Legislative History for Connecticut Act
Legislative History for Connecticut Act
PA 16-83 HB5237 Senate 3009-3024 16 Judiciary 2575, 2870-2873, 3464- 22 3466, 3476, 3482-3483, 3525-3527, 3824-3831 Labor & Public 451-452, (453), 454-459, 138 Employees 496-513, 514-517, 520- 532, 534, 543-545, 576, 593-600, 605-610, 622- 630, 631-656, 724-756, 758-760, 763-764, 817-818
House Transcripts have not been received. They are available 176 on CGA website, but are not the Official copy. Contact House Clerk for assistance (860) 240-0400
Transcripts from the Joint Standing Committee Public Hearing(s) and/or Senate and House of Representatives Proceedings
Connecticut State Library Compiled 2017 S - 699
CONNECTICUT GENERAL ASSEMBLY SENATE
PROCEEDINGS 2016
VOL. 59 PART 9 2751 – 3097
003009 /je 259 SENATE May 4, 2016
0 Those voting Nay 0 Absent and not voting 0
THE CHAIR:
The bill passes. Mr. Clerk.
THE CLERK:
On page 18, Calendar 510, Substitute for House Bill Number 5237, AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT. It's amended by House A.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Gomes.
SENATOR GOMES ,(23RD):
0 Thank you, Madam President. I move acceptance of the Joint Committee's favorable report and passage of the bill in concurrence with the House of Representatives as amended House Amendment Schedule A.
THE CHAIR:
Please continue.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD) :
The bill prohibits employers from asking about a prospective employee's prior arrest, criminal charges, or convictions on an initial employment application unless, one, the employer must do so under state or federal law, or two, the prospective employee is applying for a position for which the 0 003010 /je 260 SENATE May 4, 2016
employer must obtain a security or Fidelity bond or equivalent bond.
THE CHAIR:
Thank you very much, Senator Gomes. Senator Hwang.
SENATOR HWANG (28TH) :
Thank you, Madam President. I rise in support of this bill. It's been a bill that's a work in progress. It is an opportunity for people with reentry and an opportunity to start a new career and move themselves forward. I appreciate the good work of Senator Gomes. He himself with a personal history of accomplishment and reentry, so I urge support of this bill. Thank you.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Fasano.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
Thank you, Madam President. If I may, to Senator Hwang.
THE CHAIR:
To Senator Hwang, sir? Please continue.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH) :
Through you, Madam President.
This being on the box, it's my understanding that when you make the application you cannot ask the applicant whether or not they have a criminal record -0 003011 /je 261 SENATE May 4, 2016
at the time that the application is made, is that correct?
SENATOR HWANG (28TH):
That is correct, sir.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
My understanding is that gets you into the door so you can, if you are selected, that you could have a conversation with the employer and at that time the employer can ask you, have you ever been arrested. Is that correct?
SENATOR HWANG (28TH):
Through you, Madam President, yes.
() SENATOR FASANO (34TH) :
Through you, Madam President.
At that point in time, the employee, potential employee could describe what the circumstances were as he disclosed the arrest, explain himself or herself, and the employer could have a better understanding of the who the person they are dealing with as opposed to just a paper saying they were arrested. They're there and they could explain all the circumstances. Is that accurate?
Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Hwang. 003012 /je 262 SENATE May 4, 2016
0 SEN. HWANG (28TH):
Through you, Madam President.
It is a perfect balance and description of allowing employers an opportunity to vet and to evaluate the candidate but at the same time create an opportunity in an applicant to have an opportunity to engage in that conversation.
Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Fasano.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
I thank Senator Hwang for his answers today. If I 0 may, I'd like to ask Senator Gomes a question or two.
Through you.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Gomes, if you could prepare yourself.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
Through you, Madam President, to Senator Gomes.
It's my understanding that there's been an experience where people may check off that they've been arrested and not be able to get the opportunity to have an interview and explain the issues that they're presented with. Is that your understanding? 0 003013 /je 263 SENATE May 4, 2016 0 Through you, Madam President.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD) :
Through you, Madam President, that's correct.
THE CHAIR:
Go ahead Senator Gomes.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD):
That is correct.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
And that this bill would allow that free flow of information and still allow the employer the opportunity to look at those issues but at least 0 give the opportunity to the employee to come in and explain. Is that your understanding as well, sir?
THE CHAIR:
Senator Gomes.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD):
Through you, Madam President.
That is correct, yes, to give a conditional employment offer.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Fasano.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : 0 003014 /je 264 SENATE May 4, 2016 0 That is what that is called.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Fasano.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH) :
Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Senator Gomes.
Madam President, I think this is a great bill. This is a bill that allows people to, who have made mistakes in their lives to get in the door and say, hey, I've made a mistake. This is who I am. Here are the good things I've done. Yes, I have a criminal record. These are the circumstances or this is how long ago, how long ago it was, and 0 people are not judged just be a simple application without the ability of their personality, their charisma to come through. Madam President, I'm fully supportive of this bill.
THE CHAIR:
Thank you very much, Senator Fasano. Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
Thank you, Madam President. A question to the proponent of the bill, please.
THE CHAIR:
Please proceed, sir . .. o 003015 /je 265 SENATE May 4, 2016
0 SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
Thank you, Madam President. Senator Gomes, should this bill pass, in the event of a potential employer making a conditional offer of employment and subsequently runs a background check and discovers a background that they are uncomfortable with, is there any recourse of the potential employee when the employer says no?
Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Gomes.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD):
Through you, Madam President. Yes, there is. The 0 bill allows a prospective employee to file a complaint with the Labor Commission alleging a violation of this prohibition and subjects violation violated through a $300 per violation civil penalty imposed by the Labor Department. It also allows someone to file a complaint with the Commission alleging an employer's violation of existing law on employment-related criminal record checks.
THE CHAIR:
Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
Thank you, Madam President.
For further clarification, Senator Gomes, I may have misspoken my question to you. I'm assuming that 0 003016 /je 266 SENATE May 4, 2016 0 there is a conditional offer of employment and the employer then runs a background check and determines from the background check they are uncomfortable with the offer of employment and rescinds the offer of employment. What happens then under this proposed legislation?
Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Gomes.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD) :
Well that would depend, through you, Madam President, to the good Senator, that would depend on what after the conditional offer of employment has been made and then they went into the credit, I mean not a credit check, but a check on an employee, whatever happens or whatever the results are, what they find out would determine whether or not this employee will be a viable employee for them.
THE CHAIR:
Senator McLachlan.
The Senate will stand as ease for a second please.
(Senate at ease.)
The Senate will come back to order. Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH):
0 003017 /je 267 SENATE May 4, 2016
0 Thank you, Madam President. I have no further questions for Senator Gomes. Thank you.
THE CHAIR:
Thank you very, very much. Will you remark further? Will you remark further? Senator Fasano.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
Madam President, if I may, it's my understanding that with respect to this bill with respect to the questions by Senator McLachlan, I just want to make sure I got this absolutely correct, and if ~ could ask Senator Hwang a question or two.
THE CHAIR:
Please proceed. Senator Hwang.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
Thank you. Senator Hwang, it's my understanding that you fill out an application, you don't check a box, you get into the employer's office, before he offers you a terms of employment, you could ask the question about the background, about the person's background, has he been arrested. Is that correct?
THE CHAIR:
Senator Hwang.
SEN. HWANG (28TH):
Through you, Madam President.
That has been the reflected change in that, yes sir. 0 003018 /je 268 SENATE May 4, 2016
THE CHAIR:
Senator Fasano.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
So it no longer reads that you have to make the offer of employment and then do a background check. That's not what the bill says, correct?
THE CHAIR:
Senator Hwang.
SEN. HWANG (28TH):
As I understand it, through you, Madam President, yes. It is creating that balance and allowing the 0 employer the opportunity to vet the individual and have that conversation.
Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Fasano.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
That conversation is before any offer of employment, is that correct?·
Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR: . o Senator Hwang . 003019 /je 269 SENATE May 4, 2016 0 SEN. HWANG (28TH):
Through you, Madam President, yes.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Fasano.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
Okay. Thank you, Madam President.
SENATOR HWANG (28TH) :
As I understand it.
THE CHAIR: c Thank you. Will you remark further? Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
Thank you, Madam President. Through you to Senator Hwang.
THE CHAIR:
Please proceed, sir.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
Thank you for this opportunity. Senator Hwang, please clarify for me. Application for position, prescreening, we don't know if there's a previous criminal history. First interview that discussion occurs. It's okay to ask that question. It wasn't 0 003020 /je 270 SENATE May 4, 2016 0 part of the original application, but in th~ first application, first interview, prescreening interview, you're allowed to ask that question. When is the potential employer allowed to run a background check?
THE CHAIR:
[inaudible]
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Hwang.
SEN. HWANG (28TH): 0 Through you, Madam President.
I believe they can, as I understand it, they can do it before.
Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
Thank you, Madam President. So through you to Senator Hwang.
0 003021 /je 271 SENATE May 4, 2016
0 They're allowed to run a background check before the prescreening interview? When exactly are they allowed to run the background check?
Through you.
THE CHAIR:
Senator Hwang.
SEN. HWANG (28TH):
Through you, Madam President.
If the employer so chooses, they are able to do so. Through you, Madam President.
THE CHAIR:
0 Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH):
Thank you, Madam President. The results of the background check determine that there's a problem, that the potential employer is not comfortable with and decides not to proceed with employment offer, are you telling me that there is a conditional offer of employment before the employer sees the background check or after the employer sees the background check
THE CHAIR:
Senator Hwang.
SEN. HWANG (28TH): 0 003022 /je 272 SENATE May 4, 2016
0 Through you, Madam President. Could the good Senator repeat that phrasing? I want to be sure of the timing.
THE CHAIR:
Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
Thank you. I think I'm going to go through the steps because I'm more comfortable with being sure. Someone applies for a job. There's no box on the application that asks if you have a criminal history. There is a prescreening of the application. I'll wait until you're done. There's a prescreening of the application. The potential employer decides to proceed with an initial interview.
THE CHAIR:
Please continue, Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH):
Thank you. May we stand at ease please?
THE CHAIR:
The Senate will stand at ease.
(Senate at ease.)
Senator McLachlan.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) : 0 003023 /je 273 SENATE May 4, 2016
Thank you, Madam President. I'm sorry to have a private conversation, but I just got all my questions answered.
THE CHAIR:
No problem. Thank you.
SENATOR MCLACHLAN (24TH) :
I have no further questions.
THE CHAIR:
Then don't be sorry about that sir.
Will you remark further on the bill. Senator Hwang.
SENATOR HWANG (28TH):
Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Just for a point of clarification. I want to thank Senator McLachlan's inquiries and some of the case analysis. It's value and that was a big part of the concern as we tried to create a delicate balance act. This bill in its current form is a simple removal of the box on the application. That is all it is. It's a step forward, and I want to make that point as a clarification. But again, I want to thank in closing Senator Gomes and his leadership on this and his work and his demonstrated accomplishments from reentry. I applaud that, and I urge support. Thank you, Madam.
THE CHAIR:
Thank you. Will you remark further? Will you remark further? If not, can I put this on consent? -0 003024 /je 274 SENATE May 4, 2016
0 No. So, I'll call for roll call vote, and the machine will be open.
THE CLERK:
Immediate roll call is ordered in the Senate. Immediate roll call has been ordered in the Senate.
THE CHAIR:
If all members have voted? All members have voted? The machine will be closed. Mr. Clerk, will you call the tally, please.
THE CLERK:
House bill 5237,
Total Number Voting 36 0 Those voting Yea 35 Those voting Nay 1 Absent and not voting 0
·THE CHAIR:
The bill passes. Mr. Clerk. Oops, I'm sorry. Senator -- I'm sorry, point of personal privilege for Senator Fasan6.
SENATOR FASANO (34TH):
Thank you, Madam President. For a points of personal privilege.
THE CHAIR:
Please proceed, sir. 0 STANDING COMMITTEE HEARINGS
JUDICIARY PART 6 2347 – 2800
2016
002575 35 March 18, 2016 dm/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c PUBLIC HEARING TANYA HUGHES: Thank you. Good afternoon Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, Senator Kissel, Representative Rebimbas, Vice Chairs and members of the Judiciary Committee.
My name is Tanya Hughes and I am the Executive Director of the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. I am here to speak regarding SENATE BILL 430; AN ACT CONCERNING EMPLOYMENT FOLLOWING AN ARREST, CRIMINAL CHARGE OR CONVICTION AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION GUIDANCE.
CHRO already has testified in support of H.B. No. 5237, otherwise known as the Ban the Box Bill. We support measures to eliminate the barrier that a previous criminal conviction has on employment opportunities. Denying employment to individuals with criminal records may have an adverse impact on c members of minority groups and may violate federal laws against discrimination.
CHRO does recommend does recommend that S.B. No. 430 be modified. We recommend that enforcement of the EEOC's enforcement guidance be part of CHRO's responsibilities. Enforcement by the Department of Labor would duplicate work already being performed by CHRO and would be a lost opportunity for additional revenue for the general fund.
CHRO is currently under contract with the us Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to receive, investigate and litigate these types of complaints. Under this contract, CHRO receives money from the EEOC for each case filed and additional money for each case we close, all of which goes into the state's general fund. 0 STANDING COMMITTEE HEARINGS
JUDICIARY PART 7 2801 – 3244
2016
002870 c ACLU 330 Main Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06106 M-IER!Ct.N CIVh 1 fRt;RTIES UNION 860-523-9146 I www.acluct.org of CONNECTICUT
Written Testimony Supporting Senate Bill430, An Act Concerning Employment Following An Arrest, Criminal Charge Or Conviction And Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidance
Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, and members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is David McGuire, and I am the legislative and Policy Director for the American Civil liberties Union of Connecticut (ACLU-CT). I am submitting this testimony in support of Senate Bill430,. An Act Concerning Employment Following An Arrest, Criminal Charge Or Conviction And Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidance with a recommendation that the committee also support sister legislation, House Bill5327, An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment.
The ACLU of Connecticut strongly believes in justice and equality for all. We therefore support this bill C· because it would require employers to adhere to recent guidance issued by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Many employers in Connecticut automatically screen out applicants who check the box indicating they have a criminal record on initial applications, making it extremely challenging for people with criminal records to successfully reintegrate into society. Because racial minorities are nearly three times more likely to have a criminal record than their white peers, discriminatory hiring practices based on criminal record also disproportionately harm African Americans and Latinos. To address this discrimination, the EEOC, the federal government agency that enforces anti-discrimination laws, issued guidance on the use of airest and conviction records in employment decisions. The guidance recommends that employers adopt a ban the box policy. The Connecticut Commission on Human Right and Opportunities already follows the EEOC's guidance on disparate impact but the passage of this bill would be significant because it would put Connecticut employers on notice about the EEOC guidance.
We also strongly urge the committee to support House Bill5237, the Fair Chance Employment Act, which would mandate that most employers ban the box. Connecticut was one of the first states to pass a ban the box taw for state employment but this bill would apply to private employers, as well. Holding more employers to the same standard and pushing questions about criminal background to later in the hiring process is not only the right thing to do; it is the most effective and enforceable. If passed, The Fair Chance Act will help to mitigate racial disparities in our criminal justice system, make Connecticut safer and more prosperous, and uphold the Constitution's promise of justice and equality for all. c
i ) ) 002871
c State of Connecticut COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND OPPORTUNITIES
Judiciary Committee Friday, March 18, 2016
Testimony regarding SB-430,
AN ACT CONCERNING EMPLOYMENT FOLLOWING AN ARREST, CRIMINAL CHARGE OR CONVICTION AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION GUIDANCE.
Good afternoon Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, Senator Kissel, Representative Rebimbas, Vice Chairs and Members of the Judiciary Committee. My name is Tanya Hughes, and I am the Executive Director of the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO). I am here to speak regarding Senate Bill 430, An Act Concerning Employment Following an Arrest, Criminal Charge or Conviction and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidance.
CHRO has already testified in support of HB5237, otherwise known as the 'Ban the Box" bill. We support measures to eliminate the barrier that a previous criminal conviction has on employment opportunities. Denying employment to individuals with criminal records may have an adverse impact on members of minority groups and may violate federal laws against discrimination.
CHRO does recommend that SB-430 be modified. I would recommend that enforcement of the c EEOC's Enforcement Guidance be part of the CHRO's responsibilities. Enforcement by the Dept. of Labor would duplicate work already being performed by CHRO and be a lost opportunity for additional revenue for the general fund. CHRO is currently under contract with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to receive, investigate and litigate these types of complaints. Under this contract, CHRO receives money from the EEOC for each case filed, and additional money for each case we close, all of which goes into the State's general fund.
CHRO already has experience handling complaints under CONN. GEN. STAT. § 46a-80 in which the State of Connecticut is accused of discriminating based on a previous criminal conviction. Extending CHRO's process to cover private sector employers will not substantially affect the workload of the CHRO. CHRO also has experience handling the type of complaints that will be brought for violations of SB-430. Individuals who believe that race was a factor in the denial of employment (along with the criminal conviction) can already file a complaint with CHRO.
CHRO supports the long overdue protections proposed in SB-430. Enforcement, however, should properly be placed under the CHRO. CHRO already has a process in place for investigating and litigating these claims, and the federal government will provide a substantial portion of the funding required for doing so.
The CHRO supports SB-430 with the changes I have described. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am happy to answer any questions the Committee may have.
