Rhode Island Enacts Ban-the-Box Legislation

By Michael Klazema on 8/5/2013

Current law in Rhode Island restricts employers from inquiring about arrests. Senate Bill 357 amends Chapter 28-5 of the Rhode Island General Laws entitled “Fair Employment Practices.” With its passage, the bill makes it an “unlawful employment practice” for an employer to inquire about any convictions before the first interview. However, employers may ask an applicant for information about his or her criminal convictions at the first interview or thereafter.

There are two specific exceptions provided in the law allowing employers to inquire about convictions before the first interview. An exception is provided if a federal or state law or regulation creates a disqualification from employment based on a person’s conviction of one or more specified criminal offenses. Another exemption is made if an individual must be bonded for a position and a conviction of one or more specified criminal offenses would disqualify the applicant from obtaining the bond.

Rhode Island joins California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, and Minnesota, in passing ban-the-box legislation. There are also many cities across the United States that have passed various forms of ban-the-box ordinances. It is a trend we expect to continue.

You may access Senate Bill 357 here:

 City of Buffalo Enacts “Ban the Box” Ordinance

The City of Buffalo recently enacted a new ordinance that essentially bans the box.  Banning the box refers to the elimination of an inquiry on a job application into a person’s criminal history.  The new ordinance prevents the City of Buffalo, its vendors, and any employer in Buffalo with at least 15 employees from asking questions about an applicant’s prior criminal convictions during the application process. (The ordinance does not specify whether an employer must have 15 employees in Buffalo to be subject to the ordinance.)

The new ordinance prohibits an employer from inquiring into or requiring an applicant to disclose or reveal a criminal conviction during the application process and prior to the first interview. The application process begins when an applicant inquires about employment and ends when the employer has accepted an employment application. If an employer does not conduct interviews, the ordinance requires the employer to inform the applicant whether he or she must undergo a criminal background check before employment commences.

Employers hiring for licensed trades or professions, including interns and apprentices, may ask applicants the same questions asked by the licensing body in accordance with New York state law. Also, when hiring for some positions, an employer may inquire about certain convictions or violations that would be considered barrier crimes under state or federal law.

The ordinance specifically requires employers to comply with Article 23-A of the New York State Correction Law when considering an applicant’s prior criminal conviction in determining suitability for employment. Article 23-A protects an applicant from discrimination based on a past criminal conviction unless the employer considers eight factors to determine that the conviction disqualifies the applicant.

Exemptions to Buffalo’s new ordinance are authorizations provided by other applicable law, and hiring for the police and fire departments. Also exempted from the ordinance are public and private schools, and any public or private service provider of direct services specific to the care or supervision of children, young adults, senior citizens, or the disabled.

The ordinance has an effective date of January 1, 2014. The amended bill is not yet available, although the text of the bill passed by the legislature is viewable here:

Article 23-A of the New York State Corrections Law is available here:

Tag Cloud
Recent Posts

Latest News

  • June 20 Repeat background checks are becoming more common, with companies in India leading the charge. What does this trend look like, and how can employers embrace it now to stay ahead of the curve?
  • June 19

    Every federal job involves a background check of some kind. These background checks and how they are evaluated vary based on job, department, and security clearance level.

  • June 18

  • June 14 Ban the box laws aim to improve opportunities for employment. Could they have the opposite effect instead?
  • June 13 Jacobs Petroleum Products is a regional petroleum company that operates throughout Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, and Maryland. Apart from their employees carrying much responsibility and have frequent contact with customers, the company’s hiring also tends to be segmented since individual store managers are responsible for hiring talent for their own stores. In this employment landscape, Jacobs Petroleum Products needed a reliable and effective way to screen its new hires for criminal infractions and other red flags.
  • June 12

    The University of Wisconsin System may tweak its hiring and reference check processes. The potential changes come after one of UW’s assistant deans was accused of sexual harassment.

  • June 07 Stories of abuse by coaches in youth sports leagues continue to crop up around the country, but rules and guidelines remain patchy and enforcement is often lacking. The struggle to implement an effective system continues nationwide.
  • June 07 Financial background checks, usually referred to as credit history checks, can be an effective way to find out if a candidate is fit to handle accounts, financial data, and other assets at your business.
  • June 06 The Society for Human Resource Management and the Charles Koch Institute recently commissioned a survey to find out how willing employers were to hire people with criminal records. The study indicates that managers, HR professionals, and employees themselves are becoming more comfortable with the idea of hiring and working with ex-offenders.
  • June 04 Are fingerprint background checks the gold standard for employee screening, or are they overhyped? We look at some of the myths and misconceptions surrounding these checks.