Can I Get a Software Dev Job After an Expunged Arrest?

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

I want to get as a software dev, but here's the issue. I got arrested for a misdemeanor a few years ago, but I didn't get convicted and the arrest was expunged. Recently though I went through two 3rd party background checks and the arrest still showed up. Since then I filed a dispute with both companies and provided the paperwork, but this has me wondering do I still have a chance at a software dev job?

 

[Dale]

It wouldn’t affect your employability at my employer. I am concerned that it is showing up even though it was expunged. Do you know how that is happening? You may have some legal recourse.

 

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

It wouldn’t affect your employability at my employer. I am concerned that it is showing up even though it was expunged. Do you know how that is happening? You may have some legal recourse.

I spoke to the solicitors office that expunged the arrest. I was told it was expunge, but they can't speak for the hundreds of 3rd party background companies out there. As I said i disputed the information coming up, but now I believe I don't stand a chance now.

 

[Dale]

Well, I cannot tell about other companies and other countries, but in my country and in my company it would not be a factor. In fact our HR would not even tell the hiring manager about it.

 

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

Well, I cannot tell about other companies and other countries, but in my country and in my company it would not be a factor. In fact our HR would not even tell the hiring manager about it.

I'm in the united states. Anyways what do you think my job options are now? I know cybersecurity is a no go since jobs like that require a clearance.

 

[russ_watters]

It might be worth having a lawyer check up on the expungement.

 

[Trying2Learn]

I want to get as a software dev, but here's the issue. I got arrested for a misdemeanor a few years ago, but I didn't get convicted and the arrest was expunged. Recently though I went through two 3rd party background checks and the arrest still showed up. Since then I filed a dispute with both companies and provided the paperwork, but this has me wondering do I still have a chance at a software dev job?

I cannot help you or offer advice.

But I wish the best for you.

 

[Dale]

I'm in the united states. Anyways what do you think my job options are now? I know cybersecurity is a no go since jobs like that require a clearance.

In the US this should not affect your employability:

https://www.eeoc.gov/pre-employment-inquiries-and-arrest-conviction

“an individual's arrest record standing alone may not be used by an employer to take a negative employment action”

This is precisely the reason that my company’s HR department would not even inform the hiring manager about this. I suggest:

1) look for large companies with dedicated HR departments that are likely to follow the same policy as my company

2) get legal advice from an actual lawyer

3) consider that your arrest record may not be the reason you didn’t get those jobs and see what else you can do to improve your chances

 

[CrysPhys]

It might be worth having a lawyer check up on the expungement.

^^^ Yes, this. I'll repeat my response from a previous thread [focussed on possible effects of your (i.e., the OP's) previous arrest on a career as a quant]:

You did not ask for typical career advice such as desired educational background, job opportunities, salary, or working conditions as a quant. You specifically asked whether a prior arrest (no conviction, record expunged) would bar you from employment as a quant. That indeed falls into the category of seeking legal advice, rather than career advice. I would first consult an employment attorney. If he decides that he's not the appropriate attorney, he will then refer you to an appropriate attorney. Typically, an attorney does not charge for an initial brief call in which you explain your situation and the type of help you need (confirm this with any particular attorney). He will then decide whether your case is within his scope of practice, or whether you would be better served by someone else. If it's within his scope, he will provide you with a cost estimate.

No one here can provide you with a definitive answer (which may depend on a number of factors) unless he's an attorney. And no attorney will provide legal advice (specific to an individual case) in a public forum. The most you can expect is, "In general, here are various factors and regulations to consider: ... For an answer to your specific case, consult an attorney."

So, in spite of all the assurances (you received in the other thread from various posters) that you would face no consequences whatsoever, your past arrest has in fact turned out to be an impediment to you gaining a job. No longer conjecture or speculation; reality. Seek legal advice.

 

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

It might be worth having a lawyer check up on the expungement.