Main (860) 541-3400 .. Fax (860) 248-5419 WWW ct.qov/chro ... Ton Free In Connectlcul (800) 477-5737- TOO (860) 541-3459 c Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer 002872
0
~tab of G!nnnedirut African-American Affairs Commission State Capitol 210 Capitol Aven~e- Room 509 Hartford, CT 06106 860-240-8555
Senator Coleman, Representative Tong and other distinguished members of the judiciary committee.
My name is Subira Gordon and I am the legislative analyst for the African American Affairs Commission. The mission of the African-American Affairs Commission (AAAC) is to improve and promote the economic development, education, health and political well being of the African-American community in the State of Connecticut. The AAAC is a c steering committee member of the CT Fair chance coalition.
I am here to provide comment on S.B. No. 430 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING EMPLOYMENT FOLLOWING AN ARREST, CRIMINAL CHARGE OR CONVICTION AND EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION GUIDANCE and S.B. No. 454 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING AUTOMATIC ERASURE OF CRIMINAL RECORDS.
SB 430 requires employers to follow the federal EEOC guidelines with regards to criminal records. The AAAC fully supports any legislation aimed at helping individuals with criminal records access employment opportunities. As has been proven by many studies African Americans are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system. This then leads to less employment in African American communities as well as higher recidivism rates due to the fact that many people with a criminal records are unable to get jobs even if their record is decades old and has no relation to the job they c are applying for. 002873 c
I do want to point the committee to HB 5237 AAC Fair Chance Employment which will eventually come up for a vote in the Judiciary Committee which is a stronger bill and will help those with a criminal record in a more substantial way. This bill requires a person to receive a conditional offer of employment before submitting to a criminal background check and then places a time limit on how long a record should be counted against an employee. This bill passed on consent out of the labor committee. As a state that has has made a commitment to a second chance society this bill will help many people who were previously incarcerated for low level drug offences as well as those who made mistakes at some point in their life access employment which will help to change the trajectory of their lives. But I do want to be clear that no employer is required to hire any person if they do not think that person is qualified for the job.
The AAAC thinks that both 5237 and 430 are important pieces of legislation that could c work well together however we do hope that currently employers are following the federal law and EEOC guidelines.
We fully support SB 454 as it makes it clear that if an induvial is not charged with a crime or if there is a wrongful arrest, there should be no record of the arrest.
Thank you for your time today.
c STANDING COMMITTEE HEARINGS
JUDICIARY PART 8 3245 – 3730
2016
003464 75 March 23, 2016 Nk/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c SENATOR GOMES (23RD): Good afternoon.
REP. TONG (147TH): Could you move the mike in front of you please? Thank you.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : Good afternoon Senator Coleman and Representative Tong and ranking and other members of the committee. My name is Senator Gomes of the 23rd district representing Bridgeport and Stratford and also Co-Chairman of the Labor Committee. I'm here to testify in favor of SB 467 AN ACT CONCERNING MUNICIPAL IMPLEMENTATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORMS, also referred to as~ 5237 AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT.
This bill provides employment practices for protections for certain employees and job applicants including applicants with criminal conviction records. It generally prohibits employers including c their agent, representatives and designees from denying employment to a job applicant except for a position for which any provision of the general statute specifically disqualifies a person from employment by an employer because of a prior conviction of a crime. No employer shall inquire about an employee's or perspective post, past convictions until such employer or perspective employer -- until such employee or perspective employee has received a conditional offer of employment for the position from their employer.
Under the bill, this is an employee offer that requires an applicant to successfully complete the employer's application process which can include drug testing, criminal history record checks or verifying the validity of any necessary lysis (phonetic) . The prohibitions do not apply to c II 003465 76 March 23, 2016 Nk/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M.
positions for which state laws specifically 0 disqualify somebody based on a prior criminal conviction. The bill allows exceptions on an application for numerous positions specified in the bill. It also allows employers to require the disclosure of any arrest, criminal charge or conviction including those that have been erased. It is required on any applicable state or federal law.
Under the bill, applicants or employees could file complaints about violations of the bill's job application provision with the Labor Commission. There are job protections, exceptions but I won't read them all off here but what this, what this is primarily doing is it gives somebody who has a record and might have a conviction for a misdemeanor or a felony and comes out of incarceration an opportunity to at least get his foot in the door for a job. In the past, I believe we referred to this 0 as Ban the Box in past years and what would happen is somebody would go to apply for a job and right away they would ask him if he had a criminal record or some conviction and right away he wouldn't be accepted for anything.
This bill says before you just discount him you have to at least give him opportunity for a job offer and then you can go to his background. Other than that, if anybody has any questions I will answer them.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND) : Are there questions for Senator Gomes, former member of this committee?
SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : I would like to say if I could sum this up. This is a very important bill. A lot of people, a lot of young people are getting 0 003466 77 March 23, 2016 Nk/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c caught up and having felonies on their record way past being a child. They get these felony records when they are 17, 18 and they take them right into their adult life and it haunts them their whole lives so I would really like for people to really consider this bill. Thank you.
SENATOR COLEMAN (2ND): Thank you sir. It's good to see you again. Welcome back.
SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : Hey save me a spot there (laughter). I used to enjoy this committee.
REP. TONG (147TH): Further questions? Thank you Senator. Jeff Clayton. Good afternoon.
JEFF CLAYTON: Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. My name is Jeff Clayton. I'm the National Policy Director of the American Bail c Coalition which is a trade association of national surety insurance companies that underwrite criminal bail bonds throughout the United States. We are here today to testify against Senate Bill 18, at least the bail portion of Senate Bill 18 because it's not based on national best practices.
Regarding the misdemeanor issue, I would point out that it is not evidence-based nor is it national best practices to base a bail decision solely on the charge and this is what you would be doing in this bill based on legislative fiat. I would also point out that these are fairly serious crimes including criminally negligent homicide, stalking, abuse of the elderly. This bill would overrule judicial discretion to set bail. It was positive that 300 people are not dangerous. They could simply be released. Well, I would tell you Connecticut judges c 003476 87 March 23, 2016 Nk/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c youths with their parents in juvenile detention is troubling as well and it's a significant problem associated with youth incarceration is that they lose connections to adults and these are the adults that they are going to return home to so our service continuum -- as we're talking it out, there are provisions of the bill that specifically look at how we're going to fill the continuum of unmet mental health needs through bridging work of the JJPOC with the Children's Mental Health Advisory Board.
So that Board has family representation on it but also it's an opportunity to look at in our continuum of services for children how many of those services are working effectively with the whole family, right? So we have pieces of that but we need to do a lot more of that. We just don't have enough, we don't have enough services that are working with kids and their families and that's an area we need c to strengthen. REP. WALKER (93RD): Thank you and thank you for your testimony.
REP. FOX (148TH): Any further questions? Seeing none, thank you very much. Next up is Sarah Fox. David McGuire.
DAVID MCGUIRE: Members of the Committee, my name is 1:±~ S The last piece of that is how long the footage is kept for so right now the Excessive Force Bill tasks c posts with coming up with model policies. Their model policy says body camera footage should be kept for 90 days. This is body camera footage of incidents so whether it was used for force for an arrest we think that that should be closer to 180 days to truly safeguard the public and police too because in Connecticut you have to file a notice of intention to sue within 180 days of an incident so if someone was alleging they were abused by the police under the current policy if the police department did purge that footage at 90 days and get served with that notice on Day 179 they themselves don't benefit from the footage so we think that the Sentencing Commission would do a good job on that. And then the third aspect is the Fair Chance provision so House Bill 5237 that Senator Gomes spoke of is a really, in my mind a really effective c Ill 003483 94 March 23, 2016 Nk/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. ban the box initiative. What it would do is extend 0 the state of Connecticut's ban the box to all private employers and it would allow employers to ask about criminal history at the leader stages of a hiring process so the employers are not forced to hire anyone but people get the benefit of being evaluated on their credentials and their personality and then at a later stage when the employer can ask about criminal history they can decide not to hire that person if they want so these are 2 very, very important components put in one bill. REP. PORTER (94TH): Okay thank you for that and thank you for your testimony and thank you for all the work you do. DAVID MCGUIRE: Thank you. REP. TONG (147TH): Further questions? Thank you David. 0 DAVID MCGUIRE: Thank you. REP. TONG (147TH): Sarah Fox. Good afternoon. SARAH FOX: Good afternoon. Thank you for hearing my testimony. My name is Sarah Fox and I'm the Director of Advocacy and Community Impact for the Connecticut coalition to End Homelessness. I'm here representing our 75 non-profit providers in opposition to House Bill number 5529 which is in support of moving towards residency restriction and would add to the restrictions already imposed by the Adam Walsh Act. We know that many of the, many individuals released from the Department of Corrections who are sex offenders are released from incarceration into homelessness. 0 003525 136 March 23, 2016 Nk/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. input is of considerable value to us. Thank you so 0 much. CLIFTON GRAVES: Thank you Senator. Thank you Representative. REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you. CLIFTON GRAVES: Thank you both. Thank you committee. REP. TONG (147TH): Glenn Cassis and Subira Gordon. Senator Bartolomeo will be next. No you're now. She's next. Subira gets special dispensation because she was my sister's freshman year roommate in college. (Laughter) ~!2%q GLENN CASSIS: Senator Coleman, Representative Tong \tf>5 237 and distinguished members of the judiciary committee. My name is Glenn Cassis and I'm the 0 Executive Director for the African American Affairs Commission. The mission of the African American Affairs Commission or AAAC is to improve and promote the economic development, education, health and political well-being of the African American community in the state of Connecticut. I want to take this time to briefly commend the work of the judiciary committee. The AAAC is committed to judicial reform especially when good policies correct those unintentional consequences that separate and devalue people. We need to accept that despite good intentions some polices have gone too far with getting tough on crime. For African Americans, being tough on crime has had a negative residual effect by keeping people in the criminal justice system long after serving their sentences. 0 003526 137 March 23, 2016 Nk/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. c We understand that taking steps to make it possible for those who serve for debt for their indiscretions to rejoin society is in the best interest of the state of Connecticut. This is good policy. I would like to turn the balance of my time over to my colleague, Subira Gordon, who will discuss the specifics on the bills we support. SUBIRA GORDON: Hi, my name is Subira Gordon and I'm the legislative analyst for the African American Affairs Commission. Many people have spoken today on the bills that I was going to speak about so I will be really brief. The Senate Bill 469 which includes Ban the Box provision, we are very supportive of that measure. I want to point you to House Bill 5237 that got out of the Labor Committee on consent that, the provisions of 469 Section 2 are specifically laid out in House Bill 5237 from the c Labor Committee and as Glenn talked about we all know that African Americans are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system and I want to just commend this committee for the work that they have done in taking leadership in making some serious judicial reforms and criminal justice reforms that will help many people who have made mistakes in their lives. I think today's agenda includes many issues that will help to get them toward employment. I think as a state if we have, if we open access to employment to more individuals we will be able to see them not end up in the criminal justice system and keep going through that revolving door. We need to give individuals access to employment so they will come off of the social safety net and not end up costing the state more money because they cannot get a job c 003527 138 March 23, 2016 Nk/jh JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. so therefore they need assistance for housing, they 0 need assistance for food, they need assistance for healthcare. Senator Cassano has a bill and I left my notes over there but which automatically erases records after 5 years. I think that's a very good measure. I would like to see us ·doing that for more offenses I think starting with one simple misdemeanor that is nonviolent is great but I think there are a lot of people who after 10 to 20 years outside the criminal justice system should no longer be held behind by their record. I have submitted written testimony that goes over 5 or 6 bills on the agenda and I'm happy to take any questions. REP. TONG (147TH): Thank you. Questions? Thank you very much. Senator Bartolomeo and Jonathan 0 Cortez. SENATOR BARTOLOMEO (13TH): Hi good afternoon. REP. TONG (147TH): Good afternoon. SENATOR BARTOLOMEO (13TH): So I'm here with my friend Jonathan Cortez and I'm Senator Dante Bartolomeo. I represent the 13th District and I thank Senator Coleman, Representative Tong, Senator Kissel and Representative Rebimbas for allowing me to testify. I'm here as a member. I am a member I should say of the Juvenile Justice Policy and Oversight Committee commonly referred to as JJPOC and I actually find it very difficult to be here to testify today on this bill which is House Bill 5642. I support the purpose of the committee. However, I 0 STANDING COMMITTEE HEARINGS JUDICIARY PART 9 3731 - 4039 2016 003824 ~~ c §tate of C!tnnnettirut African-American Affairs Commission State Capitol 210 Capitol Avenue- Room 509 Hartford, CT 06106 860-240-8555 \16 6b\{ I \i0 6(o'i:J.. \t€> 5~37 Senator Coleman, Representative Tong and other distinguished members of the judiciary committee. My name is Subira Gordon and I am the legislative analyst for the African American Affairs Commission. The mission of the African-American Affairs Commission (AAAC) is to improve and promote the economic development, education, health and political well being of the African-American community in the State of Connecticut. The AAAC is a steering committee member of the CT Fair chance coalition. I would like to commend the leadership of the Governor to have the ·insight to create a c second chance society in the last legislative session. This committee also played an important role in seeing that vision of the Governor through and as a state we have started to make some changes that will help many individuals particularly those of African descent who have routinely been treated unjustly by the criminal justice system. The public hearing agenda today is filled with bills that if passed will successfully alter the lives of many and given that 1 in 3 African American males will be touched by the criminal justice system, the AAAC supports these measures. I am here today to provide comment on S.B. No. 18 AN ACT CONCERNING A SECOND CHANCE SOCIETY, S.B. No. 467 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING MUNICIPAL IMPLEMENTATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORMS, S.B. No. 469 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING NONVIOLENT MISDEMEANOR DRUG VIOLATIONS OR CONVICTIONS, S.B. No. 470 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING A Page I of4 0 003825 PILOT PROGRAM FOSTERING NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY AND CREATING A SET 0 ASIDE PROGRAM FOR PARTICIPANTS IN THE PILOT PROGRAM, AND AUTHORIZING BONDING FOR RELATED PROJECTS, H.B. No. 5641 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING PROVISIONAL PARDONS and H.B. No. 5642 (RAISED) AN ACT CONCERNING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE POLICY OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. SB 18 AAC a second chance society addresses raising the age for juvenile jurisdiction from 17 to 20 as well as bail reform. There are long term effects that are beneficial to raising the age which will keep may youths outside of the criminal justice system and steered towards the help that they need rather than becoming a statistic. For young African-Americans who have a higher likelihood of being arrested in schools then their white peers, raising the age to 20 will allow them to be treated through the juvenile system rather than as adults in an already racially biased criminal justice system. For too long many individuals end up sitting in jail for low lying offences because of their inability to make bail. The AAAC supports bail reform as in a society where someone is innocent until proven guilty it only seems fair that they should not be held in jail before c being convicted of crime solely based on their financial ability to post bail. Given the already stated racial biases that exist in the criminal justice system bail reform is a necessary next step in the state. In moving forward with criminal justice reforms the next step is to help these individuals access employment. The AAAC has put together a "fair chance" coalition which includes legislative commissions, the ACLU of Connecticut, the Restaurant Opportunities Center, Planned Parenthood of Southern New England along with various other advocacy and civil rights organizations in the state. As a group we worked together to pass HB 5237 on consent out of the labor committee. Section (2} of SB 467 includes the components of that bill which does two things: 1) removes the criminal record question from applications and requires an employer to do a background check only after a prospective employee has been given a conditional offer similar to a drug Page 2 of4 0 003826 test and; 2) limits the amount of time that employers can use that record as a 0 disqualifier for employment, both of which are instrumental in helping individuals gain access to employment. For many people who have criminal records, even when they do get an interview are then turned down for the job based on the simple fact that they had a criminal history regardless time elapsed since the offense or the nature of the crime. If we are able to give those with a checkered past access to employment, this will change their lives and help to move the economy forward by having everyone have equal access to employment and reducing the likelihood of reliance on the ever shrinking social safety net. SB 469 automatically erases criminal records for misdemeanor drug convictions after 5 years if the person convicted does not re-offend in that time frame. Erasure of records is really important in helping individuals with drug offenses get out of a life of crime and addiction. A criminal record for many becomes a scarlet letter that haunts them for years and creates barriers to jobs and housing. While the AAAC would like to see a system of automatic erasure for more crimes than single misdemeanors we fully support this effort as it is a step in the right direction. c HB 5641 gives the CT board of pardons and paroles the ability to grant an absolute pardon which seals the records of individuals who are just shy of having all the requirements to be granted a full pardon. Connecticut is one of a few states that does allow for an expungement of criminal records however in practice it is very difficult to get expungement so many people become discouraged with the pardons process, after applying a number of times and end up being denied for reasons beyond their control. The bill also allows a provisional pardon to be converted to an absolute pardon after 5 years if a person has not re-offended. By giving the board another option they will be able to help more people who have proven that they are rehabilitated and sealing of records is an appropriate step. This is another bill that helps people with criminal records re-integrate into society and be able to access housing and employment. Page 3 of4 0 003827 HB 5642 includes the recommendations from the Juvenile Justice Police Oversight 0 Committee (JJPOC). The JJPOC has taken a leadership role in ensuring that the State treats youth offenders in a humane way and ensures that they have the best possible long term outcomes after their brush with the law. The components of this bill includes limitations on how long a youth can be detained without a hearing and better training for law enforcement on how to deal with youth offenders. In closing, I would like to again say that I am enthused by the conversations that are being had about the criminal justice system and this agenda today shows that as a state we are taking a serious look at how we treat individuals with criminal records and making meaningful decisions about their futures. Thank you for your time. Subira Gordon Legislative Analyst African American Affairs Commission c Page 4 of4 c 003828 0 Research on Adopting an Adolescent Development Framework in the Juvenile Justice System Beyond the clear public safety argument against treating children as adults in the criminal justice system, there has been significant research calliog for a developmentally appropriate and informed juvenile justice system. Over the past decade. research on adolescent development and brain science has shown that .adolescence is a distinct period of developmrot that extends up to age 24 or even 25 years. Adolescence is marl 1 National Research Co1mcil (2013). Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental Approach. Committee on Assessing Juvenile Justice Refonn, Richard J Bounie, Robert L Johuson, Betty M. Chemers and Julie A Schuck, Eds. Committee on Law & Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, p89.. 2 Ibid. page 92. 'Mulvey, E.P., Steinberg, L., Piquero, A.R, Besana, M., Fagan, J., Schubert, C.A., and Cauffman, E. 2010. Longitudinal offending trajectories aruong serious adolescent offenders. Development & Psychopathology 22:453- 475 4 NRC Report, page 97 'Ibid 122-124 0 003829 . justice system demonstrate their ID1de!Standing of the trial process and are able to assist their attorney in 0 the case; 3. Justice system should make special effurts to adhere to fuir procedures to avoid practices and outcomes 1hat appear biased or discriminatmy, particularly by race, as adolescent rendencies to question adult authority and are impressionable about whether they or their peers are treated fuirly. Connecticut's Second Chance Act and JJPOC Supported by Research These aspects of a developmentally- 6 Steinberg, L, Chung, HL, and Little, M (2004) "Reentry of young offenders from the justice system: A Developmental Perspective." Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2 (I), 21-38. c 003830 strategy can have adverse efrects on participants under some conditions. By keeping the fuw youth who pose a 0 public safety riSk to the community in smaller settings that have high structure, implement evidence based, developmentally appropriate programming, and 1hat organize youth by risk !eve~ ratherfuan by charge, has shown 1hat youth are less likely to engage in negative peer- The juvenile justice system was created in 1899 with the understanding 1hat youth are different from adults and are amenable to rehabilitation. This "mission" of the juvenile justice system to focus on rehabilitation and not just punishment is evident in the juvenile oodes ofmany states. While the ITil!iority ofstate juveiille oodes balance youth accotmtability with rehabilitation, those who have had major reforms in the past decade generally refocus their pmposes to reflect more ofthe principals listed above. For example, Georgia who went through systemic refunns in reoent years, emphasizes rehabilitation, not punishment, in the juvenile code, "The pnrpose of this chapter is to secure for each child who comes within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court such care and guidance, preferably in his or her own home, as will secure his or her moral, emotional, mental, and physical welfare as well as the safety of both the child and community. It is the intent of the General Assembly to promote a juvenile justice system that will protect the community, impose accountability for violations of law, provide treatment and c rehabilitation, and equip juvenile offenders with the ability to live responsibly and productively."' The Illinois juvenile code also emphasizes rehabilitation, "The pnrpose of this Act is to secure for each minor subject hereto such care and guidance, preferably in his or her own home, as will serve the safety and moral, emotional, mental, and physical welfare of the minor and the best interests of the community; to preserve and strengthen the minor's family ties whenever possible, removing him or her from the custody of his or her parents only when his or her safety or welfare or the protection of 7 National Research Council (2013). Reforming Juvenile Justice: A Developmental Approach. Committee on Assessing Juvenile Justice Reform, Richard J Bonnie, Robert L Johnson, Betty M Chemers aud Julie A Schuck, Eds. Committee on Law & Justice, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, p180. · 8 Fazal, S. (2014). Safely Home: Reducing youth incarceration and achieving positive youth outcomes for· high and complex need youth through effective community-based programs, Washington, DC. Youth Advocate Programs Policy & Advocacy Center. 9 O.C.G.A. § 15-II-I 0 003831 10 the public cannot be adequately safeguarded without removal ••• [it is a] system that will protect the c community, impose accountability for violations of law and equip juvenile offenders with competencies 11 to live responsibly and productively ." There are several other states who also have adjusted their juvenile code to refocus on rehabilitation and age appropriate accountability in recent years. I am happy to provide this information to the Committee upon request. Unique Needs of Older Adolescents Less is known about effective interventions with older adolescents wbo are getting ready to transition into adulthood. While there is an emerging body of research, this is s1ill a nascent field What is known, is that adolescents who are arrested and jailed or incarcerated as part of the aduh criminal justice system, have poor outoomes. Aocording to crime data, it is well established that adolescents between the ages of 18-24 conunit a disproportional amount of crime; in 2013, this age group comprised 20"/o of the state and federal correctional 12 population • More concerning is their recidivism rates. The beparttnent ofJustice reports that recidivism rates for young adults released from prison are significantly higher than for other age groups. One study found that approximately 76 percent of people who were under the age of 25 when released from prison were r~arrested within three years, and 84 percent were rearrested within five years. 13 In 2015, The Council of State Governments released an issue brief highlighting this age group and making recommendations for both the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems who supervise these c youth (ages 18-25). These recommendations include: tailoring supervision and services to address young adult needs; reducing barriers across system to support the unique needs of young adults; improving data collection and reporting on young adult recidivism and other outcomes; and building the knowledge base for effective programs for this population14 We believe that Connecticut can be a leader in criminal justice reform by implementing the above referenced strategies to suocessfully integrate this older youth population into the juvenile justice system. Investing in research and documentation of practice will be imperative if this is to evolve in more widely-used prnctice. Ensuring that the juvenile justice system remains "right sized" is critical to these refonns. I am happy to serve a5 a resomce to this Committee to expound further on the infunnation presented in this testimony. Please fuel free to contact me at 202-558-3580, or by email [email protected]. "705ILCS 40511·2 II 705ILCS 40515-101 12 E. Ann Carson, and Daniela Golinelli, Prisoners in 2012: Trends in Admissions and Releases, 1991-2012, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics (2014). 13 https:l/csgjusticecenter. orglwp-content/uploads/20 15/llffransitional-Age· Brief. pdf 14 Ibid., p 7 0 JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE HEARINGS LABOR AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES PART 2 440 – 1041 2016 000451 1 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING CHAIRPERSONS: Representative Tercyak Senator Gomes Senator Cathy Osten Representative Louis Esposito SENATORS: Hwang REPRESENTATIVES: Cuevas, Kiner, Luxenberg, McGee, Miner, Rutigliano, Smith, Vail REP. TERCYAK (26TH): I hope people have seen the agenda. We have 15 items on there. We are one of those committees that let people testify in the order they signed up. You don't have to wait forever for your bill to come up. We will be responsible for keeping track of who's who. I would like to start by thanking the good mayor, Toni Harp. c It is wonderful to see you again. We miss you at the Capitol, especially now when you thoroughness and calm head would be very useful. New Haven is very lucky to have you. Let's begin. If you and/or your people would like to be first, we would love to have that be so. Welcome please. MAYOR TONI HARP: Thank you very much and good afternoon Senator Gomes and Representative Tercyak, to the ranking and other members of the Labor Public Employees Committee. My name is Toni Harp and I am the mayor of the city of New Haven. On behalf of .the city and its residents, I want to warmly welcome you. We are really delighted that you are here and I want to thank you for bringing today's public hearing on the road to our city. c __i 0004522 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING Employment issues loom large in Connecticut's urban centers where many residents, particularly minority residents, endure unemployment rates far greater than statewide averages along with widespread (H-e> underemployment. I am grateful for this opportunity 5370) to testify before you. In just a word, I encourage you to continue your minimum wage fight for $15. Connecticut's legal minimum wage must allow those who earn it the chance to afford essentials in terms of housing, food, and transportation. Today's minimum wage does not. I am also here to support the CONNECTICUT FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT ACT, HOUSE BILL 5237. I am here to urge your favorable consideration in passage. This bill is meant to address another issue of critical concern in this city, pre-judgment; that is to say prejudicial treatment of job applicants with criminal records. Today, many of us are here on 0 their behalf. Those who have made mistakes, accepted the consequences of those mistakes and who are now trying to rejoin their community and lead responsible productive lives. If enacted, House Bill 5237 would align private sector employers with those in the public sector and several national companies and prohibit questions about an applicant's criminal background from initial employment applications. I am proud to say the city of New Haven has already enacted a Ban the Box Ordinance to keep that question off of city job applications. This Ban the Box issue really comes down to two things: The first of these is judgment. Who among us has led a mistake-free life? Who among us then is justified to hold another's mistake against him 000453 3 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING or her indefinitely? The second point of this is about forgiveness and providing a second chance for those who previously engaged in some antisocial behavior. Doesn't is simply make the most sense, common sense, to do all we can to bring these people back into the fold? Should we do everything possible to help them return to their communities as responsible productive parts of our'social fabric? HB-5231 would ensure that employers first evaluate job applicants on their skills and.qualifications, not past mistakes. This new statewide legislation would bring private employers into alignment with cities like ours and postpone questions about an applicant's criminal background until later in the hiring process. Again, I thank you for being here. I thank you for your interest in this matter and I thank you for c considering this pending legislation. I urge you to Ban the Box. We have a Fresh Start Program in our city that works with people who are reentering and Clifton Graves is the director of that program and he wants to introduce you to someone who has done remarkably well and really is a poster child for while we should ban the box. So with that, Clifton? REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Can I say something before you do that? CLIFTON GRAVES: Sure. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): I just want to say that to the mayor of New Haven, Toni Harp, where else would we go for an issue like this? You fought for so many c 000454 4 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING of them when you were up in'the senate with us and just for everybody's edification, I used to call Toni, my leader. She used to tell me don't say that. (Clapping) REP. TERCYAK (26TH): I just wanted to say that. MAYOR TONI HARP: Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): I am glad to be here. CLIFTON GRAVES: Good afternoon, Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, members of the committee. My name is Clifton Graves, Jr., Program Manager for Project Fresh Start of City of New Haven. Presently, we are the only municipally funded, financed re-entry program in the state of 0 Connecticut. Although I hasten to add Senator Gomes that I think Bridgeport and Hartford are in the process of putting to add similar initiatives and we applaud them and welcome them to the frate. Project Fresh Start as the mayor indicated has been around now in the city of New Haven since 2000. Well, it was initially called the Reentry ... The New Haven Reentry Initiative under Mayor Hobbs leadership and vision. We renamed our program Project Fresh Start, relocated to the first floor at City Hall to give it accessibility and certainly credibility and towards that end, we have upwards of 80 men and women come through or cross our door's path any given week, 90% of that number seeking jobs, looking for housing, but primarily jobs and many expressing anger and frustration that they have been turned down any number of times because they had to check that box. 000455 5 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING Now, again, if they were applying for a city of New Haven job, it would be different, but certainly other entities in the Greater New Haven area still are paying homage to using that, having that box on applications and certainly it is a deterrent and inhibits quite frankly employment as the mayor indicated. It is, the right thing to do and a step in the right direction. Certainly, there is no panacea, no cure all for the challenges that face our returning citizens, our brothers, sisters, family members who return from one of these institutions, but it certainly gains us a step in the right direction and so I use that as a segue to committee members to introduce to you a young man, who will tell his own story. We are very proud of him, one who is a c citizen, I'm sorry, a citizen of west Haven, resident of West Haven, but an employee of the city of New Haven, Mr. Blaine McKay, who will tell his own enlightening story. Before I turn it over to him, just quickly again, we at Project Fresh Start join the mayor in supporting and endorsing this legislation, this FAIR CHANCE legislation which gives our returning citizen population, it removes them and elevates them from second class citizenship in many ways to not only a second chance, but for many of them a first chance, a first opportunity to be reconnected, to resocialize into our community. we thank you again, wish you well and we endorse and support this innovative and creative legislation. With that, please, committee members, we need to introduce, Mr. Blaine McKay. c ~·· ···~·~·------41-o------ 0004566 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Hi. Will you first say your name into the microphone for the record and then we await your testimony. Thank you for coming. BLAINE MCKAY: Yep. My name is Blaine McKay. I am a West Haven, Connecticut, resident and I am a member of the Fresh Start Program. I am a working example of Ban the Box. I currently work for the city of New Haven as a parking enforcement ofticer and none of it would be possible if not for the city of New Haven banning the box. While in a halfway house in New Haven, I was told about the Fresh Start Program. I registered with them and they immediately went to work looking for ways to help me with employment. I was instructed by Mr. Chance to fill out a seasonal job application for the Parks and Recreation Department. I did as instructed and was given an interview which led to getting the 0 seasonal position. As a direct result of that, other opportunities opened up to me which led me to filling out for the current position that I now have working as a parking enforcement officer, never once being overlooked because of my criminal history, but being looked at because of my qualifications instead. February 17 of this year was my one year as a parking enforcement officer and I have this job ... and having this job has changed my life dramatically. I am now on my way to becoming a single parent, having full custody of my 6-year-old daughter and I can say Ban the Box has led the way for a lot of this happening in my life. I thank God for the city of New Haven taking the lead on this 000457 7 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING and giving qualified ex-felons a fresh start on a new life. (Clapping) I want to thank the committee for their time and cooperation and I pray that they vote in favor of HB-5237. Thank you. (Clapping) REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Questions? Comments? Representative Rutigliano, please? REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon Mayor. I have just a couple of questions. Are there any exceptions to your Ban the c Box? We are generally supportive of the idea of Banning the Box and giving people the opportunity to getting to an interview. Have you exempted any certain types of employment from the Ban the Box provision? MAYOR TONI HARP: No, we haven't. You know, you really have to give people a chance to tell their story. If there are some things that through ordinance or through legislation would ban people with certain types of criminal histories from certain jobs, they would, our employers would learn that later in the interview, so you wouldn't automatically be disqualified. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Did you put a time limit on the look back for the criminal activity? Was it c Ill 000458 8 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING two years, five years or was it doesn't matter, there was no time limit? MAYOR TONI HARP: It's not on the box and if a person is qualified for the position and again, there is some prohibition or some concern later on through the interview, then that's when that would be taken into consideration. so, it is not a way to make a determination around who would even be interviewed, which is the way it is used now. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Thank you very much, but basically you are saying they fill out the application without disclosing any criminal activity, but it is something that is subject to a question during the interview process? MAYOR TONI HARP: If it is relevant, absolutely. 0 REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): If it's relevant, thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Of course. Representative McGee, I believe you had a question or comment? REP. MCGEE (5TH): I have a comment. First and foremost, Mayor Harp, Senator Harp, thank you so much for being such a great leader, not only to the folks here in New Haven, but to the folks in the state of Connecticut, thank you. And to my friend there running such an amazing initiative and really showing folks throughout this country the way with respect to paving the way to those reentering the community, thank you. Mr. Blaine, you said your name was? I didn't get your last name. 000459 9 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING BLAINE MCKAY: Last name is McKay. REP. MCGEE (5TH): McKay, Mr. McKay, thank you for sharing your story. It reminds me of my father, who has since passed on, but struggled with all types of judicial issues, mainly because he was unable to get a job and always found himself back in the streets either selling drugs or doing something that he had no business doing. So, hearing from folks like you benefitting from initiatives like the Fresh Start Program or the Reentry Program, it not only warms my heart, but it does shed some light on the fact that we have to address the system and we have to create opportunities for individuals to reenter the communities in a very sustainable, healthy, holistic way and to hear not only have you been working for a year, right, but you are getting custody of your child and that is absolutely amazing. Keep sharing c your story and hopefully, we will get some more folks throughout the state to support. You definitely have a friend in me and I will be supporting HOUSE BILL 5237. Thank you Mr. Chair. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you Representative. REP. MCGEE (5TH): Thank you. (Clapping) REP. TERCYAK (26TH): I am going to ask people not to clap so that we can move along, but really don't be clapping for any of us up here. (Laughter) c 000496 46 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING reached three minutes of testimony. Try to wrap it up when you get there. So, next up or first folks, there are two, David Denver and John Hunt together from Companions and Homemakers. DAVID DENVER: Chairman Gomes, Chairman Tercyak. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): How are you doing? DAVID DENVER: How are you? REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Hanging in there. DAVID DENVER: And members of the Labor and Public Employee Committee, good evening. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Speak into the mike, okay. DAVID DENVER: Thank you. Good evening. I am pleased to appear in front of your committee again. My name is David Denver. I am general counsel for a large employer of domestic workers in the state of Connecticut known as Companions and Home Care, excuse me, Companions and Homemakers and I have also had the pleasure of serving with distinguished chairs of this committee on the legislative task force on domestic workers and I will ask Mr. Hunt to introduce himself as well. JONATHAN HUNT: Good evening everyone. My name is Jonathan Hunt. I am Direct of Communications with Companions and Homemakers. I am pleased to have this opportunity to address HOUSE BILL 5237 ENTITLED AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE AT EMPLOYMENT and simply to ask for some amendment to this legislation. I recognize its sound and well- 000497 47 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING intentioned purposes, but I do believe an amendment is necessary; first of all to protect the seniors in our state and second to comply with current existing state law. It is my opinion that this bill, if passed as presently drafted, would conflict with Connecticut General Statute Title 20, Section 6, 7, 8. That law reads, and I will quote the relevant passage, each homemaker companion agency prior to extending an offer of employment or entering into a contract with a perspective employee shall require such perspective employee to submit to a comprehensive background check. Further, they shall require that such perspective employee plead and sign a form which contains questions as to whether the perspective employee was c convicted of a crime involving violence or dishonesty. So the long and short of it is, the proposed bill would prohibit homemaker/companion agencies from conducting background checks prior to offering employment whereby existing Connecticut law already says they cannot offer employment until they have one the background check. Moreover, I ask you just for a moment to consider the nature of homecare for our elderly. Our elderly need these services because they live in a very secluded and private atmosphere. They are there in their home by themselves most of the time. In that home is all of their personal and identifiable information; all of their credit cards, tax returns, bank statements, checking accounts. In that home is all of their financial access, their medications, their medical history and they are often physically c ------~------...i..-.