with a wide range of more than 100 supporters of the resolution, including community organizations such as Youth Justice Coalition, National Employment Law Project, Homies Unidos, Time for Change, Sober Living Coalition, L.A. Coalition to End Hunger and Homelessness, Homeboy Industries, Crossroads, A New Way Of Life, ACLU of Southern California, Drug Policy Alliance, Women Organizing for Justice, and SEIU local 660, the union that represents County workers. There was also strong representation by elected officials, including Congresswoman Maxine Waters, Assembly Member Gloria Romero, a representative from Senator Sheila Kuehl’s office, and Boston City Council member Chuck Turner, who spoke to the progressive changes Boston has already made to its hiring practices. It was a powerful day of testimony, but unfortunately, Supervisor Molina was not present at the hearing, and so a final vote was postponed.

Across the country, cities and counties are taking this small step to undo the stigma and discrimination that follows people with criminal records. Already in Alameda County and in the cities of San Francisco, Chicago, St. Paul and Boston, Human Resource departments have removed the question from their applications. Removing the box is a small, sensible, step toward the goal of enhancing public safety, and ending employment discrimination against people who have criminal records.

As we go to press, the final vote with L.A. County will likely have been decided, and we will be gearing up to push for a positive outcome with the L.A. City Council. But whatever the outcome of these resolutions, the fight before us is a much larger, longer- term battle. The resistance that we have encountered from decision makers shows they are aware that what’s at stake is not simply an administrative decision about whether conviction history should be considered hiring process. The movement to remove or even reposition the box speaks to our deepest assumptions about what we call crime and to our assumptions about those who are convicted of crimes. It speaks to whether we believe our justice system is just. It speaks to whether we believe that public safety is best achieved through punishment or restoration. And it speaks to whether we believe that people can and do change. Within the context of a criminal justice system designed to disappear and disenfranchise low-income people of color, the struggle over "the box" is about calling for an end to punishment, and instead, making way for opportunities for new beginnings. Hopefully, L.A.’s public officials will seize this opportunity for progress that has been built from the ground up and put before them.