I was convicted of 3rd degree Grand Larceny 31 years ago and I am about to get fingerprinted for a job here in Ny, will this show up?

Hi,

I have a grand Larcency 3rd degree felony on my record and Im going to be fingerprinted for a job. The felony is over 31 years ago. Will this show up?

Hello G:

Maybe and maybe not. Background checks are like burgers. There's good ones and not so good ones. If your potential employer wants to know everything about you, they can certainly find out. But, if they're just going through the motions, then maybe not.

excon

Hello G:

Maybe and maybe not. Background checks are like burgers. There's good ones and not so good ones. If your potential employer wants to know everything about you, they can certainly find out. But, if they're just going through the motions, then maybe not.

excon

His conviction here in NY is a Class D felony, and since he was convicted, which is different from being charged. I believe it will show up.

I would say it will - I often see records which contain information easily this old.

Hello j:

I'm familiar with the differences between being charged and convicted... The key isn't his record. They key is the quality of the background checker.

Not ALL background checkers are good. Some are sooooo bad, that they didn't detect that even I have a felony. And, I have several... I stand by my advice.

excon

I was convicted of 3rd degree Grand Larceny 31 years ago and I am about to get fingerprinted for a job here in Ny, will this show up?

What is the job related too?

What is the job related too?


What the job is "related to" doesn't matter. excon is right - what matters is the extent of the check and the skill of the person checking.

Life would also be easier if the OP posted once and included ALL the information in that one post.

What are you basing your "belief" on?

I've already answered this.

What the job is "related to" doesn't matter. excon is right - what matters is the extent of the check and the skill of the person checking.

Life would also be easier if the OP posted once and included ALL the information in that one post.

What are you basing your "belief" on?

I've already answered this.

If I am not mistaken, each state has statues on criminal background checks most background checks can show information on prior felonies indefinetly but the state supersedes that, and some states do not include anything past 7 years however here in NY felonies can't be sealed and show up indefinetely. Unless issued a pardon by the government which is less than likely and doesn't matter how much time elapsed since their offence. SO Again I stick to my statement that more than likely it will show up in NY. Also the OP should have put this information on his application, when asked if ever convicted of a felony.

Hello j:

I'm familiar with the differences between being charged and convicted.... The key isn't his record. They key is the quality of the background checker.

Not ALL background checkers are good. Some are sooooo bad, that they didn't detect that even I have a felony. And, I have several.... I stand by my advice.

excon

Did the background checker take your fingerprints? And if so clarify what state you are in because the statues differ for background checks depending on the state and the year from your last offense? Here in NY it's different, I am more than sure because he was convicted and didn't explain his plea and the sensitivity of the job, if so than this answer can not be answered with a yes or no, He need to explain details. I still stand by my advice.

Jolienoire

If I am not mistaken, each state has statues on criminal background checks most background checks can show information on prior felonies indefinetly but the state supersedes that, and some states do not include anything past 7 years however here in NY felonies can't be sealed and show up indefinetely. Unless issued a pardon by the government which is less than likely and doesn't matter how much time elapsed since their offence. SO Again I stick to my statement that more than likely it will show up in NY. Also the OP should have put this information on his application, when asked if ever convicted of a felony.


The Feds will see arrests forever, expunged or not. Again - it depends on the scope of the background check and I am unable to address any State BUT NY because that's where I am.

I don't understand the statement "... each state has statutes on criminal background checks most background checks can show information on prior felonies indefinitely but the state supersedes that ..."

What?

I don't understand the statement "... each state has statutes on criminal background checks most background checks can show information on prior felonies indefinitely but the state supersedes that ..."

What?


What I am trying to say is that convictions can show up indefinetely, however each state has it's own statues on the time they report. Example in Colorado, criminal background checks usually only will report the past the past 7 years. Besides even if his conviction does show up, There was a new law effective Feb 1,2009 in regards to criminal background checks and employers. This makes it unlawful for private employers that employ at least 10 employees to deny an applicant employment or to take an adverse action against an employee because of the applicant/employee’s prior criminal conviction(s) or a finding that the applicant/employee does not have "good moral character".


If they took his finger prints more than likely it is a sensitive job. Bottom line is why are you dissecting all of my statements when you are in agreement with me to some degree? Your simply saying maybe, or maybe not. You made a statement that it will, and now you're stating maybe it won't.

Again it does matter what the job is related to because that would determine how much digging they will do.

There was a new law effective Feb 1,2009 in regards to criminal background checks and employers. This makes it unlawful for private employers that employ at least 10 employees to deny an applicant employment or to take an adverse action against an employee because of the applicant/employee’s prior criminal conviction(s) or a finding that the applicant/employee does not have "good moral character". Hello again, J:

So, you're saying that exconvicts are a protected class of workers, like black people or gay people?? That would mean a bank robber could work in a bank, or a child molestor could be a day care worker...

I'm sorry. I'm not believing it. If there's a law, please direct me to it.

excon

Hello again, J:

So, you're saying that exconvicts are a protected class of workers, like black people or gay people???? That would mean a bank robber could work in a bank, or a child molestor could be a day care worker....