- 000498 48 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING dependent upon others for assistance. They are often cognitive dependent others for assistance. This creates a tremendous role of dependency and vulnerability. So, I do believe the purposes of this well intentioned bill can be effective simply by sustaining Connecticut's current and well-reasoned protection of our seniors. Homemaker/companion agencies should be exempted or carved out from this bill so that we can still continue to properly hire individuals, completely respecting all of the laws required by our federal government as to being non discriminatory in purpose, but I still think that homemaking/companion agencies should be carved out for the protection of the seniors. Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Anything to add Mr. Hunt. JONATHAN HUNT: Nothing need to add out of respect for your time. My testimony is written. We kind of have the same sentiment with the company, so I appreciate that. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): That's a way to be popular with this committee. (laughter) REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. The Co Chair, I believe, has a question or comment? SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : I just have a comment to make. I understand what you are talking about, the background checks of people who are dependent on 000499 49 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING others for assistance so on and so forth, but the background check, the bill does not wipe off the background check. It is that this is made after you make an initial offer of employment and then they would have the background checks. If the background check doesn't pan out that the person is not qualified for the job, it doesn't knock out the background checks you are talking about. JONATHAN HUNT: I do understand Senator that the bill, as I read it as being drafted, indicates that we cannot conduct a background check until we have made a conditional offer of employment. SENATOR GOMES (23RD): That's right and that is what Ban the Box means. Too many times people have come to apply for a job and right away, you cross them off and that's it. They get no opportunity to c present themselves as to whether they are qualified for the job or whether or not the company could maybe qualify them for the job, the company themselves, you know? Too many times that is happening and that is what the Ban the Box is all about. It is not wiping out background checks. It is about giving somebody a chance at a job, that's all. JONATHAN HUNT: I do understand Senator, but it conflicts with the current state law which requires that we cannot offer employment until a background check is done. That is two different standards. The new law would say you can't make an offer, you can't do the check until the offer is done. Current law says, you can't make an offer until you do the check. c 00050050 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING SENATOR GOMES (23RD): Well, maybe we ought to change current law. (laughter) JONATHAN HUNT: Thank you and I also just want to respectively suggest that since the homecare situation is so isolated, I do think the homemaker/companion agencies need a little more latitude in terms of what the background check reveals. By way of brief example, because I know my time is finished and I hate to give this kind of example, but the crime of assaulting an elderly person is a felony that is punishable by a mandatory five-year sentence of imprisonment, not that the time needs to be served, but it is a mandatory five year sentence. Under this law as written, someone who had just completed their five years would be eligible for hire in the home of an elderly person 0 and the employer would not be able to deny employment based solely upon that conviction when the very crime was assaulting an elderly person. SENATOR GOMES (23RD): I don't think it is just as flat as you just said. Because you were convicted of assaulting an elderly person and through a background check that is revealed, I am certain some consideration would be given to that. JONATHAN HUNT: As I read the proposed bill Senator, the employer would not be able to deny employment based solely upon that information. The bill as proposed says that if it is a felony conviction that is more than five years old, the employer cannot deny employment based solely upon that information. 000501 51 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : We will have to look at you, what you are talking about. JONATHAN HUNT: Thank you Senator. SENATOR GOMES (23RD): I don't think it is that way. It is not intentioned anyhow. JONATHAN HUNT: Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much for your feedback and in terms of other bills, when we pass something, changing the law a lot, usually there is a laundry list of other sections that are referenced that have to catch up to the new law too, but good catch. Thank you very much. c JONATHAN HUNT: Thank you. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Mr. Chairman? REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Anybody else? REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Mr. Chairman? REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Yes. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Through you sir, a question for the Senator. My understanding of the bill was that the box would be banned, which I am supportive of, but during the interview process, the discussion of anything that might be relevant to the job that they are seeking, sort of like companions and homemakers, whether they had a conviction for hurting elderly people, would be relevant at that time, not after they make an offer of employment, c Ill 000502 52 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING merely that they are in an interview room. I thought at that point the questions can be asked. This is my understanding of the bill, the BOX BILL. You tell if the statutes have changed since last year because I may be going off of last year's language. It was that it really was supposed to get the perspective employee in the door, give them that opportunity to interview and make their case, have their personality come through and have an opportunity, but the employer wouldn't have to wait until they actually said okay I want to hire you and then do the background check. I thought that they could ask during the interview process. I was just wondering if that was correct through you Mr. Chairman. SENATOR GOMES (23RD): Yeah, I'm sorry, thank you. 0 You're correct in that it has changed, so that you are wrong when talking about those limits that were there in last year's bill. Yes, it is later in the process now. It is after a conditional job offer not when it is the person's part of the field and last year's bill did not have the strict time limits on when somebody could look back or not look back also. They are in this year's bill and here is our public hearing and we are getting feedback already. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I would suspect that we would be open to certain compromises for certain industries and addressing their concerns, as I believe they all had last year, that unbalanced were fairly reasonable. 000503 53 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much yes. Okay, any other questions? Representative Esposito please? REP. ESPOSITO (116TH): Just a clarification, Mr. Denver. On the proposed condition of employment, can they make a statement as to your condition of employment offer based upon the background check? Does that still comply with the law if the background check comes back negative, you can stop the employment at that point couldn't you? DAVID DENVER: I believe the way this bill is presented, Representative, that that is correct. My concern is that the current law does not let the homemaker/companion association get that far because they have to do a background check before they offer any kind of offer of employment, conditional or c otherwise. REP. ESPOSITO (116TH): So we are in the position that we have to change one law or the other. Either change the law or exempt you from the present law, okay. DAVID DENVER: I do think that is correct, but just respectively suggest that 2678, when it was passed, was well-reasoned and that should be the law that remains. REP. ESPOSITO (116TH): Thank you. DAVID DENVER: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. c 000504 54 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much sir. I appreciate your feedback. It is good to see you again. We spent a lot of time together on the Domestic Workers Task Force. DAVID DENVER: Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you. Next up will be Alderman Darrell Brackeen and Alderman will be followed by Tim Phalen who will be followed by Cheryl Sharp and then Scott Carta. DARRELL BRACKEEN: Good evening. I am Darrell Brackeen of New Haven, Connecticut, representing Ward 26 on the New Haven Board of Alders and with me today, I have Attorney Graves of Project Fresh Start with us as well as a gentleman and friend Julius Dennis who is a constituent who will speak to the item that is before us which is HOUSE BILL 5237, AN 0 ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT. You know, I'm sure you all know that every day across America, we have hard working qualified men and women who are diligently seeking employment and have often found stumbling blocks and hiring obstacles because of a past arrest or conviction. The current system in place today creates a trigger that would automatically disqualify ex-offenders when it is checking off one simple box which would therefore place them in a secondary category or out of the applicant pool in general. For example, like stories we will here today, several individuals have told me of negative experiences and the complete distrust that they have in the system as it exists today. After hearing 000505 55 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING these individuals, every one of them asks the basic question, why should I have to check off a box when I have served my time? I want to be a productive citizen. This is an example of a systematic injustice that has plagued our country and state for decades resulting in many millions of Americans being left behind. This figure represents one in three US adults with a record; therefore becoming victims of a vicious cycle. Unfortunately and quite frequently, many young adults such as myself, who look like me become a statistic and a number in the American prison industry where people get out and can't find work that sustains them and their families. In a moment of hopelessness, they may find themselves back in their old ways leading them back into the prison c system. In reality, many of these young people have not had the opportunity to lay a foundation for their futures. A poor choice from the past should not become a life sentence to joblessness and hopelessness. Many people claim that while incarcerated, individuals should take advantages of various training programs offered; however after speaking with many of those who have taken advantage of those programs while incarcerated, have found that those programs are not up to par with the job market demands when they are released. It is my belief that the current legislation before us to Ban the Box in the state of Connecticut has been a long time coming. This proposed legislation will give ex-offenders a fair chance, or better yet, a fresh start. c 00050656 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING As was aforementioned by our honorable mayor, Mayor Toni Harp, and our community services and administration, the Ban the Box and reentry of ex offenders are a high priority here in the city and as a result, it.led to the creation of Project Fresh Start which has carried the torch of justice for concerning the item of banning the box here in the city on our own job applications giving citizens the took they need to receive viable employment. At this time, I want to give our citizen and constituent a moment, Julius Dennis, to talk about his experience with Project Fresh Start. JULIUS DENNIS: Thank you very much. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Would you please start by saying your name sir officially for the record. JULIUS DENNIS: Yes sir. My name is Julius Dennis 0 and thank you all very much for allowing me to speak. I would like to give thanks to Senator Gomes and also Mayor Toni Harp, Attorney Clifton Graves who invited me to present myself and also special assistant, Mr. Michael Harris, to the mayor and Mr. Darrell our Alderman. In 1991, I arrested myself. I know that sounds a little strange, but I called the police department and asked if they would like me to come down and they said yes, sure come down. I gave a testimony and I was told to go and have an attorney represent me. Anyway, I spent time, a year and a half in prison, I didn't get one ticket. I never got sent to the hole and I worked in the educational system in the system 0 000507 57 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING and also in the theological arena while incarcerated. Upon being released, I had three years of probation. I was told I couldn't go to college, but I went away. I went to Southern Connecticut State University, where I met Attorney Graves. He was one of the Dean of Students. I graduated. It took me ten years, but I believe in as long as it takes to do anything positive should be taken and I became a member of the Fresh Start Program. I have had a lot of problems trying to get a job. As a matter of fact, I am unemployed now. My boss had to downsize. I worked with him for 28 years. He kept my job for me while I was incarcerated. When I came home, he presented it to me. I put in c several applications throughout the city of New. Haven. I have earned a degree in social work with a minor in sociology. I have done a lot of research on a lot of different things and trying to get a pardon right now. Fresh Start has helped me a lot in terms of getting the application ready for pardon and also readying myself for employment. I have helped a lot of people here in New Haven to turn themselves into the police department at 4:00 or 5:00 in the morning, present themselves to several of our public defenders, who have represented them in the court system, so I have given a lot back to the state of Connecticut. In spite of all that, because of my record, it doesn't seem that I am a good citizen, but I beg to c 000508 58 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING differ in that. I am a firm believer in the word of God, read the whole Bible, read the whole Quran and read the whole dictionary. I speak publically a lot to the constituents here in New Haven trying to get them to understand the theological path of life and I really would like to see this box moved out of the way because I think that it hinders a lot of individuals. I don't think a lot of the people that are applying for jobs are as strong as I am. I am 61 years old and a lot of these other individuals are a lot younger than I am and they are not as strong as I am. So, I don't think that it is fair that they are not given an opportunity to present their better side. I think that we as a country really need to give people a chance to live. A lot of them are going to turn to drugs, they are going to selling drugs, they are going to turn to using drugs, they are going to 0 turn to killing each other and they are just going to explode the prison population even more so. The reality of it is that we as citizens, if we really, really care about our country, we need to do something. Here I am, I sit a brain, all right, I made a mistake which proves that none of us are perfect, all right, but I regret what I did and I really would like to have an opportunity to give back to the community in more of a, I guess you can say, a standard way. You know, I am glad that, you know, I am able to convince people to turn themselves into drug programs; all of that stuff is nice, but it would be nice, as a lot of my friends say to me who happen to be attorneys, "You know Julius you should get paid for some of this good stuff that you do. You really should get paid for 000509 59 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING it, you know." I may have to coach them and get them to understand, look no one is going to beat you up at the police department. Just turn yourself in and you know they know that I am out there and most of the judges, you know, they have met me, saw me and they like me as a person as well. You know, I have had situations where I had to go to court for a traffic ticket for example and the marshals have said to me, "Gee, why are you on this side. This is strange, we've never seen you on this side before." They never saw me in a situation where I had a problem, you know? A lot of them don't even know I have a record. They just see me as a really nice guy. I need a job, man. You know what I'm saying? I need a job working where I can take care of my home where I live. I have encouraged my children. I have a daughter c who has a double Master's. She works for the Hartford Board of Education. She is a counselor. I have counseled her and we stuck with each other throughout these years. We have the same alma mater. Her mother is a doctor; she is a PhD, you know? I have another son. He has a Bachelor's and lives in Japan. He works for a filming company, okay? So I am saying that there are just a lot of good people out there that made a mistake, but someone needs to give them a chance, okay? Because I figure if you could encourage your children to go to college, to earn a degree despite of your record and my children were going to college at the same time that I was going to college, so I led the example as a parent with a record, all right? My college, my degree is already paid up. It was paid up before I graduated. c c·'-----1.1...------000510 60 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Yes. Thank you very much. And did you want to speak again, sir? Good. Thank you very much. Are there any questions? It better be a fast one. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I wanted to thank you for testifying and I wanted to thank you for that story. I am generally, we are generally supportive of the Ban the Box. I am curious to know if you heard that last gentleman testify and whether or not you saw any merit in their argument for certain industries that maybe don't fall into the umbrella of Block the Box or maybe need some special consideration? CLIFTON GRAVES: Well yes I did quite frankly. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Start with your name again. CLIFTON GRAVES: I'm sorry. 0 REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Okay. CLIFTON GRAVES: And I will be very brief committee members. Clifton Graves, Project Fresh Start, city of New Haven. My understanding, my reading of the legislation, Representative, is that the legislation calls for banning the box, but that once one is offered, once a conditional offer of employment is presented to someone, to a respective employee that the employer then has a right, under the legislation proposed, to actually do a background check at that point. The legislation tries to get around the issue, prohibition and barring of one applying for a job, but at least it gets past the first hurdle. In the case of I guess it was the homemakers. 000511 61 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Companions and Homemakers CLIFTON GRAVES: Yes, that they were certainly had an opportunity at that point to still do a background check and of course given the nature of the crime or the alleged offense that the person served, they can make a determination at that point if that person is or is not an appropriate fit for their agency. I think the legislation as proposed does allow for still a check to be made, but after the initial application is filed. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Thank you for your answer. Thank you Mr. Chairman. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much gentleman. Thank you Mr. Dennis. Thank you Mr. Graves. c CLIFTON GRAVES: Thank you all. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Next up is Tim Phalen to be followed by Cheryl Sharp. TIM PHALEN: Good afternoon Representative Tercyak, #6523? Senator Gomes, Representative Rutigliano, other H65367 members of the Labor Committee. It is nice to be in, nice to be in New Haven, Connecticut. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Try not to wreck it. TIM PHALEN: Where the capital should have stayed instead of moving to Hartford, right Representative Esposito? REP. TERCYAK (26TH): They won't ask us back if this is the way you are with the equipment. c Ill 000512 62 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING TIM PHALEN: Our life would have been a lot different if the capital stayed here in New Haven instead of moving to Hartford, but in any event, as you mentioned, my name is Tim Phalen. I am the President of the Connecticut Retail Merchants Association. CRMA is a statewide trade association representing thousands of Connecticut retailers, large and small, all across our state. I thank you for the opportunity today to testify regarding HOUSE BILL 5237, AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT. I have submitted written testimony, so I will just summarize that. very briefly, we generally support as Representative Rutigliano just mentioned, we generally support this bill. Retailers employ thousands of people throughout the state, so we know a little bit about the application process and the interview process. 0 With that experience, we bring to the table, and by that I mean both large retailers and small retailers. We ask that the committee consider a couple of important points. In particular, Section 1, subsection E3, we have some concerns that the provisions of this section would prohibit an employer from acting against a perspective or existing employee that has a criminal charge or conviction for felony within five years of the date of such an arrest, criminal charge, or conviction. In our view, the proposed language is overly broad and may not be in the best public interest. There are certainly felony convictions, for example, that would give our industry great concern such as participation in organized retail 000513 63 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING crime or convictions such as murder or sexual assault. There are a couple of ways we can fix this section including carving out those crimes that I had mentioned as well as adjusting a look back period or there may be other ways. We would be willing to work with the committee to find a solution to that problem that we have identified in that section. So, I think, as I mentioned, my testimony has been submitted. You can read that. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. Also while I am here, if you don't mind, I would just like to associate myself with the remarks of CBIA with regard to HOUSE BILL 5367, retailers across the state, again, we are large employers, we have long contributed to the Unemployment Fund. The reforms c called for in this bill, we think, are good for our members and the entire business community as well. So thank you very much and I would be happy to answer any questions or get off the stage, whatever you would like. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Questions? Comments? No? Thank you. SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : Thank you. We appreciate your coming. TIM PHALEN: Thank you Senator Gomes. It was a pleasure to see you. We are closer to Bridgeport. SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : There you go. Remember what I told you before. c ,Ill 000514 64 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING (laughter) REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Next up, Cheryl Sharp from CHRO followed by Scott Carter, Carta, followed by Gillian Gilchrist who will be followed by Glen McLeod. SENATOR GOMES (23RD): Welcome. CHERYL SHARP: Good evening Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, Senator Hwang, Representative Rutigliano, Vice Chairs and members of the Labor and Employees committee. I am Cheryl Sharp. I am here representing the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. I am the Deputy Executive Director of this CHRO and I am here in support of HOUSE BILL 5237. Our testimony has been submitted, ·so I am not going to read from the testimony. We support this bill, but we ask there 0 be some considerations of a few factors and possibly some amendment to the bill. The CHRO has a federal counterpart, the EEOC, the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission. That federal counterpart has issued guidance, enforcement guidance on this very issue. Due to the disparity in criminal records for minorities, the EEOC has stated that employers may be liable for a Title VII violation, so liable for not giving someone a job because they have a prior criminal conviction. That statute already applies to state agencies and is under the enforcement authority of the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. So, you should have received a handout and on that handout is a Connecticut map and it shows you all of 000515 65 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING the towns in which we have received complaints. It is pretty much every town in Connecticut that we have received a complaint of discrimination. We have received, in three of the four regions that we have, complaints regarding prior criminal conviction. Right now, the state of the law is under 46A 80, the state of the law is that the state agencies cannot discriminate based on a prior criminal conviction and what the EEOC is saying in their guidance is that private employers, it has been shown that even though it is a neutral policy that we are going to look at people's criminal records and we are just going to disqualify them, it has larger impact on people of color, on Latinos and black of African American people and therefore, we are currently at the commission taking complaints of discrimination c based on prior criminal conviction if the person indicates that they believe it is because of their race and color that they were denied an opportunity and because of the prior criminal history. This is based on the guidance of the EEOC. While we support this bill, part of the bill talks about having that enforcement authority be under the Department of Labor. Since we already have 46A 80 in law now, which contains exceptions which address some of the concerns that were raised by Companions and I think it was Homemakers, we ask that you look at putting the enforcement authority under the commission because we already have an investigator and prosecutory arm in place to investigate these very types of violations when it is a state agency that has denied a person an opportunity to be employed because they have a prior criminal history. c 000516 66 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING The other benefit to having the enforcement aspect of this with the Commission on Human Rights is that when cases are processed by us, we have a work sharing agreement with the federal EEOC and they actually give the state general fund money once the case is completely processed. For every case that we fully process, money goes to the general fund if it is an employment case that has been filed or if it is a housing case that has been filed. The state gets reimbursed basically a flat fee for the work that we have done on that particular case. Because of the disparities and the disproportionate effect that asking about criminal records before making a conditional offer on employment has on certain communities, we believe that the proper place is with the CHRO, the oldest state-sponsored civil rights agencies in the nation. So, we want to 0 throw our support behind this bill, but ask that you consider looking at 46A 80, where you will find the exceptions which I am trying to call them up on my phone that doesn't want to work right now, so I can specifically let you know what those exceptions are because then I think we will have actually a remedy to some of the issues that were raised earlier. I know three of the things that are looked at after offer of employment are the length of time from the commission of the crime, the type of rehabilitation that was done, that the person submitted themselves to, did they try to get rehabilitated and the type of job that they are seeking. So some of the issues raised that if a person had abused an elderly person and then you want to now have them go work with the elderly would actually be dealt with because that is 000517 67 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING actually something that could be considered in hiring someone. I think that the framework of 46A 80 lends itself to accomplishing the goal which you have here which is to Ban the Box and provide an opportunity to some of the most vulnerable people in Connecticut who can be productive citizens, but just need a chance and an opportunity to take care of their families and be employed. I know you like for people to be brief, so I am going to let brevity be on my side and answer any questions that you have. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Any questions folks? No? Okay, thank you very much. SENATOR GOMES (23RD): We have your testimony. c REP. TERCYAK (26TH): We have your testimony. Thank you for your suggestions. Our legal folks wrote down the CHRO as a possibility while you were talking and we thank you. CHERYL SHARP: Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Okay. Next up is Scott Carta and then please be ready Gillian and then Glen. SCOTT CARTA: Good evening Representative Tercyak, Senator Gomes and other members of the committee. It's nice to see you again. I am Scott Carta. I am here on behalf of Connecticut Trial Lawyers Association, Workers' Comp section. We are here in support of HOUSE BILL 5449, WHICH WOULD ALLOW INJURED WORKERS TO CLAIM DAMAGES IN COURT, SUPERIOR COURT FOR UNFAIR INSURANCE PRACTICES NOTABLY HAVING c II 000520 70 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Questions? Comments? No? Okay, thank you very much. SCOTT CARTA: Thank you very much. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Okay. Gillian come on up and then it will be Glen McLeod, Glen's turns. McLeod, McLoyd, we will find out. Welcome. Please begin. GILLIAN GILCHRIST: Thank you. Good evening, Senators Gomes and Hwang, Representative Tercyak and distinguished members of the Labor Committee. My name is Gillian Gilchrist and I am the senior policy analyst for the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women. Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony in support of HOUSE BILL 5237, AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT. 0 I have also included testimony on two additional bills, but will not be speaking on those today. In March 2014, the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights (1:53:56.9) launched a collaborative project with 20 community-based organizations across the country to address four decades of unjust criminal justice policies. They found that the collateral impacts of those policies last for generations and are felt most deeply by women, low income families, and communities of color. HOUSE BILL 5237 is an important piece of a comprehensive movement to reform the criminal justice system, reduce the number of people going to prison and make it easier 000521 71 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING for those already in to get out and have a chance at a law-abiding life. In particular, HOOSE BILL 5237 can improve the lives of Connecticut women who have been incarcerated or have experienced the economic and emotional costs of having a relative or partner who has been incarcerated. Thailand is the only country in the world with a higher incarceration rate for women than the United States. According to the Connecticut Department of Corrections, women make up 7% of Connecticut's prison population. While the lifetime likelihood of imprisonment for women is 1 in 56, the chance that a woman of color would be incarcerated is much higher. It is 1 in 19 c for black women and 1 in 45 for Hispanic women. The crimes for which women are most frequently incarcerated differ from those of men as do the barriers they experience upon reentering the community and workforce. According to research out of Berkley School of Law, a woman with a criminal record is least likely to receive a positive response to a resume submission and when it comes to African American women, they are most likely to suffer from the stigma of crimina1ization, whereby they get a negative response whether or not they have a criminal record. Studies have shown that employment is the single most important influence on decreasing recidivism and that two years after release, nearly twice as many employed people with records had avoided c 000522 72 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING another brush with the law than their unemployed counterparts. When looking at recidivism rates, it is important to look at recidivism rates of men and of women because they tell a different story. While recidivism rates for men in Connecticut have been dropping, they remain steady for women. HOUSE BILL 5237 can help address this inequity by ensuring when a woman reenters a Connecticut community that she has a fair chance at employment. Women also find themselves impacted by unfair employment practices when a household member has been formerly incarcerated. Almost one in four women and two in five black women are related to someone who has been incarcerated. Many key opportunities such as education loans or housing assistance are limited or prohibited for formerly 0 incarcerated people. The impact of many of these restrictions jeopardizes the economic stability of incarcerated people and the families that support them. The PCSW supports HOUSE BILL 5237 in ensuring all Connecticut residents have a fair chance at employment. Thank you for your time and the opportunity to testify in this important public policy. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Good job. Thank you very much. Questions anybody? Okay. Thank you. SENATOR GOMES (23RD): We appreciate it. 73 March 3, 2016000523 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Interesting and discouraging statistics there that we had not heard before. Glen McLeod please, who will be followed by Subira Gordon and others. Welcome. Thank you very much. GLEN MCLEAD: Mr. Chairman, my name is Glen McLeod. I am 64 years old and I am from New Haven, Connecticut. My experience of the legal systems reach into the past which concerns BILL 5327 has been rather unsettling. I had been offered a position in October 2015 with New York Life as an insurance producer. In the course of this, I was asked about a past criminal history which I disclosed to them which amounted to two incidences of bounced checks which happened back in 1974. New York Life ran a background check which came back completely cleaned, which concerned me, so I reached out to the US District Attorney and asked them if c they could look and see if they could find anything. Now, they were able to find a couple of instances which confirmed which I had told New York Life, but New York Life believed that the background was completely clean and they're in the financial sector, so this was critical. When the US Attorney found these and just confirmed what I knew, but at that point New York Life went ahead and put me into some training classes. On January 26, during a training class, the fingerprint file that anyone who works in the financial sector came back to them and it actually had two other transactions on there that to this day I still do not know about. c Ill 000524 74 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING The employer released me from the contract believing I had misrepresented my criminal history from them and I eventually received the records, but I still am not able to tell exactly what it was that occurred even after checking with the State Police, the US District Attorney's office again and the record keeping facility in Enfield, connecticut. What happens is that records are destroyed physically after a period of time, so I have no way of even knowing what the charges are, so it is a bit disturbing to me that something that happened when I was 22 years old is still affecting me. HB-5327 with the requirement that employers only consider misdemeanors within the last two years of hiring and felonies within the last five years could have saved my job and at 64, it is a little difficult to find work and it is disheartening that something that happened 43 years ago is preventing me from finding 0 employment, so I just want to state I support FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT and hope that the committee will favorably vote on that bill. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Thank you for coming and telling us your story and how this law could be helping you and other real people. Questions anybody? No? Thank you very much. I appreciate your patience. Next up is Subira Gordon from the African American Affairs Commission and Arvia Walker, Alok Bhatt, David McGuire, and Kennard Ray, all five together. Come on now, the whole idea about being five together is to be quicker. Thank you very much. Start by each introducing yourself and we will begin. 000525 75 March 3, 2016 clm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING KENNARD RAY: Kennard Ray, National Director of Strategic Partnerships at the Restaurant Opportunities Center. SUBIRA GORDON: Subira Gordon, Legislative Analyst for the African American Affairs Commission. ALOK BHATT: Alok Bhatt, Legislative Analyst for Asian Pacific American Affairs Commission. ARVIA WALKER: Arvia Walker, Community Outreach and Engagement Coordinator for Planned Parenthood of Southern New England. DAVID MCGUIRE: David McGuire, Legislative and Policy Direct of American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut. c SUBIRA GORDON: Thank you again for raising this bill. As I said, my name is Subira Gordon and I work for the African American Affairs Commission. We are the steering committee for Connecticut Fair Chance Coalition and we are very happy that you raised this bill. I think I would say this is probably one of the most important things that we are going to be able to do this session. We have all provided written testimony, so we won't go over it verbatim, but I wanted to point out that this bill affects very many people. We had an event last week, where we heard people that have had criminal history that is very old, well over 20, 30 years old and it still follows them today. I really, really thank the committee for having this public hearing and talking about this issue. I don't have a criminal record, so I won't take up your time, but I really want you to listen to the individuals who are c ______...... ,. ______>>~' Ill 000526 76 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING here, who will give you real life stories about how this will change their lives. ltf> 5~37 ALOK BHATT: Alok Bhatt of Asian Pacific American Affairs. Just really briefly, while we were preparing our launch event last week and while we were outreaching to individuals, formerly incarcerated individuals, you know, we really heard from groups of really dynamic people who acknowledge they made mistakes, who took their time incarcerated to really rehabilitate themselves and really think about things they have done and their interactions with the criminal justice system and the struggles that they experienced when they came out. A lot of them struggled for years before they were really able to find sustainable employment. When they were able to, the lesson that really came out and that many of them had expressed to us 0 personally is that if they had those opportunities from the jump as soon as they got out, their lives would have been so much better. Just the importance of opening up employment equity and also giving people a fair shot when they deserve one, people who have paid their debts to society and really deserve as much as any of us who don't have criminal records a chance to live productive lives and really cultivate a future for themselves. ARVIA WALKER: I was going to read my entire testimony, but since everyone is making short comments, I just wanted to talk about the family perspective. At Planned Parenthood of Southern New England, we see about 64,000 patients a year and we have about 17 health centers across the state. As one of the largest reproductive healthcare providers 000527 77 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING in the country, we believe that every patient that walks through our doors have the right to comprehensive reproductive healthcare as well as they deserve the resources to access that right. As advocates for reproductive freedom, we know that policies and practices that bar individuals from obtaining employment negatively affects the entire family. So according to research that was done by the Center for American Progress, half of the children living in the United States have a parent or guardian that has some sort of criminal record. This negatively impacts the entire family because of the children actually have significant decrease in education economic achievement. We hear the stories of our patients. The patients who come into our centers don't just come for reproductive healthcare, they come with their entire lives. So as an c organization and as members of the community, we urge the committee to support this bill because we know that criminal records bar people from unemployment and being able to have reproductive freedom and raise the families that they want in the way that they want to. DAVID MCGUIRE: I am David from the ACLU of Connecticut. The reason that the ACLU is involved in this coalition and pushing for this bill is for racial justice. It is absolutely clear that our criminal justice system in Connecticut has impacted more black and brown people and that is not fair. This bill would go a long way towards trying to mitigate some of that damage that has been done to more than one generation here in Connecticut. It syncs well with the Governor's SECOND CHANCE SOCIETY BILL that passed last year and the SECOND CHANCE 2.0 c Ill 000528 78 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING BILL that he is pushing this session. I urge this committee to keep the bill as strong as possible. The current bill, according to the National Employment Loss Project, is one of the strongest in the country. We don't need a paper victory or feel good bill, we need a bill that is really going to make an impact on people and this bill does that. There were some concerns voiced by certain industries. I would note that under this bill, no employer would be forced to hire. anyone and that is an important thing to keep in mind. This is going to just give people a real shot, let them get through the process and ultimately if that employer feels that for some reason that person is not suitable, then they don't have to hire them. So, again, thank you for taking this up and I appreciate your time today. 0 KENNARD RAY: Again, my name is Kennard Ray and I am testifying on behalf of the Steering Committee as well as my organization the Restaurant Opportunities Center. To David's point, the reason why we are involved as an organization is because this is a racial justice issue and my written testimony speaks to that. You know, in restaurants, occupational segregation is real. Folks are filed out of the restaurant business or filed into the restaurant business one way or the other. Back at the House, I know Representative Rutigliano as a chef knows this and has hired several people in the past. We actually had a conversation once about, you know, him growing up rough and tumble in Waterbury and having to .... knowing that he had to hire folks just like 29 79 March 3, 2016000S dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING himself when he got the chance. So my testimony speaks to that, but I also want to testify personally, not just professionally. This particular issue is near and dear to my heart. You know, I lobbied a bunch of you before, maybe managed your campaigns, maybe worked on campaigns, maybe worked against you before anyone knew I had my own personal history. When you found out, the entire state found out and this language Ban the Box became something of a common nomenclature, somebody say the word for me, I got four people to help me out, but you know, I just want to be an example of personal and professional progress. I've worked with almost everyone on this panel and I want that record to speak for itself just as it could speak for the folks that are in. this audience c today that may have never been a part of the legislative process if we had not brought this important bill up today and brought this committee down into New Haven, where folks really want to voice their opinions. They community really wants a bill like this to pass. We really need an opportunity for fair chance for all and thank you for your time. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you for your time. Any questions or comments? No? Yes. SENATOR GOMES (23RD) : As the Steering Committee for this bill and as of people pushing this bill from our end, I want to thank all of you for being here. We all have history and some of it has come out. As a matter of fact, I had some history come out on me last week you know. c Ill 000530 80 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING I am a person with a felony in my my record and I tell you, this was in 1953, one to two record in Cheshire and when I came out of there, and I'm just telling you this to show you how the system works, I came out of there and I said I'm going to get myself together and I'm going in the service. I wanted to go in the Marines. They rejected me because I had a record, I had a felony. I wanted to go into the Army. They rejected me because I had a record. So from the time I was 18 until I was about 22, I sloughed to get along, menial jobs and so on and so forth. Finally, I became the father of a kid that was a couple of months old and then I got drafted. I got drafted by the military that refused me. When I reminded them of the felony, they said that doesn't count, we are going to waive that, not for my purpose, but for theirs. 0 That is a demonstration on how people get beat up by the system after they paid their debt to society. I say that about me because I helped somebody get a pardon. People said why don't you get a pardon and I said what the hell do I need it for now? Old as I am, I have gotten along and not to say that I didn't make out well because I had a whole lot of good people that did a whole lot of good things for Ed Gomes. A lot of these people that come out of these institutions with this record don't have that break. Nobody does anything for them. They slough around for the rest of their lives. They can't support their families. They can't raise their children. They can't even be an idol towards somebody who has made it for their children. It is just a system that robs you of everything after they beat the hell out of you and they beat the hell out of you and you 000531 81 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING paid your debt to society and everything and people still have you by the collar. This is why we want this bill to pass because this bill needs to pass because somebody can get a chance at just doing something constructive with their lives, getting on with their lives, raising their families without somebody every time you go to apply for a job, somebody just crosses you right off right from the beginning. This is what this bill is all about. This is what these people work for and this is what we are trying to do with this bill. Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much? Anybody else? Well, I'm sorry, yes Senator Hwang? SENATOR HWANG (28TH): Thank you Mr. Chair. I just want to compliment all five of you. For you to come out and be engaged, it really puts to fallacy when c we talk about young people not being engaged in our political process, so I want to applaud all five of you. I want to compliment Senator Gomes for sharing his story and you know what, you are absolutely right. It doesn't change one thing about how much I have fondness and respect for you, what you have accomplished and for you to be able to share that story is a tremendous source of courage and pride and I wanted to say thank you for your public service. Thank you Mr. Chair. