I overheard a P.O. tell a registrant “You need to make finding a job, your job. Get out there from 7AM to 4PM, knocking on doors, looking for a job.”
I wanted to tell her to “Snap Out Of It ! What world was she living in where people still sought employment by pounding the pavement?”
Although the P.O.’s advice was excellent, it was for a time long ago when ‘Help Wanted’ signs were posted on windows of establishments.
But it’s 2017. Today there’s not even an “Employment Section” in the newspaper. (For those few of us that still read our news in paper form!)
Employment is all about the internet. It’s Indeed, Glass Door, Craigslist, Simply Hired, Monster and all the other hundreds of websites where one can search for employment. Job searches are done online, no one takes “paper applications” anymore and stopping by unannounced at a store, restaurant, factory or anywhere else to “drop off a resume” is unheard of. That’s no longer the way things are done.
Applications are filled out online. Some registrants may be allowed access to computers, others may not. P.O.’s may suggest you fill out applications online at the local job center or public library, although this can be a problem in towns where “sex offenders” have been banned from public libraries.
And while friends or family members might be able to fill out online applications for you, having to constantly ask them do this is a real blow to your self-esteem. Here you are, an adult and you can’t even apply for jobs by yourself, you need to ask others if they can take time out of their busy lives to “search and apply” for you. If the government wants to sabotage your efforts to find a job, computer restriction is certainly the way to go!
Finding a job is difficult enough without governmental barriers.
Dare I say it, it’s almost as if the powers that be don’t want you to succeed!
There’s the problem of job applications in states that haven’t yet caught on to the “ban the box” idea. That little section of an application where it reads “have you ever been convicted of a crime/felony?” It’s hard enough checking the “yes” box, but then there’s a bigger box that reads, “please give a brief description of your conviction.” How does one briefly describe a sex offense in a way that will at least get you a face to face interview?, No matter how creatively you word your offense, is it really going to help you get an interview, or does it just make “interesting” reading or gossip for the receiver of your application?
The best idea I’ve heard for getting around this obstacle is to just write in “will discuss at interview”. Maybe that will at least peak the interviewer’s interest enough to call you in for an interview. There’s no guarantee’s, but you’re being honest on your application and good things may come from an actual person to person interview. (But if you get an interview and the interviewer “neglects” to bring up the conviction item, you must bring it up and “briefly describe your conviction”. There’s no way around that.)
If you actually get an interview and your offense was a non-contact, non-violent offense, you will at least get to give your side of the story at the interview. But wait, the stink of governmental sabotage still lingers….
It only takes a prospective employer a few minutes to go online and check your state registry to see that despite your non-contact, non-violent assertions, you are listed as “violent against children”.
Never mind that you’ve never been violent against anyone, the state you live in only lists two categories of offenders, those whose offense was against someone older than 13 and those whose offense was against someone under 13. It doesn’t matter what your offense. Never mind that there was never any contact or violence involved. Your state casts every registrant into one of two categories and you have been reeled-in and netted into the “violent against children” category.
It’s not who you are, it’s not someone you’ve ever been, but in the world of potential employment, you are now perceived as not only violent, but as a liar since you didn’t mention anything about violence in your interview. The only thought in the interviewer’s mind now is “The Registry wouldn’t lie.”
Or would it?
Portraying someone as something different than what they are, to me, that’s a lie. And that’s exactly what the Registry is doing. It’s like a big red flashing neon sign warning employers not to hire Registrants. It’s labeling people as something they are not and it’s barring them from not only getting jobs but from even getting interviews. And that’s not right.
Recent Colorado cases are prime examples of the damage that the Registry has done to those looking for employment. Hundreds of job applications put in by one of the registrants, hundreds and no offers! Does the government really believe that being on the Registry didn’t play a part in this person’s not being able to get a job?
It’s time to break down the barriers, remove the obstacles, let people who have paid the dues get on with their lives, without governmental sabotage.