I know some will and I assume some won’t, but if anyone has any insight into how most companies feel about hiring a software engineer with a felony probation please share
I can't say if they truly care, but they can't a priori DQ you just for that. When I was a hiring manager, it wouldn't have bothered me a bit, assuming the interview went well, it had been a while, they weren't applying for a classified task / job, and their explanation satisfied everyone. It would have been a factor, but not the only factor.
Regardless, you can only apply with your background, so all the usual advice applies: interview well, practice, be confident, be deep, have good stories, questions, and talking points ready. The extra advice for folks with a record (like myself) is to prep a good explanation.
In CA your potential employer can’t ask about criminal history before extending an offer. After the offer is extended that’s off the table: they absolutely can (and will!) run a background check, and any convictions are assessed against the offered job.
A SWE might get a job with a drug conviction they picked up a decade ago. They might have their offer pulled due to a recent conviction for embezzlement.
No worries, I have also been convicted of sloppy speech!
But yeah, for OP: this is why this is a hard question to answer without specifics. What jurisdiction are you in, what crime, how long ago, what job? These details matter.
If you’re really unsure most employment lawyers offer a free consultation. Good luck.
No, but it regulates the reporting of it by "consumer reporting agencies," which includes background check companies, as you would see noted in the linked article. Seven years is a common length of time which the information can be reported, although it varies by the exact type of check that's done, by whom, and for what purpose.
I'm not sure if or how I should answer this, given you don't seem to want to believe me after having answered this twice already. So, how about you do some research and report back to the group? If I've misread, great, I get to learn. If not, you get to learn. Fair enough?
> Businesses that sell criminal history information to employers are "consumer reporting agencies" (CRAs) if they provide the information in "consumer reports" under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (FCRA). Under FCRA, a CRA generally may not report records of arrests that did not result in entry of a judgment of conviction, where the arrests occurred more than seven years ago. However, they may report convictions indefinitely. (emph. added)
The FCRA does not wipe convictions after seven years.
A few states extend FCRA-like provisions for felony reporting. Most don’t.
Even if your state does extend those protections, most have salary caps: if you are (for example) a felon in Washington applying for a job over $20k in annual salary, the 7-year reporting exemption doesn’t apply to you.
Other states offer an exemption for misdemeanors but exclude felons entirely.
(edit: I had MA in my head but it was WA I was trying to remember, changed :-))
If it’s related to violence or theft I think they would care. If it’s drug possession I don’t think they would care. If it’s selling drugs and you were successful at it then you’re a great fit!
(Assuming the company is media, social media or gaming related)
If the dudes suffered society’s prescribed punishment he should be free from judgement.
That’s kind of the entire point of justice.
And he’s applying for a job in literally one of the two types of jobs that you can set up total informational and access control.
How many decades before he should be considered normal again, or is he tainted for the rest of his life because of your “dishonesty conviction speaking to character”?
And that’s the tip of the iceberg. Tons of jobs in the US - especially those dealing directly with finances - pull your credit too, with the justification that people with bad credit are riskier and more likely to steal from the company.
Or perhaps they had an unexpected medical bill. Despite the talk of the American dream, the US system seems intent on keeping people down when they are down.
It would seem that experience, how you successfully budgeted around a sudden, significant, unexpected expense (possibly combined with loss of income), would be something you'd highlight and use as evidence of your qualifications. Companies want people who can handle the unexpected, especially in finance, since it happens so often.
Hiding it, so that's it's only revealed during a credit check, is the problem.
Being good at corporate or banking finance does not translate to being good at personal finance.
You would be shocked at how many high-earning individuals in the finance industry essentially live paycheck to paycheck because they spend as much (or more) than they make in an effort to maintain "status" among their peers, clients, and neighbors. It's pretty much the norm for that industry.
A credit check is more often used to gauge how susceptible a candidate is to becoming a pawn in some espionage plot. Someone with large outstanding debts is more likely to agree to get paid to steal information or money when approached by an agent working for another company or government than someone who is financially secure.
High income makes you feel like you don’t need to save, because every month lets you buy things that others wait a year to buy.
