Bill 164: Breaking The Cycle Of Poverty For Future Generations

In Canada, 27% of prison inmates are Indigenous despite the fact that Indigenous people make up only 4.9% of Canada’s population. With nearly 50% of incarcerated youth being Indigenous, the disturbing overrepresentation of Indigenous people in our prisons is set to proliferate in coming years. Beyond justice reforms, the Canadian Government needs to do more to facilitate an eco-system to support ex-offenders in attaining gainful employment which will help to break the cycle of poverty that so insidiously feeds recidivism. Bill 164, which was introduced in October 2017, would have amended the Human Rights Code to include further protections against discrimination based on immigration status, genetic characteristics, social condition and police records. If it had been passed, these amendments would have broken down some of the barriers that prevent the most vulnerable and marginalized Canadians from improving their standard of living through employment and housing. Specifically, enacting Bill 164 would be useful in the employment setting to prevent individuals from being undeservingly penalized and excluded from the workforce due to their police records. This is evident from the insurmountable barriers preventing those with records from gaining employment and flourishing in the workforce, the diversity of perspective and talent that is lost when ex-offenders are not considered for jobs, and the maltreatment of ex-offenders once the employer obtains knowledge of their interactions with police.

Bill 164 would have eliminated the many barriers to employment that surreptitiously come with a police record and helped to reconcile a policing system that has unfairly punished and targeted minority groups. Unfortunately, the practice of arbitrary police street checks, otherwise known as carding, means that stereotypes and race significantly determine who is more likely to accumulate a record with police and therefore likely to suffer the disadvantages that accompany having a record when seeking employment. Although new rules were put in place restricting carding in January 2017, data collected from 2009-2014 in Brampton and Mississauga showed that minority groups were almost three times more likely than Caucasians to be randomly stopped and have their personal details inputted into the police database.

The racialization of carding has resulted in disparate outcomes for disenfranchised peoples and therefore should not be considered during the job selection process. For those who have committed a criminal offence, the stigma towards offenders that many employers have, acts as an unassailable barrier to gaining employment. One study conducted in New York City by the National Institute of Justice showed that, “having a criminal record reduced the likelihood of a callback or job offer by nearly 50%.” The stigma surrounding those with records exacerbates the already challenging job search process for former inmates, who, because of factors such as limited access to education and mental illness, are already at a disadvantage. With many companies transitioning to a digitalized job application process, more barriers are arising for those with records. Many online job applications have a segment of the application where if a candidate checks the box indicating that they have a record, they are automatically excluded from being considered for the position, without any opportunity to speak to the employer and explain the circumstances. In many jobs, this automatic exclusion is without merit because the existence of a police record is not a relevant job selection criterion and is not a reliable predictor of job candidate’s success. A common reaction to Bill 164 is public fear and concern that the Bill would benefit those with records who are still dangerous. However, Bill 164 would address this concern by allowing an employer to gain access to a person’s record if it is relevant to a bona fide occupational requirement, for instance if the job includes working with the elderly.

Without Bill 164, an absurd amount of human capital and talent continues to be squandered. A study conducted by the National Institute of Justice found that almost 75% of those released from prison are still unemployed a year after their release. This harrowing statistic sheds light on the magnitude of the many hindrances ex-offenders face when applying for jobs which results in low rates of employment and higher rates of recidivism. Employment Bill 164: Demolishing the Barriers Against Employment for Individuals with Records 3 is crucial for post-release success, but ex-offenders are not the only ones who stand to gain if Bill 164 were to be passed. Many employers actively seek out diversity, spending thousands on premium programs and marketing initiatives because of new research showing that companies with more diverse employees perform better financially. If an employer’s goal is to enhance the diversity of their organization, then excluding those with records from the hiring process is extremely counter-productive.

The extreme overrepresentation of minorities targeted in carding practices and in federal prisons has resulted in a wealth of surface-level diversity that employers are failing to capitalize on because they cannot see past the police records. Not only do many individual’s with records have surface-level diversity, but many employers forget the importance of deep-level diversity of perspective, experience and knowledge that many people with records have. This deep level diversity is proven to be more influential in teams than surface-level diversity in improving team decision-making by integrating more unique information and perspectives. Therefore, not only would Bill 164 improve the chances of ex-offenders in attaining employment, but it will also benefit employers by making their teams more diverse and consequentially more effective. Even when an individual with a police record obtains a job, significant anxiety and stress commonly occurs because of the fear of being ostracized or judged by the colleagues that know of the record. For example, Jimmy Erikson was forced to disclose his police record to several company members before being hired at Butterball and subsequently, when he began work, “… battled constant anxiety that everyone knew about his record and judged him for it”.

Passing Bill 164 would allow those with a police record to enter a new job on an equal playing field along with those without records. The importance of ensuring that records are kept confidential is further illustrated by a 2003 study that revealed that after accumulating a record with police, an individual’s earnings typically dropped between 10-30%. Therefore, police records not only hinder Bill 164: Demolishing the Barriers Against Employment for Individuals with Records 4 one’s chance of getting employed but can also negatively impact a person’s earning potential after obtaining employment. Bill 164 defined a police record as any record of an individual’s interaction with the police, including charges and convictions. Bill 164 would protect former convicts from forms of maltreatment such as unfair pay, but would also notably protect the privacy of individuals who have a police record because they were the victim of a crime. Many victims of crime have experienced significant trauma and therefore being forced to share the details of the event with the police can result in serious mental strain and can even dissuade them from applying to the job. Thus, as the arguments above illustrate, Bill 164 would be useful in the employment context because discrimination based on police records is prevalent and serves as a perpetual handicap for those who have served their sentences or who have been unfairly racialized by Canada’s police system. In 2014, a lack of employment opportunity was identified as a root cause of Canada’s 35% recidivism rate. Instead of further penalizing those with records, more should be done to create programs and policies so that every Canadian citizen feels they can contribute to society. Specifically, employers should follow the lead of Butterball, who has a policy in place to hire two ex-offenders per thirty workers at their Grand Rapids location and to mentor them while on the job.

Undoubtedly, enacting Bill 164 would be a vital step in the right direction and the effects of this Bill would have a positive rippling effect on the most vulnerable people in Canada. The correlation between poverty and crime in Canada is apparent with almost 100% of prison inmates coming from the 10% of Canada that lives below the poverty line. This statistic highlights the fact that through Bill 164, some of Canada’s most marginalized people would have a better chance of becoming employed and through that an invaluable opportunity to break the cycle of poverty for future generations.