Front Page / Issue Briefs / Justice, Crime and Public Safety & Economy and Jobs / Employment Barriers for Ex-Offenders / USA / New Jersey
 

Issue Brief

Employment Barriers for Ex-Offenders - New Jersey

Scope of the Problem  factual statements on the extent of the problem in the past, current, or future

• In New Jersey, 96% of state prisoners are released back into the community. In the past five years, approximately 70,500 individuals have returned to New Jersey communities following incarceration. A relatively small proportion of individuals receive education or training while incarcerated. For example, only 11% of inmates were provided with academic programming and only 6% were provided with vocational training by the Department of Corrections Office of Educational Services in FY2008. These numbers have increased in the past couple of years due to 2009 legislation known at the "Education and Rehabilitation Act."^[1]
• In New Jersey, there are approximately 18 categories of job for which certain criminal convictions are an absolute bar, most under state law and some under federal law. With some exceptions, these are lifetime bars and many are grouped under the heading of "crimes of moral turpitude."
• Of individuals released in 2005, 37% were employed by companies covered by Unemployment Insurance at some point during the seven quarters spanning 2006-2007. In any one quarter, this number ranged from 17-22%. Only 22% of releasees were employed at any point in time, and only 36% found employment at any time after release over a two year period. The highest proportion of releases (21-22%) was employed in the first and second quarters of 2006, however, by the final quarter, only 17% of the 2005 releasee cohort was employed. Overall, the number of weeks worked increased over the course of the year from 7.5 week to 8.8 weeks between the first quarter of 2006 and fourth quarter of 2007. The average quarterly income also increased, by about one-third, between the first quarter of 2006 ($3,151) and the third quarter of 2007 ($4,248). 
• A higher proportion of white reentrants found jobs in New Jersey compared to those who did not find jobs (26% to 21%). The opposite was true for the African American population, where more ex-offenders did not find jobs (59% to 63%). There was no significant difference among the Hispanic population (14% to 15%). 
• In terms of industries, about 33% of releasees were employed in administrative, support, waste management, and remediation services. Employment within other industries, such as construction, manufacturing, retail trade, accommodation and food services, and health care and social assistance.
• In terms of employment stability, only 29% of employed re-entrants in 2007 were in the same industries they first entered in 2006.
• The New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development (LWD) surveyed 1,200 employers about their experiences with ex-offenders, only 175 firms responded, and the overall response rate was about 17%. 36.2% (63 firms) hired an ex-offender in the last three years and the distribution of industries was more or less similar across response types.
• The vast majority of firms that participated had a highly-skilled workforce, with employees with at least bachelor's degrees or beyond, making up more than 75% of total employment. For 23% of respondents, most of their workforce (more than 60%) possessed at least a bachelor's degree and for 49% of respondents, 21-60% of their employees had at least a bachelor's degree. Only 7% of respondents did not have any employees with at least a bachelor's degree. This is important considering that half of re-entrants have less than a high school diploma or equivalency.
• 40% of firms (64) reported having restrictions in hiring ex-offenders, which were most often related to the type of work or specific factors of the employer's industry. The industries cited included health and child care, as well as industries cited to be serving "vulnerable clients." The next most common set of restriction cited was related to the type of offense. Specific offenses that were restricted included violent offenders, drug and sex offenders, theft, and felonies. Some respondents reported that their employees must undergo a background check. Some respondents referred to either company or government restrictions or regulations on their hiring practices. Two respondents noted tat ex-offenders would only be hired if at least 7 years had passed since their conviction.
• Other barriers were brought up by employers, the most common two of which concerned customers and existing employees. Respondents expressed that customer safety and trust could be an issue, especially in cases where they worked with a vulnerable population or did work at customers' homes. In regards to current employees, companies were uncertain about their attitudes towards re-entrants and did not know who it might impact them. There was also a concern about the safety of the current workforce. Other concerns included reliable transportation, probation appointments during work hours, and childcare. Lastly, employers reported either that they had never received applications from ex-offenders or that their work was to specialized for this population to pursue.
• Conditions that would increase the employer's likelihood of hiring an ex-offender
• Worker training and certifications
• Financial incentives
• Outside support
• Positive work history for the ex-offender (most significant incentive)
• Reentrant employment by industry clustered in administrative, support, waste management and remediation services (1/3 of surveyed cohort released in 2005)
• Average quarterly income was $2,900, however, it was only $2,000 for those employed in administrative support, waste management, and remediation
• Only 29% of the ex-offender cohort started 2007 in the same industry that they first entered in 2006
• This group of ex-offenders was able to earn more ($11,600 average in 2007) than their counterparts who changed industries or those who did not work in 2006 ($6,700 average in 2007)  
• The LWD report found that misperceptions and lack of first hand knowledge influence employer perceptions of ex-offenders; restrictions and barriers exist within many levels of private employment; improving ex-offenders' skills is more important than financial incentives for hiring; and employers and career counselors reported favorable experiences with ex-offender hiring and placement.

Past Policy & Program Milestones  key legislation and milestones including significant policy and funding shifts, major studies, etc.

Current Policy & Programs  summary of current policies in the form of legislation, programs, and funding

Key Organizations contacts for public and private organizations

• Government
• Executive 
• New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development 
• New Jersey One-Stop Career Centers 
• Legislative
•  
• Non-Profit - Service Providing
• The Nehemiah Group
•  
• Non-Profit - Advocacy/Membership/Network
• New Jersey Institute for Social Justice:  The New Jersey Institute for Social Justice (“NJISJ” or “the Institute”) is a Newark-based urban research and advocacy organization dedicated to the advancement of New Jersey's urban areas and residents. Established in 1999 by the Alan V. and Amy Lowenstein Foundation, the Institute provides a dynamic and independent voice for change necessary to create just, vibrant and inclusive urban communities throughout New Jersey. We are pleased to have been referred to as a “social justice think and do tank.”
• New Jersey Institute for Social Justice Workforce Development and Education
• Foundation
•  
• Other
•   

Bibliography   web sites, reports, articles, and other reference material

Contributor(s):

Footnotes

1. "Impact of Prior Criminal Conviction on Private Employment Opportunities in New Jersey." 2008. Division of Labor Market and Demographic Research, New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development. ▲