Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Is it disqualifying? Practitioner responses to criminal offenses in hiring decisions

Is it disqualifying? Practitioner responses to criminal offenses in hiring decisions The purpose of this paper is to explore variation in the responses of human resource practitioners and managers to criminal offenses.Design/methodology/approachThis paper considers background checks as a personnel selection test. In the first study, 280 professionals with hiring experience indicate how various criminal offenses, described as having occurred either within the past year or several years ago, would affect their evaluation of an applicant for a call center position. In the second study, a separate sample of 109 practitioners evaluates criminal as well as non-criminal transgressions that might appear on a background report.FindingsIn Study 1, both the apparent seriousness of an offense and its recency influence modal responses. Even non-violent misdemeanors from several years ago, however, are judged as automatically disqualifying by some participants. Study 2 shows that a practitioner’s attitude toward criminal offenses is distinct from their attitude to related forms of stigma. Results from both studies find associations between demographic variables and general willingness to accept applicants with criminal records.Originality/valueThis work provides quantitative data on practitioner reactions to several specific criminal offenses for a specific job context. By considering differences among offenses and among gatekeepers, rather than among applicants, it identifies challenges to fair implementation of background checks during the hiring process. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal Emerald Publishing

Is it disqualifying? Practitioner responses to criminal offenses in hiring decisions

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/is-it-disqualifying-practitioner-responses-to-criminal-offenses-in-ZHwEafTmHm
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
2040-7149
DOI
10.1108/edi-10-2018-0182
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to explore variation in the responses of human resource practitioners and managers to criminal offenses.Design/methodology/approachThis paper considers background checks as a personnel selection test. In the first study, 280 professionals with hiring experience indicate how various criminal offenses, described as having occurred either within the past year or several years ago, would affect their evaluation of an applicant for a call center position. In the second study, a separate sample of 109 practitioners evaluates criminal as well as non-criminal transgressions that might appear on a background report.FindingsIn Study 1, both the apparent seriousness of an offense and its recency influence modal responses. Even non-violent misdemeanors from several years ago, however, are judged as automatically disqualifying by some participants. Study 2 shows that a practitioner’s attitude toward criminal offenses is distinct from their attitude to related forms of stigma. Results from both studies find associations between demographic variables and general willingness to accept applicants with criminal records.Originality/valueThis work provides quantitative data on practitioner reactions to several specific criminal offenses for a specific job context. By considering differences among offenses and among gatekeepers, rather than among applicants, it identifies challenges to fair implementation of background checks during the hiring process.

Journal

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International JournalEmerald Publishing

Published: Jun 25, 2019

Keywords: Employment; Criminal history; Personnel selection; Industrial psychology; Background checks

References