I already contacted the court where the case took place and they said it was expunged and i also have the paperwork as proof so idk why you keep bringing up lawyers all the time.

your past arrest has in fact turned out to be an impediment to you gaining a job. No longer conjecture or speculation; reality. Seek legal advice.

when have i ever said that? as a matter of fact i have a job currently at a local grocery store, but I believe i can never get an IT job now that my arrest is still coming up on 3rd party background checks although its been expunged. So again I ask what am I suppose to say to a lawyer exactly?

 

[Dale]

I already contacted the court where the case took place and they said it was expunged and i also have the paperwork as proof so idk why you keep bringing up lawyers all the time

There is more to the legal system than just the courts and their actions. If you are facing illegal employment discrimination then you do need to consult with a lawyer.

Let’s put it this way, if you are being illegally discriminated against in employment then that is severely impacting your income, perhaps by several tens of thousands of dollars per year. If you need to spend say five thousand on a lawyer to rectify that then the break-even time is only a couple of months.

Don’t dismiss the recommendation to seek professional advice. It is a good recommendation.

 

[CrysPhys]

I already contacted the court where the case took place and they said it was expunged and i also have the paperwork as proof so idk why you keep bringing up lawyers all the time.when have i ever said that? as a matter of fact i have a job currently at a local grocery store, but I believe i can never get an IT job now that my arrest is still coming up on 3rd party background checks although its been expunged. So again I ask what am I suppose to say to a lawyer exactly?

OK. So if you're content working at a local grocery store, no problem. But acccording to you, you believe that your arrest record is an impediment to the types of jobs you aspire to, correct?

Look at this site: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/...t-and-conviction-records-employment-decisions. In particular:

" Additionally, reports have documented that criminal records may be inaccurate.

• One report found that even if public access to criminal records has been restricted by a court order to seal and/or expunge such records, this does not guarantee that private companies also will purge the information from their systems or that the event will be erased from media archives.
• Another report found that criminal background checks may produce inaccurate results because criminal records may lack "unique" information or because of "misspellings, clerical errors or intentionally inaccurate identification information provided by search subjects who wish to avoid discovery of their prior criminal activities." "

Also, look at the various examples given on that website. Only an attorney can parse through all the nuances.

So, you have two options: (1) Keep sending out job applications (for positions you aspire to), and hope the problem goes away [The mere fact that you've launched this new thread indicates to me that you're not happy with that approach.], or (2) Consult an attorney to determine what recourse (if any) you have (e.g., Is there a mechanism for purging your arrest record from private databases?). What other answers are you hoping to find on this forum (other than a rehash of all the assurances you received on the previous thread)?

 

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

OK. So if you're content working at a local grocery store, no problem. But acccording to you, you believe that your arrest record is an impediment to the types of jobs you aspire to, correct?

Look at this site: https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/...t-and-conviction-records-employment-decisions. In particular:

" Additionally, reports have documented that criminal records may be inaccurate.

• One report found that even if public access to criminal records has been restricted by a court order to seal and/or expunge such records, this does not guarantee that private companies also will purge the information from their systems or that the event will be erased from media archives.
• Another report found that criminal background checks may produce inaccurate results because criminal records may lack "unique" information or because of "misspellings, clerical errors or intentionally inaccurate identification information provided by search subjects who wish to avoid discovery of their prior criminal activities." "

Also, look at the various examples given on that website. Only an attorney can parse through all the nuances.

So, you have two options: (1) Keep sending out job applications (for positions you aspire to), and hope the problem goes away [The mere fact that you've launched this new thread indicates to me that you're not happy with that approach.], or (2) Consult an attorney to determine what recourse (if any) you have (e.g., Is there a mechanism for purging your arrest record from private databases?). What other answers are you hoping to find on this forum (other than a rehash of all the assurances you received on the previous thread)?

I just got off the phone with a local attorney that handles expungements. I basically told her about my arrest and how it was expunged. She explained to me that it's expunged, but only at state level. When it comes to 3rd party background checks the arrest can still show up potentially and the only thing i can do is file a dispute so the background check company I go through can remove the information from their databases.

