The Incarceration Numbers

Let’s momentarily set aside racial disparities in law enforcement and personal beliefs about legal enforcement. Focusing solely on the statistics, the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate globally, at 639 per 100,000 people. While this may seem minor, it's worth noting that we lead the world in imprisoning individuals.

In fact, the U.S. has over 2 million people behind bars, just slightly trailing China, which has a population four times larger. Despite China's questionable human rights record, we're still vying for the top position in incarceration. Brazil, in third place, is over a million prisoners behind us.

It's essential to clarify that not everyone in these figures is innocent; the statistics include serious offenses like homicides and sexual crimes. However, the sheer number of individuals caught in this web is alarming. If we factor in community service, probation, and other forms of supervision, the numbers swell even more.

A significant portion of the population is entangled in this system. In fact, 14 states have populations smaller than our total number of incarcerated individuals. With employers struggling to fill positions, it’s crucial to consider how many potential workers are overlooked.

The Impact of Criminal Records on Employment

Given this substantial population with criminal records, the question arises: how should we proceed? Currently, we apply broad, uniform hiring standards to this diverse group, which is particularly perplexing in a system that relies on discretion.

For instance, consider two couples, both in their late 20s, who smoke cannabis. Depending on their circumstances, they might buy an ounce together. If both get pulled over, the outcomes can differ dramatically based on how the cannabis is packaged. One couple may face mere possession charges, while the other could be charged with intent to distribute, especially if they were near a school.

The consequences of such charges vary widely. Couple "A" might receive probation and maintain their employment, whereas Couple "B" could end up with a felony conviction, drastically limiting future job opportunities. This inconsistency highlights the flaws in our legal system.

Hiring Practices and Their Discrepancies

Many companies adopt hiring policies that automatically disqualify felons while overlooking misdemeanors. In my experience, this has been evident during the hiring process for roles requiring thorough background checks. However, as we’ve seen, this is a flawed approach.

A company might disregard certain drug possession charges, yet individuals in different states can face drastically different penalties for similar offenses. For example, a person caught with cannabis may face a misdemeanor in one state and a felony in another, impacting their employability based purely on geography.

This blanket approach to hiring leads to unfair disadvantages for those in states with strict laws. A person caught with drugs in a lenient state is more likely to secure a job than someone facing severe penalties elsewhere.

Corporate Accountability and Change

Public pressure can compel corporations to act swiftly. This was evident during the recent pandemic when businesses implemented safety measures ahead of governmental directives. With enough motivation, corporations can serve as catalysts for meaningful change.

Given the high rates of arrest and incarceration, we need a more thoughtful approach to addressing the aftermath. Waiting for systemic reform at the federal or state level is often futile. The current labor market crisis presents a unique opportunity for companies to reconsider their hiring practices.

Many employers shouldn’t be overly concerned with a candidate’s past minor drug offenses if they have demonstrated rehabilitation. After all, would you expect someone working for minimum wage to refrain from seeking a form of escapism after a long day?

Perhaps companies should reevaluate what truly matters in their hiring processes. Instead of asking candidates if they have a criminal record in the last seven years, they could specify which offenses are relevant. This would allow for a more nuanced understanding of a candidate's background.

It's clear that societal attitudes toward drug offenses have evolved significantly, yet many laws and hiring practices remain stagnant. This disconnect often leads to the exclusion of capable individuals. By seeking out those who have made mistakes but are eager for a second chance, employers can tap into a valuable talent pool that has been largely ignored.