So it’s not just about the status, you can easily get addicted to spending money. Earning a lot of money and knowing how to save money are vastly different skills.
In my home country no one can do a background check like that. But they can ask me to produce a "proof of good conduct and morals". Seldom they ask for this. The only places they ask for it I know of is working for NATO, EU or something like that.
Absolutely. Criminal history is a valid and lawful criteria of discrimination. The tolerance varies by industry. For example the finance industry will have 0 tolerance.
It depends on the state. Some have "ban the box" laws that prohibit asking about convictions until a conditional job offer has been extended. Given that (unexpunged) convictions are public record though, it's pretty easy for them to find out if they bother to run a check and decide another candidate is a better fit.
To add on one anecdotal data point, I've never worked anywhere that didn't do a criminal background check. If you have a public record expect that everyone you work with knows.
Most tech companies have to care even if they don't want to. Standard contracts with clients as well as industry regulations (like SOC, ISMS, PIMS and more) all enforce clean background checks for all employees.
About a decade ago I had a coworker whose access was suddenly pulled from all prod systems. The reason? Someone with his (quite common) name had a warrant issued in Oklahoma. We weren’t anywhere near Oklahoma and he’d never even set foot in Oklahoma. But our company had a few state contracts that required clean background checks & periodic rescreenings of employees, they checked him, and his name matched. It took a few weeks to clear it up, during which time he couldn’t do his job.
Most contracts aren’t likely going to be that painful but you’ll have a hard time going near any compliance regime with a criminal background, which narrows your options.
Depends on the nature of the conviction and the employer. Theft, fraud, sex offenses, violent crimes, drugs will likely count against the candidate. Companies don't "feel" any specific way since companies don't "feel" or have the same policies. How much a record counts against a candidate will depend on company policies (both formal and informal), and the judgment of the interviewers.
I know someone with a felony fraud conviction who can't get a job at any financial company (the business domain he has most experience in). Instant disqualifier.
Not all employers run background checks, but they may ask about felony or even misdemeanor convictions and if you lie and they later find out they can fire for that reason.
A candidate with a record may get passed over with the employer giving some other reason, to protect themselves from lawsuits. In other words the candidate may get told "We hired a more qualified candidate" when they actually got rejected because of a criminal record.
> if you lie and they later find out they can fire for that reason
There is no standard "background check." A criminal history might come up, might not. You have to decide what's the best strategy... disclose it now while I'm competing against multiple other candidates with clean records and no solid internal relationships, or not say anything and take my chances, that maybe someone may discover it in the future and my ability, once I've become a well-liked, important contributor to the company, to be able to explain it away.
Some employers run pre-employment or post-offer background checks. Those checks vary but will generally include felony convictions. If the employer does get a background check do they are supposed to get the candidate's permission, but criminal convictions and sex offender registrations can show up in Google searches. Some jurisdictions don't allow pre-employment background checks. In any case the candidate should know if the hiring process includes a criminal background check.
Some employers simply ask (usually on an information form) if the candidate has any convictions.
A candidate doesn't have to volunteer information, but should have an explanation for a criminal record should that come up. If asked the candidate shouldn't lie because lying to get a job usually gives the employer grounds to terminate later with cause (unless you get elected to Congress).
In my experience (interviewed a lot of people in 40 years in the software business), mostly you see DUIs, marijuana possession, and things like burglary or auto theft, vandalism, trespassing from way back when the candidate was a teenager or young adult. It would matter how far back the incident occurred and if the candidate only had one conviction rather than a pattern of repeated criminal behavior.
I don't think someone should get penalized their whole life for a mistake, but multiple convictions or recent convictions will make anyone wonder about who they are hiring. I've hired candidates who had drug-related convictions but had stayed away from drugs for years. I hired a man who had a fairly old conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm because he had a good explanation (and even though I'm not a fan of carrying guns). I have passed on people who had stolen from their employer or had convictions for violent crimes like assault, robbery, or sex offenses.
An employer has to consider more than giving a candidate with a record a second chance. They also have to consider the safety (real or perceived) of their other employees. If people at a company find out that they're working alongside someone with a history of violent assaults they aren't going to like that.