I'm sorry. I'm not believing it. If there's a law, please direct me to it.

excon

New York Employers Face New Background Check Requirements :: Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. (http://www.ebglaw.com/showclientalert.aspx?Show=9669)

There are exceptions.

Hello again, J:

So, you're saying that exconvicts are a protected class of workers, like black people or gay people???? That would mean a bank robber could work in a bank, or a child molestor could be a day care worker....



excon

There are exceptions I should have included.

Here is something else pretty interesting about NY BILL TO FIX CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK PROBLEM CREATED BY ROCKEFELLER REFORMS | New York State Senate (http://www.nysenate.gov/news/bill-fix-criminal-background-check-problem-created-rockefeller-reforms)

Hello again, J:

So, you're saying that exconvicts are a protected class of workers, like black people or gay people???? That would mean a bank robber could work in a bank, or a child molestor could be a day care worker....

I'm sorry. I'm not believing it. If there's a law, please direct me to it.

excon



The exclusions - and this has been around for a while in some form or other and is familiar to anyone who does background checks - pretty much negate the "thrust" (pardon the phrase) and intent of the law.

It is up to the employer to determine whether the criminal background would be a danger to business or employees, blah, blah, blah. For example, if the conviction is for theft and the employer "thinks" the employee "might" steal, he can refuse employment. Same with a drug arrest and working in a hospital.

It's another useless law passed by the State that has no teeth.

There has not been a test case and to the best of my knowledge not a single failure to hire has been reversed.

Any employer I have seen who requests a background check also requests the employee to fill out an application listing arrests. If the employer (in this tough economy) sees an arrest he doesn't go to step 2 which is obtaining written permission to do a background check.

Then you get into false information on the job application and that becomes an issue if that is the case.

Therefore, the argument is moot - no background check, no refusal to hire, ends right there.

Once again - I have experience with background checks. :D

Comments on this post
jolienoire disagrees: You are making assumptions about my knowldege.


This is a revenge reddie, pure and simple.

Not a problem - please post your experience with background checks. Your husband's experience does not count because I still don't know if he has a Federal job, a State job, an airport job, a private company job.

Here is something else pretty interesting about NY BILL TO FIX CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK PROBLEM CREATED BY ROCKEFELLER REFORMS | New York State Senate (http://www.nysenate.gov/news/bill-fix-criminal-background-check-problem-created-rockefeller-reforms)



This has not been passed and is stalled.

It doesn't pertain to ALL security clearances. As I said, the Feds and certain other exceptions will ALWAYS have access to this information.

We are talking about how it works now - not how it might work some time in the future.

There is no digging involved - it's either a full background check or it's not.

I disagree with you because you are posting info which is based on research and speculation without any understanding of how it works in real life.

EX: so you are telling me, it doesn't depend on the job? It does depend on the job. Say what you want.

Example if he is going to work at the JFK airport and a fingerprint background check is required For clearance, any convictions especially a felony will show up, because it is a safety sensitive job and you need certain clearance. My husband works in Aviation, in which they do fingerprinting even for regular airport employee. And if you need a SIDA badge to work at the airport for security clearance and you have any felony convictions you are disqualified. It will show up.

So what are you really saying? Again you are answering maybe/maybe not.

Anyway I'm done responding to you, because you just keep saying I know I know, then you told him you have seen something show up that old but yet, you are still disagreeing with me.

Don't even respond back to this post, I posted links to back up my statements. I still stick to my answer.

This has not been passed and is stalled.

It doesn't pertain to ALL security clearances. As I said, the Feds and certain other exceptions will ALWAYS have access to this information.

We are talking about how it works now - not how it might work some time in the future.


I know it isn't passed Doesn't it say bill? It was something informational.

Don't even respond back to this post, I posted links to back up my statements. I still stick to my answer.


Please don't direct who will respond to you and in what manner. https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/feedback/suggestion-new-written-policy-372284.html.

Further, this is not the "what might happen" board. It's the legal board and it addresses the law NOW. And, yes, I can both read and understand NYS laws. I can also interpret them and make sure I cover all the bases when I post. I don't come back with additional information.

But I agree - the thread is over. The question has been asked and answered. Now the OP can decide who has direct knowledge and experience and go from there.

.

Yes but it's okay for you to assume I have no experience with background checks. Classic.

yes but it's okay for you to assume I have no experience with background checks. Classic.



Revenge reddie - makes you look small.

No, I'm making assumptions based on what you've posted.

You respond "according to the circumstances" (according to you) instead of the law - the law does NOT change "according to the circumstances." You "believe" this and that. I post what I know.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/real-estate-law/eviction-roomate-372612.html

Again - this is not the "this is what might happen if the bill gets passed" board. That's the stuff of discussions. This is the law board. Please stick to the laws as they exist when you post.

And if you give a citation and explanation, please give the WHOLE explanation - in this case, that includes the exceptions.

I would say it will - I often see records which contain information easily this old.



His conviction here in NY is a Class D felony, and since he was convicted, which is different from being charged. I believe it will show up.


Bottom line is in the beginning we said pretty much the same thing.

But because I said I believe it will show up, you questioned my answer. Please reread the post.