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you. Anybody else? Thank you very much one and all. Next up, Nadine Nevins followed by James Bhandary-Alexander followed by Amy Eppler-Epstein. c II 000532 82 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING NADINE NEVINS: Hi. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much for coming, start with your name and we're listening. 3?2 ;p.o NADINE NEVINS: Good evening Senator Gomes, l±f2. 54?;7 Representative Tercyak and Senator Hwang from my hometown of Fairfield and the rest of the committee members. My name is Nadine Nevins. I am the managing attorney of the Bridgeport Office of Connecticut Legal Services. I am submitting my testimony on behalf of the state's legal services programs. I support the concepts of SB-314, AN ACT CONCERNING THE TEMPORARY FAMILY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BENEFITS and would like to direct your attention to the comment submitted by Attorney Joanne Gibau for analysis of that bill. 0 Additionally, I am proposing that SB-314 be amended with substitute language that changes Connecticut General Statutes 31-273 and makes unemployment compensation overpayments of $1300 or less a misdemeanor rather than a felony because right now, if you have an unemployment compensation overpayment of $500 or more that is considered a felony. This change is consistent with the Second Chance Society laws passed by the legislature last year. That initiative was aimed at turning non-violent offenders into productive members of our society who can attribute to our economy rather than drain it. For workers collecting unemployment compensation, who finally found a new job, it could be as long as a month before they get their first paycheck. May II 000534 84 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING their families and contributing to Connecticut's economic growth. In addition, I would like to note that I have submitted comments regarding SB-220, AN ACT CONCERNING UNEMPLOYMENT TECHNICAL REVISIONS. Some of the changes are really more substantive than just technical, so I hope you read my testimony on that bill. I also want to throw my support to HB-5237, WHICH WOULD EXTEND BAN THE BOX TO PRIVATE EMPLOYERS. This is enlightened policy that is consistent with the reforms already made in Connecticut. It is recognition that continuing to punish those who have already been punished serves no public interest. Giving the person with a conviction an opportunity for a job promotes public safety, economic growth and family stability. 0 REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Questions? Yes, Representative Rutigliano? REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your testimony. I am just curious how you got to $1,300? What was the methodology? NADINE NEVINS: So the maximum weekly benefit rate is $598, so I doubled that and then added a little more because each year, it goes up a little. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Oh I see. That was good. Because I did it myself and it was $1,196 and I was like what was the significance of $1,300. NADINE NEVINS: Yes, so it was just ... 000543 93 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Please introduce yourself before you speak. AMY EPPLER-EPSTEIN: My name is Amy Eppler-Epstein and I am an attorney at New Haven Legal Assistants and to my left is Divya Musinipally who is a law student at Yale Law School in our new Reentry Clinic which is a partnership between Yale Law School and New Haven Legal Assistants and it is focused on dealing with the legal issues affecting the reentry population. It just started this January because of our recognition of the serious legal needs affecting this population in New Haven and in our state. I would like to ask Divya to give some comments why were here in support tonight of the CONNECTICUT FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT ACT, HB-5237. DIVYA MUSINIPALLY: Good evening. The reentry c clinic, as Amy said, was started in recognition of the importance of helping the reentry population have success getting back on their feet and in the case for many of our clients, move on from criminal incidents that happened more than a decade ago. We have seen that there is a great need for this work. There are many people coming to us for legal assistance in advocating for themselves with their employers. This legislation would rightly put the responsibility on employers about when they are holding criminal convictions against people who are otherwise completely qualified. The New Haven Legal Assistance Reentry Clinic vigorously supports HB-5237. The Ban the Box policy would ensure that employers are making individualized assessments rather than blanket c 00054494 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING exceptions. As you heard from one of our clients who spoke earlier, Glen McLeod, there are, there are individuals whose convictions are decades ago and the look back periods are limited to two years for misdemeanors and five years for felonies would ensure that people could move on with their lives and become productive employed members of society. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Is that it? Wow, very good. AMY EPPLER-EPSTEIN: I just want to add that Glen McLeod is one example. We have had many other people where very minor, minor convictions from years ago still plague them. He lost his job over convictions of a bounced check 43 years ago and that is just wrong. So, we are really glad that this legislation not only addresses Ban the Box, but also addresses the look back period and I think that is really important. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Questions? Yes, Senator please. SENATOR HWANG (28TH) : In your work, have you seen that those people who have applied and not given jobs, have they returned and what was the recidivism rate if you have any kind of percentage rage? AMY EPPLER-EPSTEIN: This clinic just started in January, so we don't have a big track record, but what we've seen is people who have been, you know, as the gentleman who testified, his conviction was a long time ago and he has no convictions since the conviction for the bounced check 43 years ago. So, there has been no recidivism. It was in 1973-1974 were his convictions. There have been no arrests or 000545 95 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING convictions since then, but he still is facing this, well he lost his job over this. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. AMY EPPLER-EPSTEIN: Did that answer your question? SENATOR HWANG (28TH) : Yes it did, thank you, thank you very much. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Okay, next up George Wentworth followed by Daryl DeMarco and then Eric Gjede. We would like to thank some commissioners for sending us their testimony, but now showing up; Scott Semple, the Commissioner of Corrections, Miriam Delphin-Rittmon from DMHAS and Melody Currey from the Department of Administrative Services, thank c you. GEORGE WENTWORTH: Good evening Representative Tercyak, Senator Gomes and members of the committee. My name is George Wentworth. I am senior counsel with the National Employment Law Project. We are a national nonprofit out of New York that engages in policy analysis, research and advocacy on behalf of unemployed and low wage workers. My concentration is in the area of unemployment insurance. Prior to 2009, I spent 35 years at the Connecticut Department of Labor overseeing unemployment insurance policy and regulations. I am here tonight to speak in opposition to HOUSE BILL 5367. Like most other states, Connecticut's unemployment trust fund was not prepared for extraordinarily high volumes of claims during the great recession and the long ensuing recovery. Like c 000576126 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING appreciate your suggestions and testimony. Tom Swan followed by Ronda Dafalice followed by Paul Filson and then James Gattison. TOM SWAN: Good evening Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, other members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. I am going to try to be really fast because I know you have all had a long day. I am the executive director of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group. I am going to testify quickly on three bills. The first bill is SENATE BILL 39, AN ACT CONCERNING THE MINIMUM FAIR WAGE AND EMPLOYEES WHO CUSTOMARILY REGULARLY RECEIVE GRATUITITES. This is a bill about basic fairness. It is about ending a discriminatory practice that impacts women and particularly single women in a larger manner than the rest of society. It has been implemented in other locations. It has not hurt the restaurant industry. Good restaurants, like yours Representative, will continue to thrive, I am confident. I also want to voice support for 5370 or 5237, AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT. This is a basic issue of fairness. We have taken great strides with the criminal justice system changes. In order for them to work, people need a real second chance. This will lessen recidivism. It will allow people the chance to get jobs. It is just the morally right thing to do. The last bill I want to testify on is HOUSE BILL 5370, AN ACT INCREASING THE MINIMUM WAGE. Seattle has moved in this location. What we have seen after the initial adjustment period is where it has 000593 143 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you. Next up, Yasmin Erikson followed by Patrick Sullivan followed by Erica Dean and then Louise DiCocco. Welcome and thank you very much. YASMIN ERIKSON: Thank you. Good evening. My name is Yasmin Erikson. I am the co-chair of the Criminal Justice Legislative Committee with the Yale College Democrats and the legislative coordinator of the Yale Undergraduate Prison Project. I am here tonight to testify in favor of the bill NUMBER 5237, AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT. This bill is particularly important.to me both as a resident of New Haven now and as a resident of New Orleans. Coming from Louisiana which has one has c one of the highest incarceration rates, the highest incarceration rate in the world with the US having the highest incarceration rate in the world. Criminal justice has always, criminal justice reform has always been very important to me. In Louisiana, more than 80% of defendants cannot afford a lawyer or do not have the means to represent themselves. Not only did one of my mom's closest friends have to wait over a month in jail before her trial, but she pleaded guilty to a crime that was out of self-defense simply because she was afraid of the potential 20-year sentence she could have been given if she did not agree to the plea. Once she is out of jail, she will have to admit to her former incarceration on job application forms. 0 000594144 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING People are often coerced into taking a plea bargain despite their innocence to avoid harsher sentences that will often be carried out if someone exercises their right to trial. This is all to say that there are many reasons people end up in jail. Some people have been wrongfully convicted. Some people receive sentences that perhaps were not deserved as harsh due to the plea bargain system and there are many misconceptions concerning people who have been formerly incarcerated. This leads to unconscious bias ingrained at a systemic level that is represented through employer discrimination such as blanket refusal to even consider an applicant for a job due to the~r criminal record. There are many factors that go into having been given a sentence of jail including poverty, lack of 0 access to quality education, mental health and disenfranchisement based on race, gender, socioeconomic background that play important roles in why people commit crimes. Also, I am speaking as a college age student. Currently, the juvenile jurisdiction in Connecticut is age 17, which means at age 18, you will be tried as an adult regardless of the crime. Many people- basically what I want to say last is that recent research have shown that peoples' brains do not fully develop until age 25 and so a lot of people aren't able to properly assess risk with regards to crime and that I think especially the youth need to be given a second chance to prove that they can lead productive lives by being able to participate in the labor force and it has been implemented successfully 000595 145 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING in New Haven, so it's time that equal opportunity through the BAN THE BOX BILL is enforced statewide. Thank you. REP. GOMES (23RD): I want to thank you for testimony. Some of it we went through a few years ago when we were trying to get the bill to raise the age about young people with brains that don't work as well as adults when it comes to certain things and when we were talking about some of them getting stuck with felonies at age 18 and carrying them for the rest of their lives. I also, the thing about what you're talking about plea bargaining. YASMIN ERIKSON: Uh-huh. c SEN. GOMES (23RD): I understand that out of plea bargaining, about 20 times the rate of people that accept plea bargaining as the people that really go to court and that's why a lot of people are in jail with sentences that they should not have had or should be reduced much more and that's why when we worked on the governor's second chances thing, a lot of people were let out of jail because of that, because of that same thing that you're talking about. They didn't belong there. we had people that were waiting in jail for as much as a year just trying to get to court. Doing a year's time for something that you haven't been convicted of, so some of the statistics you were talking about are very real to us. Thank you for coming. YASMIN ERIKSON: Thank you. 0 000596146 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING SEN. GOMES (23RD): I appreciate it. Patrick Sullivan, which one are you Patrick? PATRICK SULLIVAN: I am Patrick and this is Korinayo. We are co-directors. SEN. GOMES(23RD): All right and what is your name? KORINAYO THOMPSON: Korinayo Thompson. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Korinayo Thompson. PATRICK SULLIVAN: Yeah, so as I said, my name is Patrick. This is Korinayo. We are the co-directors of Advocacy and Awareness with the Yale Undergraduate Prison Project and we urge the committee to pass HOUSE BILL 5237. You've heard many statistics, stories and studies that demonstrate how important this bill is for formerly 0 incarcerated individuals in the state of Connecticut. I am going to speak from my experience as a mentor at Manson Youth Institution. Every Friday, other students and I walk into Manson to have conversations with young men our age. My most recent partner and I, both young men who are 20 years old, talked about a wide variety of subjects from our love of friend Oreos to the new songs that he had most recently written, but much of our conversation centers, usually, on the life outside and what job he's going to get when he gets out. Never spoken, but always heard in this conversation is the box that looms on the job application that awaits outside the walls. 000597 147 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING Employers will repeatedly throw out his job application simply because of a check in a box that in no way represents who he is. I urge you to consider the impact of this bill on the lives of young people across the state of Connecticut. Furthermore, the voices of 464 college students expressed in the letters I have here urge you to support HOUSE BILL 5237. Thank you. KORINAYO THOMPSON: I want to briefly echo the sentiments voiced by my colleague, Patrick, here and I am also a student at Yale University involved in the mentoring program at Manson Youth Facility, where myself, Patrick and other young men go in to tutor, mentor young black men who have been incarcerated for crimes and are getting ready to, and are at the later stages of their sentences c looking for, looking to plan their futures. The young man I am paired with currently, his name is Rayquan. I only talk about work with him because that's all he wants to talk about. He wants to talk about getting a job in home care and nursing, getting an RNA certificate. In my own time, I do research to, about the potential jobs for him and I have to navigate for him a world that discriminates him based on his felony record; a felony record that he has worked hard to expunge. He has obtained a high school diploma. He has been through several mentoring services and these are the things that a box does not disclose when you are forced to disclose that at search an early level in the application process. There has been a lot of building up of the individual that is not disclosed in the employment process with the current 0 000598148 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING practices. So, and what it does it renders these improvements, the GED, tutoring, like they've got their GEDs, the mentoring, it renders these things a waste almost. I think that in order to make Connecticut Corrections truly corrective and rehabilitative, this bill needs to pass. Thank you. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I want to thank both of you for coming and it's encouraging to see that two young people get it. Two young people out there working to improve something that I had to go through all my life to realize what is really happening, so I appreciate your work. KORINAYO THOMPSON: Thank you sir. SEN. GOMES (23RD): All right. We have Erica, Erica Don, Dean, Erica Dean. I need to put on my glasses. 0 ERICA DEAN: You're fine. (laughter) ERICA DEAN: Good evening Senator Gomes and respected members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Erica Dean. I am a policy analyst at the Connecticut Association for Human Services. we are a statewide non-profit agency that works to reduce poverty and promote economic success both in policy and program work. Today, I have submitted two testimonies. One is SB 314. I won't be talking about it. I will be touching on HB 5237. So we are all totally aware of the racial dispersity that exist in the criminal justice system and briefly, African American men are six times more 000599 149 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING likely to be incarcerated than white men and are 2.5 times more likely to be incarcerated than Hispanic men and this cumulative effect of the disparity that exists today, even after 50 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and 150 years after the ratification of the Reconstruction Amendments, more black men are still in prison, in jail, on parole, on probation that were enslaved in 1850. Research has shown that at the one year mark after being released between 60 and 75% of incarcerated individuals are still unemployed. One study in New York City found that, focusing on women, found that after 15 months, only 33% of women were actually able to find legal jobs, 19% of women reported having jobs that were not legal. Even though those who do become employed after their incarceration, they claim that their earnings are about 40% less c than what they did make before their incarceration and they also report having limited upward mobility. Research has also shown that wages grow for African American individuals at a 21% slower rate than they do for white men and after submitting job applications, those with criminal records are only 50% likely to receive an interview. African American men with criminal records are 33% likely to receive an interview. So, banning the box will definitely ensure that all Connecticut residents have a fair opportunity to be considered on their qualifications first and secondly, Ban the Box increases public safety by reducing recidivism. This has already been mentioned. 0 II 000600150 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING One study that focused, that was a three-year study, found that after one year of employment, there was a 16% recidivism rate among previously convicted individuals compared to a 52.3% recidivism rate for people who were not employed. A second study found that after just 30 days of employment, this lowered the likelihood of ever being re-arrested to 20%. So basically the FAIR CHANCE ACT requires that all potential employees, regardless of criminal past, be treated equally. It is important that those with conviction histories are considered on their present merits instead of their past mistakes and I think this decision should be easy because Connecticut has already passed Ban the Box for state employees, so private companies should follow this suit. By making this a universal policy throughout the state, unnecessary barriers to employment will no 0 longer exist for past criminals. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Thank you for coming. Some of the statistics that you quoted just like the people before you, you know, first of all when a person gets out of incarceration, the first thing they have to do is deal with homelessness. If you haven't got a place to lay your head, you sure can't get in the morning and go look for a job. Then when you go to look for a job, you have somebody doing the Ban the Box business on you or lack of Ban the Box. So all of these things in tandem in order for a person to beat recidivism and recidivism is still large, but not as large as the used to be, but people like you help. Thank you. ERICA DEAN: Thank you. 000605 155 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING towards reducing inequality in a state with the nation's second largest income gap and help give truth to the notion that if you work hard, you should be able to work your way to the middle class. That's my testimony and I'll take any questions. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I appreciate you're coming. DERIK THOMAS: You got it. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Interesting statistics. DERIK THOMAS: Okay. SEN. GOMES (23RD): We're going to get there. DERIK THOMAS: Thank you so much. c SEN. GOMES (23RD): Thank you. I was going to say going, going, gone, but Louise Simmons is here now, so she can speak. She can get up. LOUISE SIMMONS: Representative Tercyak had the wrong Louise when he read the names, so I was not, so I was outside, so I'm sorry about that. My name is Louise Simmons and I am a professor of social work at the University of Connecticut and I live in Hartford. I am saying this both, I am going to just give a couple of things, a couple of remarks both as an academic and a long-time supporter of poor peoples' rights and worker rights. They are my views and don't represent the entire university. 0 ------·~ 000606156 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 Much of what I would have said has already been said by many other people, but I do want to call the attention to the fact that there have been a number of studies that show when there is a business model of low wage employment and employers bank on that and inadequate schedules that that means that people have to turn, those workers have to turn to public services and public support. So if we raise the minimum wage and people can begin ~~311 to get out of poverty and we give them decent l±f> 5:J.37 scheduling and we ban the box, that means that people are going to get more involved in the economy, more money will circulate and also it will cause taxpayers less. Instead of people having to use public service, they will be able to get more involved in the economy because they will have money to spend. 