Fair Chance Hiring ordinance -- amendments for consideration
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2016 6:16 pm
Colleagues:
After nearly a year of debate, public input, stakeholder meetings, committee meetings, and several work sessions, I am glad that we will finally have a chance to vote on the Fair Chance Hiring ordinance on this week’s agenda.
I believe the Economic Opportunity Committee made sound recommendations for the Council. In the last few weeks as we’ve approached a final decision, I’ve continued reaching out to business and community leaders to craft the best ordinance possible. I received requests for many amendments to the recommended ordinance. After much consideration, I believe that six of these amendments will balance the concerns of all sides and make for good policy. Below are the amendments listed with a description of each. Amendments #1, 2, 5, and 6 will make it easier for businesses to comply with the rules, and amendments #3 and #4 will make the ordinance more enforceable. You can see a copy of the ordinance linked here that I will propose Thursday, with the amendments incorporated: http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 180854.pdf
Amendment #1: Requires that the City use the same guidelines as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission when assessing whether or not an employer violated the ordinance, rather than the posted ordinance language which allows the City to use its own guidelines.
Amendment #2: Allows employers to give applicants, in writing, the employer’s criminal background check processes and explanation on how the employer considers criminal history.
Amendment #3: Gives applicants 90 days to make a complaint once they’ve learned of a violation. No applicant can file a complaint more than a year after a violation.
Amendment #4: Makes the civil penalty for violation $500, the same as our other non-discrimination rules. Note that amendment #5 allows for warnings before any such penalty is incurred.
Amendment #5: For the first year after the ordinance passes, no citations shall be issued, only warnings. After the first year, an employer can receive a warning for a first-time violation of this ordinance if the employer participates in a training to understand the requirements of the ordinance.
Amendment #6: Requires that the City include a website with best practices for complying with the ordinance for employers as part of the education campaign.
Please note that there are a couple of clarifications in the attached ordinance, suggested to us by City legal: making it explicit rather than implicit that the City will set up a process for handling anonymous complaints and clarifying the 501(c) status of membership organizations.
One last point:
As you know, the Council has substantial support from business and community leaders for the Fair Chance ordinance as recommended by the Economic Opportunity Committee. The Council has been presented letters of support from Presidents/CEOs of the Young Chamber of Commerce, the Black Chamber, the Gay & Lesbian Chamber, and the Hispanic Chamber. Although they are directionally supportive of Fair Chance Hiring, the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce has expressed continued concerns about the ordinance and has opposed its passage for Thursday. Amendments #1, 2, 5, and 6 are specifically drafted to address many of the issues their membership has communicated to my office.
Some have also communicated their general opposition to a core component of the ordinance: delaying the background check until the very end of the hiring process (the conditional offer stage). This is a critical component of the ordinance and a national best practice. It creates the most opportunity for employment for our constituents who need it. The National Employment Law Project has a useful brief that explains why cities such as Washington D.C., New York, Columbia (MO), and Philadelphia have successful ordinances that delay conviction inquiries until the end of the process. That brief is available here: http://www.nelp.org/content/uploads/Fai ... -Offer.pdf
A useful excerpt from the brief follows: “a candidate who is asked about his or her record prior to receiving a conditional offer faces ambiguity and uncertainty about the role his or her past conviction played in the employment decision. The employer may turn down the candidate for a variety of reasons unrelated to a prior conviction. Regardless, the applicant is unclear about the reason for denial. An employer that waits to inquire into a conviction history until the conditional-offer stage will not cause this uncertainty. The employer can assure the job candidate, and any enforcement agency that is investigating a complaint, that the individual was considered fully for the position.”
I look forward to further discussion tomorrow,
Greg
After nearly a year of debate, public input, stakeholder meetings, committee meetings, and several work sessions, I am glad that we will finally have a chance to vote on the Fair Chance Hiring ordinance on this week’s agenda.
I believe the Economic Opportunity Committee made sound recommendations for the Council. In the last few weeks as we’ve approached a final decision, I’ve continued reaching out to business and community leaders to craft the best ordinance possible. I received requests for many amendments to the recommended ordinance. After much consideration, I believe that six of these amendments will balance the concerns of all sides and make for good policy. Below are the amendments listed with a description of each. Amendments #1, 2, 5, and 6 will make it easier for businesses to comply with the rules, and amendments #3 and #4 will make the ordinance more enforceable. You can see a copy of the ordinance linked here that I will propose Thursday, with the amendments incorporated: http://assets.austintexas.gov/austincou ... 180854.pdf
Amendment #1: Requires that the City use the same guidelines as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission when assessing whether or not an employer violated the ordinance, rather than the posted ordinance language which allows the City to use its own guidelines.
Amendment #2: Allows employers to give applicants, in writing, the employer’s criminal background check processes and explanation on how the employer considers criminal history.
Amendment #3: Gives applicants 90 days to make a complaint once they’ve learned of a violation. No applicant can file a complaint more than a year after a violation.
Amendment #4: Makes the civil penalty for violation $500, the same as our other non-discrimination rules. Note that amendment #5 allows for warnings before any such penalty is incurred.
Amendment #5: For the first year after the ordinance passes, no citations shall be issued, only warnings. After the first year, an employer can receive a warning for a first-time violation of this ordinance if the employer participates in a training to understand the requirements of the ordinance.
Amendment #6: Requires that the City include a website with best practices for complying with the ordinance for employers as part of the education campaign.
Please note that there are a couple of clarifications in the attached ordinance, suggested to us by City legal: making it explicit rather than implicit that the City will set up a process for handling anonymous complaints and clarifying the 501(c) status of membership organizations.
One last point:
As you know, the Council has substantial support from business and community leaders for the Fair Chance ordinance as recommended by the Economic Opportunity Committee. The Council has been presented letters of support from Presidents/CEOs of the Young Chamber of Commerce, the Black Chamber, the Gay & Lesbian Chamber, and the Hispanic Chamber. Although they are directionally supportive of Fair Chance Hiring, the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce has expressed continued concerns about the ordinance and has opposed its passage for Thursday. Amendments #1, 2, 5, and 6 are specifically drafted to address many of the issues their membership has communicated to my office.
Some have also communicated their general opposition to a core component of the ordinance: delaying the background check until the very end of the hiring process (the conditional offer stage). This is a critical component of the ordinance and a national best practice. It creates the most opportunity for employment for our constituents who need it. The National Employment Law Project has a useful brief that explains why cities such as Washington D.C., New York, Columbia (MO), and Philadelphia have successful ordinances that delay conviction inquiries until the end of the process. That brief is available here: http://www.nelp.org/content/uploads/Fai ... -Offer.pdf
A useful excerpt from the brief follows: “a candidate who is asked about his or her record prior to receiving a conditional offer faces ambiguity and uncertainty about the role his or her past conviction played in the employment decision. The employer may turn down the candidate for a variety of reasons unrelated to a prior conviction. Regardless, the applicant is unclear about the reason for denial. An employer that waits to inquire into a conviction history until the conditional-offer stage will not cause this uncertainty. The employer can assure the job candidate, and any enforcement agency that is investigating a complaint, that the individual was considered fully for the position.”
I look forward to further discussion tomorrow,
Greg