South Carolina Town Shuts Down Ban the Box Ordinance

By Michael Klazema on 1/9/2014

One of the major trends in the background check industry over the past couple of years has been the spread of “ban the box” legislation, laws that have prohibited employers in towns, cities, and states all across the country from including any questions about criminal history on job applications. However, ban the box laws – which are designed with the goal of giving ex-criminals better chances of securing employment – are not for everyone. That much at least was proven in the town of Florence, South Carolina, where the city council recently cut down a proposed ban the box ordinance.

The ban the box ordinance has been percolating in the city of Florence for the better part of a year now. Last April, councilman Ed Robinson announced in a news conference his belief that Florence needed an ordinance that would help to cut down on discrimination in the employment process. Robinson’s proposed ordinance, similar to pieces of ban the box legislation that has been passed in states like Rhode Island and Minnesota and cities like Richmond, California, would have prohibited local businesses from asking about criminal and felony history on an initial job application.

In practical terms, the failed ordinance would have given applicants with criminal histories an opportunity to secure an interview or get further in the hiring process than they otherwise would be able to, perhaps giving them the chance to show off their hirable qualities and posit themselves as attractive applicants – despite their criminal pasts. In many ways, Robinson was merely hoping that he could build a hiring environment in Florence where all applicants could be judged based on their merits rather than on their past mistakes or misdeeds.

Robinson stated in his initial news conference about the ordinance that he felt criminals being denied employment consideration and opportunity would only lead to higher and more destructive rates of recidivism. The councilman, an African-American himself, also expressed a belief that the problem of employment discrimination in Florence was especially severe for the African-American community. The EEOC has made similar statements in the past, and has even at times hinted that employment discrimination involving criminal history might have race-related implications to it.

The Florence ban the box ordinance would not have infringed upon employers’ ability to require background checks of their applicants. In other words, a background check would still have given employers all of the information they needed or wanted to know about their employers, including criminal histories, presence on sex offender registries, and more. However, it appears now that Robinson’s ban the box battle was all for naught. According to a local CBS affiliate, the ordinance was felled by the city council, with a final vote of 4-2. One member of the council was not present to submit a vote.


Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • March 20 Employers who use E-Verify must follow the proper steps and procedures when they receive a “tentative non-confirmation notice” from either the Social Security Administration or Department of Homeland Security. Failure to follow the proper procedures can cost employers both time and money. 
  • March 20

    Four Department of Commerce employees are out after their background checks resulted in security clearance denials. All four had worked high-ranking positions for months despite incomplete background checks.

  • March 15 As more states legalize the recreational use of cannabis, they contend with the emergence of new industries surrounding marijuana cultivation and production. 
  • March 14 In most cases, it is easy to determine where an issue might show up on a pre-employment background check. Citations for traffic violations or reckless driving charges will appear on a motor vehicle record check. Verdicts in a civil court case will show on a civil court background check. And criminal convictions—from petty theft to violent felonies—show up on criminal background checks.
  • March 13 How many years back do employment background checks go? This question can have multiple different answers depending on the situation.
  • March 13 A new bill in Florida would require landlords of apartment complexes to present tenants with verifications of employee background checks to give them peace of mind the people working in and around their homes are trustworthy.
  • March 08 Police officers working with the University of Texas at Arlington recently arrested a man who had avoided police capture on a warrant out of Oregon for nearly two decades. The man, whose real name is Daniel Charles Ray Hanson, spent those 17 years using a variety of fake names and identification documents to move around the country, often engaging with educational institutions under false pretenses. Police say Hanson regularly went by at least three different aliases. He sports a rap sheet that stretches back to an arson conviction in 1995. 
  • March 07

    The Future of EEOC Guidance in Texas Is Up in the Air

    The EEOC issued guidance in 2012 warning employers about the dangers of enforcing categorical policies to bar candidates with criminal histories. That guidance is not enforceable in Texas thanks to a recent court ruling.

  • March 05 Vermont is the latest state to restrict employers’ access to and use of social media accounts of employees and applicants. 
  • March 01 In an age of "industry disruptors" turning established business models on their heads, companies such as Uber and Lyft rely on a unique workforce of individuals outside the traditional employer-employee context. Uber calls them "partners" while other businesses refer to them as "independent contractors," the official classification these individuals use for tax purposes. Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) revealed they had warned a business, Postmates, for misclassifying their staff as independent contractors. In the NLRB's determination, these individuals were employees.