WHEN does an American stop paying for a crime? WHEN are such persons allowed full re-entry into society? I often wonder if since such persons are summarily excluded from society, denied basic rights and privileges of citizenship in every way that is meaningful, then why should such persons be made to pay taxes? For what benefit do they pay? Certainly not their own. Most cannot vote, can't find work, are denied housing, college grants, certain professional licenses, food stamps and so much more after being forced into a free labor system, because mass incarceration is also tantamount to re-implementation of slavery. Inmates are forced to barter the prospect of freedom (better referred to as early release because once branded a criminal, freedom escapes you) for so few pennies for the hour, that essentially they work for free. Don't believe me? Read Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II by Doug Blackmon, the title sums up the message. Is it expected that when persons with convictions are fortunate enough to find or create work, that they should then work and pay to support the comforts of America for everyone but themselves? Seems rather unfair, seems unjust...
In the Washington Post article, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charges that two employers, BMW and Dollar General, are discriminating in their hiring practices, refusing to hire or blatantly firing those persons with criminal convictions. How dare both companies, who undeniably make a ton of money in the Black community which is unduly burdened with the stigma of criminal convictions, enforce such practices, particularly where long term and otherwise good employees were terminated for matters that seem minor in nature and that occurred in the distant past.
This is where we need to be reminded of the power of a boycott. We have forgotten the effect of collectively refusing to buy a product or use a particular service. Our history has proved that launching a mass boycott of these type employers, would force them to revisit their discriminatory policies. In this instance, where would Dollar General be without Black and/or poor patrons, both of whom are disproportionately burdened with criminal convictions, both of whom largely constitute Dollar General's customer base? I think we know. Here I must plug and encourage you to read Our Black Year: One Family's Quest to Buy Black in America's Racially Divided Economy by Maggie Anderson. She passionately and convincingly details for the Black community the power of our dollar and encourages that we make demands in return for our patronage, that we exercise our muscle in terms of our significant spending power.
If companies can set up shop and sell their goods and services to persons with criminal convictions, certainly they can be more lenient and reasonable in terms hiring such persons therefore rewarding the "hand that feeds them". The crime prompting exclusion from employment should be directly related to the work to be performed and even then, there should be a consideration of relevant circumstances; further involvement in criminal activity and certainly how long ago the crime was committed.
My hat is off to the EEOC for investigating, exposing and hopefully enforcing strong penalties for such blatant discrimination. These are but two of MANY employers who are equally guilty of enforcing similar exclusionary policies. Join me and support that the EEOC sends a very strong message of zero tolerance and puts an end to even to this long arm extension of discrimination!
Check out the article:
Two Companies Accused of Discrimination in Hiring
