Fired for Minor Crimes Committed Long Ago

[goofyfish]

The article is from the Wall Street Journal, and is available only to online subscribers.

Firms Dig Deep Into Workers' Pasts Amid Post-Sept. 11 Security Anxiety

After Sept. 11, Kimberly Kelly says, she got a lump in her throat each morning as "The Star-Spangled Banner" blared at the Eli Lilly & Co. plant where she worked as a pipe insulator.

But on Jan. 29, her supervisor informed her that the drug giant, after conducting a criminal-background check as part of new post-attack security measures, had decided to ban her and several other contract workers from its facilities.

Her crime? In 2000, the 46-year-old single mother bounced a $60 check to a refrigerator-rental company. Ms. Kelly, who was going through a divorce at the time, says she moved to a new town and closed her bank account without realizing the check hadn't cleared. Court records in Montgomery County, Ind., show that when the appliance company couldn't locate her, it pressed charges. A judge found her guilty of check deception, a misdemeanor, and ordered her to pay $179 in fines and court costs.

Union officials say Lilly has since banned at least 100 contract workers from its premises. Some of those were found to have committed felonies, including burglary. But union officials say a great many were guilty of nothing but misdemeanors, the lowest category of crime. On the day Ms. Kelly was banished, four of her roughly 25 co-workers suffered the same fate. One was arrested 6-1/2 years ago on a misdemeanor battery charge that had since been dismissed and he thought had been expunged. Another had been fined $250 and served 20 hours of community service 14-1/2 years ago for misdemeanor marijuana possession.

Donald Ade, 44 years old and a veteran of the sheet-metal trade, made around $70,000 a year in wages and overtime building air ducts at Lilly's Technology Center until being banned Jan. 4. His offense: possession of a pound of marijuana nine years ago. Court records show he spent one night in jail, with the remainder of a one-year sentence suspended, and paid $1,115 in court costs and fines.

Teresa Butler, an Atlanta attorney who specializes in employee background checks for the law firm Littler Mendelson, agrees. "As tragic as it may be in certain situations, it just isn't a violation of the law," she says.

The article, about Lilly, says they are not the only firm doing so.

Lilly, IMHO, is wrong to start releasing contract workers for old slips, but their blanket policy seems to be that if the record does not come back clean, they are out. Any misdemeanor is enough to get a contract worker disqualified, it seems. (Regular employees, the article implies, were not subjected to the same post 9/11 scrutiny). I understand Lilly backed off of motor vehicle record review and credit checks, but I've still think they've gone much too far.

Can anyone defend the extent to which Lilly has gone?

Alternate Link for News Story


Peace.

 

[Asguard]

i don't know about the US's leagle system but couldn't the employer be taken to court for wrong full dismisal?