Also in that eeoc.gov link I found this while reading:
"The fact of an arrest does not establish that criminal conduct has occurred.101 Arrests are not proof of criminal conduct. Many arrests do not result in criminal charges, or the charges are dismissed.102 Even if an individual is charged and subsequently prosecuted, he is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.103

An arrest, however, may in some circumstances trigger an inquiry into whether the conduct underlying the arrest justifies an adverse employment action. Title VII calls for a fact-based analysis to determine if an exclusionary policy or practice is job related and consistent with business necessity. Therefore, an exclusion based on an arrest, in itself, is not job related and consistent with business necessity.

Another reason for employers not to rely on arrest records is that they may not report the final disposition of the arrest (e.g., not prosecuted, convicted, or acquitted). As documented in Section III.A., supra, the DOJ/BJS reported that many arrest records in the FBI's III database and state criminal record repositories are not associated with final dispositions.104 Arrest records also may include inaccuracies or may continue to be reported even if expunged or sealed.105

Example 3: Arrest Record Is Not Grounds for Exclusion. Mervin and Karen, a middle-aged African American couple, are driving to church in a predominantly white town. An officer stops them and interrogates them about their destination. When Mervin becomes annoyed and comments that his offense is simply "driving while Black," the officer arrests him for disorderly conduct. The prosecutor decides not to file charges against Mervin, but the arrest remains in the police department's database and is reported in a background check when Mervin applies with his employer of fifteen years for a promotion to an executive position. The employer's practice is to deny such promotions to individuals with arrest records, even without a conviction, because it views an arrest record as an indicator of untrustworthiness and irresponsibility. If Mervin filed a Title VII charge based on these facts, and disparate impact based on race were established, the EEOC would find reasonable cause to believe that his employer violated Title VII.
Although an arrest record standing alone may not be used to deny an employment opportunity, an employer may make an employment decision based on the conduct underlying the arrest if the conduct makes the individual unfit for the position in question. The conduct, not the arrest, is relevant for employment purposes."

 

[Dale]

I just got off the phone with a local attorney that handles expungements. I basically told her about my arrest and how it was expunged. She explained to me that it's expunged, but only at state level. When it comes to 3rd party background checks the arrest can still show up potentially and the only thing i can do is file a dispute so the background check company I go through can remove the information from their databases.

Excellent! That sounds good. Then you can stop worrying about the arrest and focus on your qualifications.

 

[CrysPhys]

Excellent! That sounds good. Then you can stop worrying about the arrest and focus on your qualifications.

A lingering issue is how many 3rd party companies handle background checks, how many databases they access, and which particular 3rd party company a particular employer (to which the OP applies) uses for its background checks. So multiple iterations may be needed (I don't know whether that's indeed the case; the attorney probably would): It's not necessarily "one and done".

 

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

A lingering issue is how many 3rd party companies handle background checks, how many databases they access, and which particular 3rd party company a particular employer (to which the OP applies) uses for its background checks. So multiple iterations may be needed (I don't know whether that's indeed the case; the attorney probably would): It's not necessarily "one and done".

so pretty much my chances at getting a tech job of any kind is not going to happen even though I was never convicted and it wasn't a felony?

 

[Dale]

Again, look for big companies with dedicated HR departments that would behave like mine.

 

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

Again, look for big companies with dedicated HR departments that would behave like mine.

wouldn't "big companies" have more stricter background checks? So what's even the point?

 

[CrysPhys]

so pretty much my chances at getting a tech job of any kind is not going to happen even though I was never convicted and it wasn't a felony?

That's not what I said at all. I was responding to Dale's reply:

Excellent! That sounds good. Then you can stop worrying about the arrest and focus on your qualifications.

which reads along the lines of, "Hey, your problems are over!" , when they might not be. That's why consulting with an attorney might be worthwhile.