0 And so, I think that is really important. In my written testimony, I attached some pages from the Self-Sufficiency Standard that is on report of 2015, that is on the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women's website. They show just how much money is really needed to get off of all forms of public assistance and have a minimally decent life. I think it is really important to look at that and see what it means. They do that by region of Connecticut, by different cities and it would be worth your while when you are considering this to look at those and see. In Stanford, for two people to not have to go on any kind of assistance, you know you are looking at salaries that are well above $50,000 a year because in Fairfield County it is so expensive to live. In 0 000607 157 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING other parts of the state, it doesn't take as much to live, but we are an expensive state and we have huge disparities in income and so some of these measures would go a long way to help those citizens and residents of Connecticut that are in the most need. There is more in my written testimony, but I just wanted to conclude there. SEN. GOMES (23RD): As each of you people come up and start giving off the statistics, I have to say they're right because there are a lot of statistics that I've seen that the last three or four people that have given that I've read some of them. LOUISE SIMMONS: Right. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Like you said, in the state of Connecticut, there are counties, like Fairfield c county, everything is kind of high. One statistic they said that a family of four; a mother, father and two children, in order to rent an apartment, they would have to be making $23 an hour. LOUISE SIMMONS: Yeah and it's gone up since those stats. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Most of those people are not making anywhere $23 an hour. LOUISE SIMMONS: Yeah exactly. So, in my written testimony, attached to it is, you know, a few pages and you can see the whole report on the PCSW's website. It's very informative when you are talking about wage levels. 0 II 000608 158 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 SEN. GOMES (23RD): I thank you for coming and thank you for your testimony. LOUISE SIMMONS: My name is Simmons not Coat. You called me Louise Coat. (laughter) REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Well I apologize if I did, doctor. LOUISE SIMMONS: Representative Tercyak, I know. SEN. GOMES (23RD): That's why you can give him hell, right. LOUISE SIMMONS: Right. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Oh yeah? 0 SEN. GOMES (23RD): I thank you for coming. LOUISE SIMMONS: Thank you. SEN. GOMES (23RD): We have a Marilyn Kendricks? Marilyn Kendricks? Going, going, gone. Marilyn Kendricks? We have oh, who's this? Lindsey Farrell. (Laughter) REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Could this be Lindsey coming down the aisle now? LINDSEY FARRELL: Hi, good evening. 000609 159 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING SEN. GOMES (23RD): How are you doing, Lindsey? LINDSEY FARRELL: I'm all right. How are you Senator? SEN. GOMES (23RD): All right. LINDSEY FARRELL: Good. So my name is Lindsey Farrell and I am the state director for the Working Family Organization here in Connecticut. I want to testify in favor of a few bill tonight: 5237, THE FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT LEGISLATION, 5370 FOR HIGHER MINIMUM WAGE, 5371 FOR MINIMUM WORK WEEK FOR CUSTODIAL STAFF, 5378 TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE STANDARD WAGE LAWS. You know, there has been a lot of testimony and there's going to be more. I don't think I have c anything particularly new to say. I do want to commend the effort to raise the minimum wage to $15. It is the new standard from Seattle to, you know, fast food and retail workers in our neighboring state of New York and we do need to get there. I do want to also encourage the committee to wrap the tip credit bill, the SB 39, into the minimum wage bill. You know, we could do two birds with one stone and raise a lot of people's wages with one piece of legislation. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I'll tell my friends that. LINDSEY FARRELL: And I also did want to highlight the fair chance legislation. There has been some talk about reducing recidivism by giving people more options and more choices in their lives. It does 0 II 000610 160 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 increase economic activity. As more people have more jobs, they have more money to spend. It's just part of the growth of our state. You know, the economic arguments aside, _you know, our criminal justice system is just unjust and fundamentally rooted in prejudice. When we force people to carry that record around for the rest of their lives, we are just perpetuating that prejudice and that unjust situation and it's wrong. For 5371 and 5378, you know, it just gives more economic security to the families and the workers who take care of our buildings, so that's it. I encourage passage of all of those bills. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Thank you for coming Lindsey. LINDSEY FARRELL: Sure. 0 SEN. GOMES (23RD): As usual. LINDSEY FARRELL: Off the hook? SEN. GOMES (23RD): You have a good day. Good job. You even got a cheering section. See there? Do we have a Katie Mendola? Yeah. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Welcome. Thank you very much for coming Katie. Begin when you are ready. KATIE MENDOLA: Hi my name is Katie Mendola and I fighting for no less than $15 an hour for all workers in Connecticut. I urge you to support HOUSE BILL 5370, AN ACT INCREASING THE MINIMUM FAIR WAGE. ------~~ ·II 000622 172 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 have no job and being unemployed is very difficult on a person's values and sense of self-worth and what we want is more jobs. We want more jobs and more prosperity for everybody. I mean and how do we get there? That's the conversation I think we all want to have is how do we get there. Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much for your testimony and your patience waiting. Is this Luis? Luna? Yes? Correct? Luna and a group of people? This looks like a group of people. I could be right. Very good. If anybody speaks, start out with your name in the microphone. It is required for the record. Thank you very much. While you're settling down, I would just like to point out, most states do not provide this opportunity to citizens to come and comment on legislation that might be written. Even fewer states have a rule that says we are not going to pass a bill unless we've had the 0 chance for public testimony on it. So what you came to say is important. Thank you very much. We value it. THERESA SANDOVAL SHAFER: Thank you. Yes, good evening. My name is Theresa Sandoval Shafer. I am here to give my testimony in favor of the law HB 5237, SB 39 AND HB 5370. I am a volunteer at Unidas Latinas en Accion. We are all members and volunteers at Unidas Latinas en Accion and are names were not in the list and we decided to speak together. So most of the members of the Unidas Latinas en Accion work in restaurants, constructions, factories, farms, gardening, cleaning. To be short, they do all of the bad paying jobs. As workers in Connecticut, we are here 0 000623 173 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING to demand an increase in the minimum wage to $15. We also want to ask that the waiters, bartenders and all of the workers that are earning tips also have the right to earn a minimum wage of $15. Please stop the wage theft and stop the discrimination. We all have the right to have a dignified and well-paid job regardless of our race, our language, where we come from or whether we had a criminal record. Nobody can really live on $9.60 an hour. A lot of the workers make even less than that because the employers are stealing their'wages. That's why many of them have to have two or three jobs. Right now, there is wage theft in Goodfella's Restaurant. There is wage theft in Thai Taste Restaurant. There is wage theft in Gourmet Haven. There is wage theft in Fair Haven Clam and Lobster. I don't want to c take so much of our time, so I would like to pass the microphone to some of the workers so that they can give their own testimony. Thank you. ALBERTO (UNIDENTIFIED LAST NAME) : (Indiscernible in Spanish testimony) ALBERTO'S INTERPRETER: So, good evening my name is Alberto and I am a member of the unidas Latinas en Accion. ALBERTO (UNIDENTIFIED LAST NAME) : (Indiscernible in Spanish) . ALBERTO'S INTERPRETER: So I am here to support BILL 5237, BILL 39 AND BILL 5370. I am here because two days ago, I quit my job at Riverside Dairy Farm because they were paying me less than minimum wage. c II 000624 174 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 ALBERTO (UNIDENTIFIED LAST NAME) : (Indiscernible in Spanish) . ALBERTO'S INTERPRETER: So from 2008 until 2012, I was paid $6.50 an hour and then from 2012 until February of this year, I was getting paid $8.00 an hour with no vacation time, no insurance, and no holidays. ALBERTO (INDISCERNIBLE LAST NAME): (Indiscernible in Spanish) . REP. TERCYAK (26TH): The person behind you taking notes there is from the Department of Labor. Make sure she notes the name of that business that is paying less than minimum wage. ALBERTO'S INTERPRETER: (Indiscernible in Spanish) . 0 If I you allow me, I'm going to translate very briefly to what you say so our workers can also understand what is going on. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): What kind of operation is that Riverside place? ALBERTO'S INTERPRETER: It's a dairy farm. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD) : It's an actual farm? ALBERTO'S INTERPRETER: It's a farm, yeah, it's a farm. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Welcome, thank you. DANIEL BARRALES: Hi good afternoon. My name is Daniel Barrales and I had a work accident a couple 0 000625 175 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING of years ago. I had surgery last month. My testimony today is I identify with the people who are making $9.60 per hour because right now, my Worker's Comp gives like $400 per week. Out of those $400, I have to pay $100 for my medical insurance and other things, so I am getting like $1200 every month and because I'm single, I have to pay my rent myself, so $1200 isn't enough to pay my rent, my bills and other stuff. So, I identify with people who are making $9.60 because I don't know how do they do that to feed their family, their kids. I see my neighbor and he works two jobs and his wife works another job and they cannot give values to their kids because they are always working. That is why I want to increase the wage from $9.60 to $15.00 because kids are suffering because people can't afford to pay bills c and they have to put the values of the kids or pay the bills. That's why I am here. It's going to be for the good of the families. LUIS LUNA: If I may, there were some other works with us that unfortunately had to leave, but we wanted to come as a block because we are workers. We are the faces of workers in Connecticut of low wage workers. We have some friends who are here in the, you know, who are here together in struggle. Something that I wanted to point out is that I have worked as a tip worker for many years. I no longer do any tip work, but I used to do it for 10 years and it's important to understand that tip workers wages fluctuate. 0 000626 176 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING The analogy that I was thinking about today was that what if you fine gentleman would get paid by how many people would come to a hearing for instance, so would you be able to feed your families? That is the thing with tip workers. Yes you might have a $9.00 fine Friday evening or fine Saturday evening, but what about Saturdays, I mean what about Mondays, Tuesdays? So that's why it is very important to consider raising the minimum wage for tip workers because yes there are some very good restaurants and I am not sure why you are smiling. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I don't want to interpret, but that is exactly how I get paid. I get paid by the people who come in. Some nights it is good and some nights it is bad. LUIS LUNA: No, no. 0 REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I get paid just like everybody else. LUIS LUNA: You're a representative. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): No, no, I'm in the restaurant business, so I have the same bad Monday as everybody else, so understand your pain. LUIS LUNA: But you still, but the restaurant still makes their profit, but then the workers. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): I'm going to stop you there because I happen to know that every restaurant doesn't make their profit. Some of them are nice enough to keep (indiscernible). 000627 177 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING LUIS LUNA: I understand I mean. It's probably tough to be a business owner, especially in the restaurant business, but then it's not fair for the low wage workers not be to able to get what they deserve as workers. I have worked in restaurants where for instance on a Sunday, I'd have to come early because we had to clean and that was a rule. So, I'd come in at 10:00 in the morning and then my first customers would come at 3:00. So for those three hours, I would not get paid a tip that was by law allowed for me, so this is real. So, our workers, our families are there, our bills are still there, so it's very important to make sure that we guarantee a good wage for our workers. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Just for the record, the employer was breaking the law. If you come in at c 10:00 and your first table is not until 3:00, there is a law being broken. That is not legal. LUIS LUNA: Sure, but think about the leverage that business owners have when the workers are undocumented. Undocumented workers are being exploited because of that because they are undocumented and employees, employers, excuse me, employers, they have that leverage to not pay the workers right because the know that worker will not protest. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): So when you say it's undocumented, is this person receiving a check for their labor? Are taxes being taken out or are they receiving cash? Are they in the underground economy? 0 000628178 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING LUIS LUNA: There is, there is. It's both. It has been documented that undocumented workers still pay into Social Security, about $12 billion into the us economy. Please do look up those numbers. There is a big, excuse me, there is a big argument. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Excuse me actually, the point is that if somebody is .. you know what, there may be operations out there that I am not aware of. LUIS LUNA: There is. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I have a hard time comprehending anybody having leverage over anybody, but I don't live in that world. You know, we sort of live in the above (indiscernible) world, so I'm sure it happens. I'm sorry that if it does happen. LUIS LUNA: It happens. We have a gentleman, who is 0 here. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): But I believe there are legal remedies. I just don't like it. I guess I get defensive. LUIS LUNA: Sure. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Because my industry tends to get painted with a broad brush. You know, there are a lot of us that try to do the right thing. I am a family of immigrants. I'm second generation. I get it. We are not all bad. When I hear the stories of the bad ones, it upsets me because people come in here and say, well we are taking advantage of the workers who are doing this. I don't live in that world. So, I've never taken advantage of 000629 179 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING anybody in my life, so I have a hard time understanding it. So, I shouldn't get so defensive. I should allow you to tell your story, so I'm sorry. LUIS LUNA: But there is. We have Mr. James or Attorney James came a little while ago and he gave an amazing testimony, but we are not talking about your restaurant. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I just meant in general. LUIS LUNA: But wage theft is an epidemic in restaurants and in construction. We see it. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I don't live in that world so it happens and I won't deny that it happens, I just don't see it. c LUIS LUNA: I mean so I don't know how many complaints there are to the Labor Department for wage theft. There is a person behind us, maybe they can tell us whether they have a backlog of applications asking for wages being stolen. So, that's my, thank you for allowing us to speak. SEN. GOMES (23RD): You'll never know some of the statistics. Let's get out of the restaurant and talk about the big box like Wal-Mart. Think of millions of dollars in fines for what they've done. The average person that goes to Wal-Mart doesn't know that. When I go down to North Carolina, I got some grandchildren down there and I got one that is about this big, he always told everybody, "Pop Pop don't like Wal-Mart." (laughter) 0 II 000630 180 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING SEN. GOMES (23RD): So, it's like you said. Just be proud to be one of the good guys. You'll never get the real statistics on good or bad to tell you the truth. But the thing of it is, there are a lot of bad ones out there in the restaurant and I know them for years. I know these people aren't treated that well. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Yes sir. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Good evening. My name is (indiscernible). Actually I was not intending to speak tonight, but after I heard the testimony of a young lady who stated that she worked two jobs for 14 years full-time, I really felt like more on duty to speak. Actually, I was supposed to be working tonight, but 0 somehow I was able to get the time off. I would like to ask support for the bill for minimum wage. I.'ve beeri, well I'm on a (indiscernible) 25 years. I usually have done three jobs or two jobs most of the time. I thought I was really doing it for us, people who come from other countries. But most, let's say a lot of people are under the pressure of getting two jobs to be able to keep up with expenses with the cost of living. Life really becomes like we don't feel happiness being compelled to work this way. Actually, my wife and I keep two jobs and we have a son who is 17 years old and we don't see any way of paying for his college education. We don't see it. There is no way of doing that. 000631 181 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING We ask you senators, legislators to follow the lead of New York to rage the minimum wage to $15 per hour. After all, I feel we are the state, the richest state of the union, so I think this is possible. If others have already done it, we can do it too. I think we are doing a favor for the people working to actually create the wealth. I ask you kindly thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Well said. Thank you very much. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Thank you for coming. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you all for coming in. LUIS LUNA: And I think Fatima wanted to say something? So Fatima wanted to speak and thank you c for your time. FATIMA ROJAS: My name is Fatima Rojas and I am a member of Unidas Latinas en Accion, former union organizer with UNITE HERE Local 217 and currently bilingual job coach at New Haven Works and I am here to support the bill HB 5237, SB 39 AND HB 5370 because I believe that raising the minimum wage would be in the best interest of our communities. When people have more income, they can (indiscernible) on the family aspect. They can spend time with their kids. They can take care and feed them properly and not just try to buy the cheapest food because organic food is expensive. If we see it from the education part, families are going to start thinking and maybe being able to send their kids to the university for a better future. 0 II 000632 182 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING From the economic aspect, our communities would get beneficial of this proposal if it passes because people might start dreaming, but seeing it as a reality buying a house. If you speak about political and social problems in our community such as drugs, such as crime, such as violence, we will see those numbers drastically go down because people instead of trying to make ends meet with other types of activities selling drugs or something, they will have enough income to sustain their families. I totally believe that this combined aspect will make our communities better and it is a reality in another city and in other countries and it is unbelievable that being in the United States of America that we have to struggle in order to put bread on our table with a salary of just $9.60. 0 I have been in this country for 11 years. My first job was as a janitor in Hamden Middle School. My minimum wage at that time was $4.50 which was not minimum wage and was exploitation. It makes sense. Let's invest in our communities and the best way to do it is to raise the minimum wage. Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH) : Thank you very much. LUIS LUNA: Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH) : Okay. All set? Great. Thank you very much for taking the time and for staying so patient, we appreciate it. we got more names here than we have people in the room, but let's hope we can match folks up. Blaine McKay next followed by Clifford Graves followed by Lisa Puglisi followed by 33 183 March 3, 2016000G dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING John Price. Is Blaine McKay here? Clifford Graves? Lisa Puglisi? John Price, you're here. Oh, hold on. John Price? JOHN PRINCE: Good evening, my name is John Prince. They got my wrong name of Price, it's Prince. I'm from Providence, Rhode Island. I came here on a train just to be here to testify about Ban the Box which in Providence, Rhode Island, where I am from, we passed that legislation on so stopping discrimination against people with criminal records on job applications. It is well established that the path to stability for people caught up in the criminal justice system is through employment. Yet after meeting all demands of a criminal sentence for example incarceration, probation, drug and mental health c counseling, finds and restitution, people have difficulty finding work because of the mark of a criminal record. This barrier to employment begs to question, when does my sentence end? This year, three years ago, one of my representatives at our state house argued the fact that he never heard a judge sentence anyone a lifetime without employment. So that is true because if you, and I am a formerly incarcerated person and I've been out 15 years and since I've been out, I had to build up my credibility show good work ethic and now I go shake hands with senators, representatives and judges. My life turned around and I always thought my life was damaged. I was a damaged good. I was no good product for anyone. When you feel like that, when 0 II 000634184 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING your spirit is amputated, there is no anesthetic for that. The end results are jails, institution and death. That's not the way to live after you come out and everyone makes a mistake in their lives. How long does anyone have to continue to pay for that mistake? I am here today to say that I pray to God that this body, you know, passes Ban the Box for people like myself where there are 1.5 or 1.6 million people in prison today and I don't even want to count how many folks is on probation. Why can't these folks get a fair shake and build themselves back together. So, I ask this body to consider Ban the Box here in Connecticut like they have done in so many other states around the country. Thank you. