Hire an Ex-Con, Get a Tax Credit

uscitizen

Villified User
Hire an Ex-Con, Get a Tax Credit
By KATHY MATHESON,
AP
Posted: 2008-05-28 10:26:57
PHILADELPHIA (May 27) - One-time thief Heber Nixon Jr. has filled out his share of futile job applications. All said being a felon wouldn't stand in his way - but the promised calls from managers never came.

Getting a Second Chance
Heber Nixon Jr. applied for job after job but never got hired. No one wanted to take on a convicted thief. Nixon finally got a second chance, working for Gensis Group construction company in Philadelphia. Now the city is promoting a program that offers incentives to businesses to hire former inmates.
He finally got a second chance when he showed up at a construction site looking for work and found a sympathetic builder.

Now, the city of Philadelphia is making a concerted effort to encourage the hiring of ex-convicts amid a renewed interest nationwide in dealing with high recidivism, growing crime rates and exploding prison populations.

Philadelphia averaged a murder a day the past two years and has been sued to reduce its overcrowded, record-high jail population.

So on his 100th day in office last month, Mayor Michael Nutter announced a program, being headed by an ex-offender, that gives $10,000 a year in municipal tax credits to companies that hire former prisoners and provide them tuition support or vocational training.

"This is one of the best crime-prevention programs we'll ever have," he said.

Initiatives to help former prisoners re-enter society have become a renewed priority across the country as new data shine a spotlight on staggering rates of incarceration and recidivism.

For the first time in U.S. history, more than one of every 100 adults is in jail or prison, a study released in February found. Federal data show about 700,000 people are released from state and federal prisons each year.

Michael Thompson, director of the Council of State Governments Justice Center, said the level of interest in finding ways to keep ex-prisoners from repeat offenses is unprecedented. "It's really quite extraordinary," he said.

Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago and San Francisco are among cities with agencies already dedicated to ex-offenders; states including Oregon and Oklahoma established councils last year to study re-entry policies.

In April, President Bush signed the "Second Chance Act," which authorizes more than $330 million over two years to help government agencies and nonprofit groups lower recidivism.

"The spending on corrections is consuming a larger and larger percentage of state and local budgets," Thompson said. "When you're spending it on this, you're not spending it on other government priorities."

Philadelphia spends about $30,000 a year to house each of its more than 9,000 inmates.

"You don't have to be a CPA to do the math," said Ronald Cuie, director of the mayor's Office for the Re-entry of Ex-offenders. "The investment on re-entry has a hard-dollar return."

http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/hire-an-ex-con-get-a-tax-credit/20080527184309990001
 
I favor programs like this.
These people have paid their debt to society and when they get out, they have an extremely hard time finding jobs. The best way to fight recidivism is through gainful employment. If giving companies a tax break for taking a chance with someone who is rehabilited is necessary, then I'm all for it.
 
I favor programs like this.
These people have paid their debt to society and when they get out, they have an extremely hard time finding jobs. The best way to fight recidivism is through gainful employment. If giving companies a tax break for taking a chance with someone who is rehabilited is necessary, then I'm all for it.

Right on. This was the aim of the facility where I worked; only a few of the non-dangerous psych inmates were a part of that program, but we had another segment of the inmate population that was required to work (we helped them find jobs), pay room and board, and do household chores. Once in a while it did some good within the limited time frame we had to work with them. I suspect that some of the benefits showed up 1, 2, or 5 years down the road. The goal was to help them to perceive alternatives to the actions and lifestyles that had led them into trouble in the first place.

This approach won't work for everyone, of course, but it did have some very positive effects for a lot of people, including the staff.
 
Right on. This was the aim of the facility where I worked; only a few of the non-dangerous psych inmates were a part of that program, but we had another segment of the inmate population that was required to work (we helped them find jobs), pay room and board, and do household chores. Once in a while it did some good within the limited time frame we had to work with them. I suspect that some of the benefits showed up 1, 2, or 5 years down the road. The goal was to help them to perceive alternatives to the actions and lifestyles that had led them into trouble in the first place.

This approach won't work for everyone, of course, but it did have some very positive effects for a lot of people, including the staff.

It almost makes you wonder why this wasn't done before.
 
Rear of ExCons.. Most of us are fear driven. It is an offshoot of Christianity.

You know.....I say that its a great idea, but in all honesty, when I think about this guy at my boyfriends job who just got caught stealing from people (he was a coke head) and it turns out embezzling volunteer money, there's no way in the world I'd hire him in my finance department. Ever. With any tax break.
 
You know.....I say that its a great idea, but in all honesty, when I think about this guy at my boyfriends job who just got caught stealing from people (he was a coke head) and it turns out embezzling volunteer money, there's no way in the world I'd hire him in my finance department. Ever. With any tax break.

You understand.....
As I said it does not work for everyone, but does for some.
How to tell the difference fairly and safely ? There is the rub, but I think it is still a cost effective and worthwhile program.

Heck even Candy McCain stile from a non profit....
And somehow she did not wind up a con...Ohh wait she is :)
 
You understand.....
As I said it does not work for everyone, but does for some.
How to tell the difference fairly and safely ? There is the rub, but I think it is still a cost effective and worthwhile program.

Heck even Candy McCain stile from a non profit....
And somehow she did not wind up a con...Ohh wait she is :)

Well, maybe I'd let him do my lawn. But he wouldn't get near any money or jewelry or electronics.

And yes. Cindy is a con.
 
You know.....I say that its a great idea, but in all honesty, when I think about this guy at my boyfriends job who just got caught stealing from people (he was a coke head) and it turns out embezzling volunteer money, there's no way in the world I'd hire him in my finance department. Ever. With any tax break.

A lot of places have restrictions on the types of jobs that exconvicts can have; in any event a background check should reveal any red flags pre-hire.
 
It almost makes you wonder why this wasn't done before.

Well, it's been done in Ontario at least for over a quarter century. That was my job that kept body and soul together while I finished my undergrad and masters' degrees; I quit when I went on to grad school.
 
I guess "serving your time" and "paying your debt" are pretty meaningless phrases if we are going to continue allowing the kind of discrimination against former inmates.

Anyone who supports black or gay rights should be absofuckinglutely ashamed of themselves if they support the continued discrimination against convicts who have served their time.
 
I guess "serving your time" and "paying your debt" are pretty meaningless phrases if we are going to continue allowing the kind of discrimination against former inmates.

Anyone who supports black or gay rights should be absofuckinglutely ashamed of themselves if they support the continued discrimination against convicts who have served their time.

It depends on what you're prepared to trust them to do. If somebody has been convicted of a series of break-and-enters and burglaries, for example, I'd be pretty hesitant to allow them to work inside my house, unsupervised. In fact there's a bylaw in the city near which I live supposedly preventing that.

Similarly, if someone has been convicted of embezzlement I wouldn't hire that person as an accountant. I wouldn't hire a child molester as a teacher, coach, or daycare provider.
 
I guess "serving your time" and "paying your debt" are pretty meaningless phrases if we are going to continue allowing the kind of discrimination against former inmates.

Anyone who supports black or gay rights should be absof*&&kinglutely ashamed of themselves if they support the continued discrimination against convicts who have served their time.

That is a piss poor correllation. Convicts are being judged on their illegal actions which for all intents and purposes is fair. And yes. There should be restrictions on the types of jobs they have. There is no way in the world a serial rapist should have a job at a convelescense home or a molester should work with children in any capacity. To pretend their plight is the same as people persecuted for essentially existing is absurd.
 
Back
Top