From your Reply #13, it's apparent that you did refer to the EEOC link I gave in Reply #12. Even though that link provides only a short overview, notice all the complex nuances involved in determining whether or not an employer or potential employer is violating Title VII, and what recourse an employee or applicant might have. And that addresses only Title VII. If you refer back to the link in Dale's Reply #8 (https://www.eeoc.gov/pre-employment-inquiries-and-arrest-conviction), you will also find the following passage:

"Several states' laws limit employers' use of arrest and conviction records to make employment decisions. These laws may prohibit employers from asking about arrest records or require employers to wait until late in the hiring process to ask about conviction records. If you have questions about these kinds of laws, you should contact your state fair employment agency for more information."

So there might be other laws, each with its own set of complex nuances, which apply to your specific scenario. A competent attorney would be able to discuss these with you, and what recourse (if any) you have.

So again, you can (1) Keep applying until you find a position that you like with a company that doesn't care, or (2) Consult with an attorney (a) to see whether there's a mechanism to correct all the private databases once and for all, and (b) to see whether any potential employer you apply to is violating any laws and what recourse you have if they are (that is, discuss the specifics of your personal situation, not some generalized hypothetical situations ... I can't emphasize that enough to you).

 

[CrysPhys]

wouldn't "big companies" have more stricter background checks? So what's even the point?

Don't make such assumptions. "Big companies" have deep pockets and stand to lose a lot if they are successfully sued. "Big companies" are also more likely to have legal staff on hand who are cognizant of the relevant laws. "Big companies" are more sensitive to bad PR arising from any infractions.

 

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

That's not what I said at all. I was responding to Dale's reply:
which reads along the lines of, "Hey, your problems are over!" , when they might not be. That's why consulting with an attorney might be worthwhile.

From your Reply #13, it's apparent that you did refer to the EEOC link I gave in Reply #12. Even though that link provides only a short overview, notice all the complex nuances involved in determining whether or not an employer or potential employer is violating Title VII, and what recourse an employee or applicant might have. And that addresses only Title VII. If you refer back to the link in Dale's Reply #8 (https://www.eeoc.gov/pre-employment-inquiries-and-arrest-conviction), you will also find the following passage:

"Several states' laws limit employers' use of arrest and conviction records to make employment decisions. These laws may prohibit employers from asking about arrest records or require employers to wait until late in the hiring process to ask about conviction records. If you have questions about these kinds of laws, you should contact your state fair employment agency for more information."

So there might be other laws, each with its own set of complex nuances, which apply to your specific scenario. A competent attorney would be able to discuss these with you, and what recourse (if any) you have.

So again, you can (1) Keep applying until you find a position that you like with a company that doesn't care, or (2) Consult with an attorney (a) to see whether there's a mechanism to correct all the private databases once and for all, and (b) to see whether any potential employer you apply to is violating any laws and what recourse you have if they are (that is, discuss the specifics of your personal situation, not some generalized hypothetical situations ... I can't emphasize that enough to you).

Another thing I want to ask is that is it true background checks only go up to 7 years? Or is that a myth?

 

[CrysPhys]

Another thing I want to ask is that is it true background checks only go up to 7 years? Or is that a myth?

Sorry, I don't know, and I'm not qualified to answer that. But again, as you've found out the hard way, there can be a disconnect between "what should be done" and "what actually is done": that keeps attorneys busy.

 

[Dale]

wouldn't "big companies" have more stricter background checks? So what's even the point?

They have generally more strict hiring processes, which means first and foremost that they prevent hiring managers from breaking the law. You want a company with a big strict HR department, that works in your favor here.

 

[KamenRiderTorbjorn]

Sorry, I don't know, and I'm not qualified to answer that. But again, as you've found out the hard way, there can be a disconnect between "what should be done" and "what actually is done": that keeps attorneys busy.

To give you a bit on a update the disputes that I field with the background companies they ended up removing the arrest information. Also when I google my name the arrest doesn't show up either. besides that when I talked to the attorney earlier today she just said the best thing I can do is keep filing for disputes so they can remove it