Sometimes a person can get their criminal record sealed or expunged, maybe worth it to discuss with a lawyer.
> Not all employers run background checks, but they may ask about felony or even misdemeanor convictions and if you lie and they later find out they can fire for that reason.
They can ask about anything I suppose. I've had company interviews where the application required me to state whether or not I've ever even been arrested, "regardless of conviction". Presumably their risk model counts even innocent (and ultimately incorrect) run-ins with the law as too risky to hire.
They can't ask about anything but they can ask about criminal history. I've seen forms that ask about arrests, whether those led to a conviction or not. Some seem so broad that they would include traffic citations.
In the US a fairly big industry exists to do background checks and pre-employment screening. Having worked in enterprise logistics for a long time, with warehouse staff and drivers coming and going all the time and mandatory background tests and drug screens, I know that employers have to carefully screen so they aren't endangering their other employees, but also that employers can show compassion and understanding and not just toss a candidate for an old conviction.
I doubt a human cares that much or at least takes the circumstances into account. However, insurance and other policies required to make business possible probably care a lot.
It very much depends. I have been with a company that found and hired someone because they became known through a felony conviction related to hacking.(They had a specific set of skills we needed related to the hacking conviction.)
...But ultimately we couldn't complete the hiring process since there was a bank on the first floor and the building owners would have terminated our lease if they found out they worked there.
I worked for a company that hired a tech as he was being prosecuted for company equipment theft for a previous company. I think it had to do with him selling unused and outdated equipment on ebay. Anyway, he got the job and there was never any secrecy about it. Not sure why they did it but obviously it was not a big deal. I guess it all comes down to what the felony is.
Depending on the role and company there might be legal limitations, regardless of hiring manager views on the crime.
For example, working at a software firm focused on trading and financial systems we had contractual requirements to never send felons onto customer sites. So for sales or support/engineering roles given that traveling to customer sites was part of the role description, that limited employees we would have otherwise hired.
Also, all the regulated financial's I've worked at have background checks at onboarding, and then annual compliance reviews where you have to attest to not having felonies in a range of related areas. You can't manage money if you've been convicted of stealing it.
57 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 122 ms ] threadRegardless, you can only apply with your background, so all the usual advice applies: interview well, practice, be confident, be deep, have good stories, questions, and talking points ready. The extra advice for folks with a record (like myself) is to prep a good explanation.
You'll do fine.
This depends entirely on jurisdiction and company policy.
In CA your potential employer can’t ask about criminal history before extending an offer. After the offer is extended that’s off the table: they absolutely can (and will!) run a background check, and any convictions are assessed against the offered job.
A SWE might get a job with a drug conviction they picked up a decade ago. They might have their offer pulled due to a recent conviction for embezzlement.
But yeah, for OP: this is why this is a hard question to answer without specifics. What jurisdiction are you in, what crime, how long ago, what job? These details matter.
If you’re really unsure most employment lawyers offer a free consultation. Good luck.
https://www.goodhire.com/resources/articles/how-far-back-do-...
> Businesses that sell criminal history information to employers are "consumer reporting agencies" (CRAs) if they provide the information in "consumer reports" under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (FCRA). Under FCRA, a CRA generally may not report records of arrests that did not result in entry of a judgment of conviction, where the arrests occurred more than seven years ago. However, they may report convictions indefinitely. (emph. added)
The FCRA does not wipe convictions after seven years.
A few states extend FCRA-like provisions for felony reporting. Most don’t.
Even if your state does extend those protections, most have salary caps: if you are (for example) a felon in Washington applying for a job over $20k in annual salary, the 7-year reporting exemption doesn’t apply to you.
Other states offer an exemption for misdemeanors but exclude felons entirely.
(edit: I had MA in my head but it was WA I was trying to remember, changed :-))
Wat
(Assuming the company is media, social media or gaming related)
Didn’t they already pay their “debt to society” by serving whatever their sentence was?
That’s kind of the entire point of justice.
And he’s applying for a job in literally one of the two types of jobs that you can set up total informational and access control.
How many decades before he should be considered normal again, or is he tainted for the rest of his life because of your “dishonesty conviction speaking to character”?
