By Michael Cerda-Jara and David J. Harding

One of the primary ways in which contact with the criminal legal system creates and maintains inequality is through the stigma of a criminal record. Although the negative effects of the stigma of a criminal record are well-documented, existing research is limited to the low-wage labor market. Through a job application audit design, this study examines the role of criminal record stigma in the labor market for recent college graduates across Black, Latino, and white men. We find that criminal record stigma has a large effect among white college-educated men but not among Black or Latino men and find no evidence that earning a college degree after the record mitigates criminal record stigma. In-depth interviews with college-educated men with a criminal record show that the criminal record stigma has effects beyond the initial application stage, as many reported provisional job offers being rescinded following a criminal background check, leading participants to limit the jobs to which they applied

Sociological Science 11: 42-66.2024

By Shawn D. Bushway, Justin T. Pickett

Although society benefits when people with criminal records are employed, employers are reluctant to hire them. Can we diminish this reluctance with direct incentives that reduce the cost of employing record-holders or that compensate for the associated risk? If so, will the beneficial effects of incentives emerge under traditional hiring, where job applicants disclose criminal history information at the application stage, and under Ban-the-Box, where they do not? To answer these questions, we conducted two preregistered experiments with a national sample of hiring decision-makers (n = 1,000). The first was a conjoint analysis where participants chose between applicants who randomly varied on eight attributes, including criminal record (n = 13,998 choices). It corresponded to traditional hiring, where applicants’ criminal records are available at the outset. The second experiment involved a series of picture-based factorial vignettes depicting tentatively hired employees later discovered to have records (n = 3,989 decisions). It approximated Ban-the-Box. In both experiments, a $2,400 tax credit and $25,000 insurance against losses from employee dishonesty reduced participants’ reluctance to hire record-holders. Rehabilitation certificates also had beneficial effects under Ban-the-Box.

Policy implications

Across two experiments, we found that a $2,400 tax credit and $25,000 insurance both reduced participants’ reluctance to hire record-holders; they did so under traditional hiring and Ban-the-Box, and they did so regardless of whether applicants had misdemeanor or felony convictions. The clear policy implication is that employers should receive both incentives. Two federal programs, the Work Opportunity Tax Credit and the Federal Bonding Program, currently offer similar incentives, but neither program is used widely. Our findings indicate that steps should be taken to increase their use and to expand them. Because rehabilitation certificates were also helpful for getting record-holders hired, steps should be taken to increase their use as well.

Criminology & Public Policy, 1–28. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12681