Hiding it, so that's it's only revealed during a credit check, is the problem.
You would be shocked at how many high-earning individuals in the finance industry essentially live paycheck to paycheck because they spend as much (or more) than they make in an effort to maintain "status" among their peers, clients, and neighbors. It's pretty much the norm for that industry.
A credit check is more often used to gauge how susceptible a candidate is to becoming a pawn in some espionage plot. Someone with large outstanding debts is more likely to agree to get paid to steal information or money when approached by an agent working for another company or government than someone who is financially secure.
So it’s not just about the status, you can easily get addicted to spending money. Earning a lot of money and knowing how to save money are vastly different skills.
About a decade ago I had a coworker whose access was suddenly pulled from all prod systems. The reason? Someone with his (quite common) name had a warrant issued in Oklahoma. We weren’t anywhere near Oklahoma and he’d never even set foot in Oklahoma. But our company had a few state contracts that required clean background checks & periodic rescreenings of employees, they checked him, and his name matched. It took a few weeks to clear it up, during which time he couldn’t do his job.
Most contracts aren’t likely going to be that painful but you’ll have a hard time going near any compliance regime with a criminal background, which narrows your options.
I know someone with a felony fraud conviction who can't get a job at any financial company (the business domain he has most experience in). Instant disqualifier.
Not all employers run background checks, but they may ask about felony or even misdemeanor convictions and if you lie and they later find out they can fire for that reason.
A candidate with a record may get passed over with the employer giving some other reason, to protect themselves from lawsuits. In other words the candidate may get told "We hired a more qualified candidate" when they actually got rejected because of a criminal record.
There is no standard "background check." A criminal history might come up, might not. You have to decide what's the best strategy... disclose it now while I'm competing against multiple other candidates with clean records and no solid internal relationships, or not say anything and take my chances, that maybe someone may discover it in the future and my ability, once I've become a well-liked, important contributor to the company, to be able to explain it away.
Some employers simply ask (usually on an information form) if the candidate has any convictions.
A candidate doesn't have to volunteer information, but should have an explanation for a criminal record should that come up. If asked the candidate shouldn't lie because lying to get a job usually gives the employer grounds to terminate later with cause (unless you get elected to Congress).
What crimes are left?
Also, ‘convicted criminal’ is not a protected class, you wouldn’t win a lawsuit against someone who refuses to hire ex-cons.
I don't think someone should get penalized their whole life for a mistake, but multiple convictions or recent convictions will make anyone wonder about who they are hiring. I've hired candidates who had drug-related convictions but had stayed away from drugs for years. I hired a man who had a fairly old conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm because he had a good explanation (and even though I'm not a fan of carrying guns). I have passed on people who had stolen from their employer or had convictions for violent crimes like assault, robbery, or sex offenses.
An employer has to consider more than giving a candidate with a record a second chance. They also have to consider the safety (real or perceived) of their other employees. If people at a company find out that they're working alongside someone with a history of violent assaults they aren't going to like that.
Sometimes a person can get their criminal record sealed or expunged, maybe worth it to discuss with a lawyer.
They can ask about anything I suppose. I've had company interviews where the application required me to state whether or not I've ever even been arrested, "regardless of conviction". Presumably their risk model counts even innocent (and ultimately incorrect) run-ins with the law as too risky to hire.
In the US a fairly big industry exists to do background checks and pre-employment screening. Having worked in enterprise logistics for a long time, with warehouse staff and drivers coming and going all the time and mandatory background tests and drug screens, I know that employers have to carefully screen so they aren't endangering their other employees, but also that employers can show compassion and understanding and not just toss a candidate for an old conviction.
...But ultimately we couldn't complete the hiring process since there was a bank on the first floor and the building owners would have terminated our lease if they found out they worked there.
For example, working at a software firm focused on trading and financial systems we had contractual requirements to never send felons onto customer sites. So for sales or support/engineering roles given that traveling to customer sites was part of the role description, that limited employees we would have otherwise hired.
Also, all the regulated financial's I've worked at have background checks at onboarding, and then annual compliance reviews where you have to attest to not having felonies in a range of related areas. You can't manage money if you've been convicted of stealing it.