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Good presentation. Thank you 0 very much. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Thanks for waiting this long to testify. JOHN PRINCE: All right. SEN. GOMES (23RD): You had a story to tell. JOHN PRINCE: Yes sir and you know, for my story of being incarcerated and you, when you get ready to get released, you are afraid to come back out. When you get afraid to come back out because you feel that you don't have a chance. When you don't feel you got a chance, you are going to throw a brick and run back into prison because that seems like the comfort zone. It's backwards. It should be society 000635 185 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING should be the comfort zone and prison be no zone, you know? SEN. GOMES (23RD): There is one thing that is never said here, recidivism, believe it or not, people become what they call institutionalized. You know what that is? JOHN PRINCE: Yes sir. SEN. GOMES (23RD): They cannot live on the street. They will do something to go back to prison because that is the only comfortable life that they know. JOHN PRINCE: Uh-huh. SEN. GOMES (23RD): And that's a tragedy that there c are people like that. I had a friend like that. JOHN PRINCE: Uh-huh and I had many friends. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I didn't see him for years and then one day I saw him on TV. He was being interviewed at Christmastime. He was pontificating about how it feels to be incarcerated on Christmas. He would go back to prison. Three to four months after he got out, he was back in prison. It has been that way all of his adult life. That is what they call being institutionalized. That can catch on. JOHN PRINCE: I don't know if you all watched that movie, "Shawshank Redemption." SEN. GOMES (23RD): Yep. 0 000636 186 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 JOHN PRINCE: Same thing with Brooks when they let him out after amassed time without giving him the tools. That's what we don't have the tools to work with. SEN. GOMES (23RD): They just cannot adapt. JOHN PRINCE: Yes. Yes sir. SEN. GOMES (23RD): It's a shame. JOHN PRINCE: I hope this state of Connecticut will pass some kind of law of Ban the Box. It is a small step, but it's a small step in the right direction. SEN. GOMES (23RD): You've got somebody sitting up at this table along with a few friends who will try to their damnest, all right? 0 JOHN PRINCE: All right. Thank you sir. Thank you everyone and have a good night after this long day. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Okay, thank you very much. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Another day in paradise. (laughter) REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Darlene Raggozine, Chandra Bozelko? Is Chandra here? REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): What number are we on? REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Chandra is number 48 out of 82. 000637 187 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Oh 48? I thought he was 63? REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Yes he was, but he switched with number 46. SEN. GOMES (23RD): You're Chandra? CHANDRA BOZELKO: I am Chandra. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much for staying. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Welcome. CHANDRA BOZELKO: Thank you. Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, other distinguished members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to c testify tonight in favor of the FAIR CHANCE LEGISLATION, BILL 5237. I've submitted some written testimony, but I am going to deviate from it a little bit tonight. My name is Chandra Bozelko. I live in Orange, Connecticut, and approximately two years ago, I was released from York Correctional Institution in Niantic, Connecticut. Since that time, I published approximately 50 op-ed and opinion pieces in newspapers around the country on the topic of justice reform. I was honored when the Prison Policy Initiative recommended me for a Pulitzer Prize earlier this year and even more humbled when the committee accepted the recommendation. I stand before you today as someone who is being considered for one of the highest c 000638188 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 honors in this country, yet I still can't get a job because my criminal record persists and I am continually rejected for positions for which I am over-qualified. You can lament all you want the lack of programming and education in prisons, but I am proof that underemployment amongst people with criminal records is not an issue of qualification or appropriateness for the position, but rather one of prejudice. Pure and simple prejudice. It is not a prejudice that has any moral, social, economic or public safety value.. I support this legislation because it is the first legislation in the country that combats that prejudice by requiring employers to disclose the reason for rejecting an applicant for a job and fining those who discriminate against people with felony records. 0 I personally can't think of one lesson in history where prejudice helped a society. I can find many examples of success that followed the decision to stop it and that is why I am here today to ask this committee and the legislature to please stop this prejudice. I know there are a number of people waiting behind me so I am going to keep it at that for now unless you have questions. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I am just glad that you are here being a part of it and testifying about what you believe in and you're right. I just told you when we were talking about different people, recidivism prevails if we don't help these people once they get out of incarceration just like yourself. Someone 000639 189 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING needed to help you, I guess, or you had find help somewhere. CHANDRA BOZELKO: Well actually that's one of the unique parts of my situation, Senator, is that I helped my self. I am not a boot strap type of person, but I didn't have another choice because my record was held against me in so many different situations. I happened to luck out and be able to sustain self-employment through writing and that proved my worth, but no one is actually acknowledging that work by hiring me. SEN. GOMES (23RD): You probably made the same promise I made. I made a promise to God and ten other responsible people that I would never go back to jail again. You just got to put your mind to it c that's all. CHANDRA BOZELKO: Correct. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Right? CHANDRA BOZELKO: Correct. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): You attached the letter you got from Whole Foods saying thanks, but no thanks? CHANDRA BOZELKO: Correct. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): They mention a Consumer Report or Investigative Consumer Report? Is that? CHANDRA BOZELKO: It's a background check and basically just so that everyone else knows, the letter shows that they never really say we are 0 000640 190 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 rejecting because we found out that you have a criminal record. They are saying we found this record. This record doesn't say the word criminal. That is an important thing to note in anywhere in the letter. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): What is in this Consumer Report? CHANDRA BOZELKO: Just the criminal record. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Just for the consumer? CHANDRA BOZELKO: Yes at Whole Foods no less. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): It's your criminal record. Do you know if ... well actually they enclosed it. Did it have other information? Like your credit score? Which we would like to do away with also. 0 CHANDRA BOZELKO: No. It didn't have that. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Straight up, just that? CHANDRA BOZELKO: And you're given the opportunity. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): And an address if you disagree, you can get in touch with the company that says. CHANDRA BOZELKO: Only if you are going say it's wrong though. Not to explain it, but only say this is not my record which is actually a significant problem that doesn't happen to someone like me with such a unique name, but to John Smiths, they do have other people's records come back and are held 000641 191 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING against them, so that's really the opportunity offered in that letter, is to say are you really this person who was convicted of these crimes? I can't say that, no I was in fact convicted of those crimes then I have nothing to say to dispute that and as you can see in the letter, they tell you, "It's on hold until we hear from you," and if you don't, you're gone. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Yep. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I wonder if they just made up this name Consumer Reports because Consumer Reports is a magazine. Did you know that? I subscribe to it and it says based on the information contained in your Consumer Report. I'm wondering if this actually exists. c CHANDRA BOZELKO: I think the consumer is actually Whole Foods paying a company for a product which is my history. That's what I think that name means, but I could be wrong. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Amazing. SEN. GOMES (23RD): This is something. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Yes, Representative Vail? REP. VAIL (52ND): Thank you Mr. Chairman. I am actually a former prison guard for the state of Connecticut. I did transportation to York and other facilities and I worked at Osborne for the majority of my career. One of the things I noticed is I didn't think the prison system did much to help people prepare, as the gentleman said before us, for 0 000642 192 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING ~ life after prison. I thought there were a lot of programs. I thought they were disingenuous. I didn't really think they accomplished too much. So my question to you is, did you think that you learned anything while you were incarcerated that would help you post-incarceration to be, you know, to find a job or to do anything? Did you feel there were any programs that benefitted you there for that transition? CHANDRA BOZELKO: Well to the extent that I hadn't found employment, I would have to say in some ways no because I would be otherwise here testifying to you that I got a job at X, Y or z. They took a look at my background and decided to either overlook it, question me about it or something like that. With that being said, I actually have tremendous respect for the correctional staff even though I am 0 a former inmate because a number of my supervisors in the food service area of York were tremendous at bringing about personal change in me. Whether that could affect my employment, I don't know, but can I say as a direct result of those public employees' service, am I a better person today? Yes. As I have explained, I've done a ton of writing since I left and I took Wally Lamb's writing class while I was at York, so we could argue incredibly that it helped me to achieve what I did when I got out? Sure. There are some things. There are definitely some people in there who can get you to where you need to go at least internally. Whether they can get you to where you need to go to get a marketable resume or where you need to go to get a job, I can't say. 0 000643 193 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING REP. VAIL (52ND): Are there any job centers or anything like that that specialize in people that were previously incarcerated to help them find job placement? CHANDRA BOZELKO: Not that I know of in Connecticut. In fact that is one of the issues, one of the op-eds that I wrote actually influenced Governor Malloy to keep the job centers open this past summer when they were about to close because of the lack of federal funding. I wrote an op-ed that a reporter brought to Governor Malloy and he changed his mind to try to accommodate more people who are coming out of incarceration as they try to get jobs, so I have to pat myself on the back just a little bit that there is a little bit of an offer in these American Job Centers that are around the state. They do try to c help people who are coming out of that situation. REP. VAIL (52ND): Okay, thank you. SEN. GOMES (23ND): But you incentivized it on your own not to go back to prison. Like you said, you helped yourself. CHANDRA BOZELKO: I did it all myself, but I would be humiliated to have to go back to the men and women in the food service department at York and betray all the faith and all of the work that they did for me. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I think that in the experience of being incarcerated, you learn one or two things. There are two things you learn. One is not to go back. You dislike it so much you never go back or 0 000644 194 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING ~ you learn to be a better criminal. Being incarcerated with the different people you met, is that true? You either make plans to never go back or you learn enough to be a better criminal. CHANDRA BOZELKO: There is something to that, Senator, but I also think a lot of people do make the plans not to go back and those plans change when they can't find a job or some type of secure employment, housing or some type of stable situation when they are released. SEN. GOMES (23RD): You got to hit first housing. I can remember a few years back when I first became a senator, they let this guy out of prison and they dumped him off somewhere in a town where he didn't come from and then in two days, he had broken into a house, robbed a car and killed a women and he was back in within two or three days. 0 CHANDRA BOZELKO: It happens. I watched it happen. SEN. GOMES (23RD): That's extreme, but the thing of it is, it's hard for you do to anything if you don't have some place to leave your stuff at. If you have no place to sleep, you will damn sure have a hell of a time trying to go out and find a job. CHANDRA BOZELKO: Exactly. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Or do anything, you know so. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Can I ask what you did in food service? 000645 195 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING CHANDRA BOZELKO: I was a "loader" of the large kettles, the industrial-sized kettles for the inmates. Inmates called it slop. We called it casserole type meals. The pumps to get the stuff and into plastic bags. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): Because I'm hiring cooks all of the time. CHANDRA BOZELKO: Okay, awesome. REP. RUTIGLIANO (123RD): I'll talk to you after. (laughter) CHANDRA BOZELKO: Okay sounds good. c SEN. GOMES (23RD): He owns a couple of restaurants. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): I'd like to congratulate on your nomination and being in the run for a Pulitzer Prize. It's remarkable for anybody. It's especially nice to see it for someone who is putting their life back together. You're doing a lot of good. Thank you very very much for waiting. CHANDRA BOZELKO: Thank you. SEN. GOMES (23RD): And you're running for a Pulitzer Prize? CHANDRA BOZELKO: I'm working hard. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I can get your name and I can tell people later on I knew her. 0 II 000646 196 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 (laughter) CHANDRA BOZELKO: You will, you will. Are there any other questions? REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Any other questions? Nope. Thank you very very much. Thank you for your waiting and talking with us. Thank you Chandra. Ulber Morales, John Melina, Audrey Richardson? Any hands up yet? Anderson Curtis? George Long? Is this man coming? Okay while we wait to see who this, I will take a moment to recognize Representative Robin Porter from New Haven, who is here in the audience paying attention to this. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Hey Robin. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): It's not just the folks sitting up here staying long. Thank you very much. 0 Hi sir, I went through a lot of names. Please tell us which one was yours. ANDERSON CURTIS: I'm Anderson Curtis. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much Mr. Curtis. ANDERSON CURTIS: Dear Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak and other distinguished members of the Labor committee. My name is Anderson curtis from New Haven, Connecticut. I am currently working as a recovery support specialist with Continuum of Care since October 2015. Continuum employs roughly 50 other returning citizens. Continuum saw how we could help and 000647 197 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING looked beyond the box. I stand in support of HB 5237, AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT. This bill would eliminate barriers to employment for individuals with a criminal record. I was released from prison August 17, 2007. I matriculated into Gateway Community College in September 2007. During the first eight months of my release, I was unable to get a job. The box banned me from employment. When employers looked at my application, the felony box blinded them from seeing my true self and all of the skills and talents that I have to offer. Finally, I was hired at the Clinic (indiscernible) in March 2008. (indiscernible) saw a student and looked beyond the box. In May 2008, I earned a certificate in addiction counseling. Crossroads saw me working to change my life, hired me and looked c beyond the box. Crossroads employed me from May 2008 until July 2009. In December 2009, I completed the requirements of my Associate's Degree in addiction counseling. While living at the Bethel Shelter in Milford, two shelter employees noticed me and referred me to their other job in New Prospects. In March 2010, New Prospects saw my passion for recovery, hired me and they looked beyond the box. New Prospects employed me from March 2010 to October 2010. Then from October 2010 to September 2014 with an Associate's Degree in addiction counseling, recent and relevant work history, and a certification as a dislocated worker, the box banned me from employment. 0 II 000648 198 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 Unemployed for four years, I survived on Connecticut employment and Obama's stimulus package from October 2010 until December 2012. Then, I moved to North Carolina for a year. I returned to Connecticut in December 2013. A friend created work for me at his insulation company, a friend who knew me for who I was, who I am and most importantly, who I could be. A friend, who looked beyond the box. This friend also referred me to one of his customer's companies. With this reference, the company looked beyond the box and hired me. In September 2014, another friend hired me to manage his independent living facility, where I had been living since November 2013 when I returned to Connecticut. He then hired me as a prep cook and pot washer at the Country House Restaurant. He knew me, he hired, and looked beyond the box. 0 I remained employed at this restaurant until I got my current position at Continuum of Care where I do peer mentoring for men on parole through the Connection Program and the Reach Up Program. Sometimes, passion can get you in the door. Nevertheless, in my experience, only proper self care empowered me to persevere through my struggles. This bill is very near and dear to my heart. I am where I am and I am who I am simply because of the relationships that are near and dear to my heart. I am able to find employment from people who knew me or companies willing to look beyond the box. But there are many jobs that I could not access. Jobs that screen employees based on their criminal records. Because I was unable to access many jobs, 000649 199 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING I experienced long periods of unemployment which limited my ability to contribute to my community. This bill to Ban the Box will allow returning citizens the opportunity to be interviewed by potential employers, who can hopefully look beyond the box to consider the whole person. I support fair chance employment and hope that the committee will favorably vote for HB 5237. Thank you for your time, Anderson Curtis. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you for your time and for staying and letting us here that. That was very good. It was enlightening and it makes a difference. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I want to thank you for coming. When you sit and listen to a story like that, there c are so many stories like that out there that people don't know. A lot of people just look at somebody incarcerated coming out of prison as being nothing, you don't want to be around them or whatever, but there are so many stories, good and bad, about people that were incarcerated and came out. Yours is a good story. Thank you for that. ANDERSON CURTIS: Thank you. Thank you for your time. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you very much. Okay. How about some of these folks. Are you still here? George Long? Daniel Barrales? Eric Munoz? Kennard Ray is here, but he can't talk again. Jonathan Casada? 0 II 000650 200 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 SEN. GOMES (23RD): He's coming. He's coming. Look here he comes. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Is Luis Piscil here? Crystal Williams? Theresa Sandoval-Schafer? Ernest Pagan? Tim Sullivan? Well if Gretchen Raffa is here, she gets to testify before you do? Is Gretchen Raffa here? Gretchen. You are on before Kennard come on down. Jonathan too? There we go. You can have a second time, but not before other people get their first. Come on. If you haven't testified yet and you signed up or even if you haven't signed up and you would like to, come on and sit close and we will let you testify before Kennard does? Thank you very much sir. sorry for not noticing you when you did just what I asked you to do. JONATHAN CASADA: That's fine. Thank you sir. My name is Jonathan Casada. I am 29 of Newington, 0 Connecticut. I stand here in support of HB 5237, AN ACT CONCERNING THE FAIR CHANCE OPPORTUNITY FOR EMPLOYMENT. I have some very personal connections to this bill here. I was convicted of a crime at 17 and didn't get prosecuted until 18, so this childhood mistake haunted me for almost 8 years. I had been released from incarceration in 2008. I did everything the counselors and everything the reintegration people told me to do, educate myself, make myself more employable, go to school, get certified and yet, I've still been turned down for employment. I heard this gentleman here, Rep. Vail, ask if there were plenty of programs while incarcerated. Well coming from the youth facilities, I had many mentors 000651 201 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING within the system that helped me out and pushed me to do good and educate myself. But at the same time, when I got home it was really discouraging because I could not find employment. I could not find people to give the opportunity Even though I was a child when I committed this crime, my mind was not fully developed. Then I had opportunities, companies to let me display my skills in carpentry. I am a carpenter by trade and then you get in the door and you get all your safety, your OSHA 30, your aerial lifts, your boom lifts, and yet you still do not get the same opportunity for advancement. I've been entrusted with company vehicles, but have not been offered 401-K's, not been offered health insurance as other lead guys have been. There have been times when I am completely underpaid, but do I go to the boss and c tell him listen I want a raise now. No I am not because I have a mortgage still. I have my kids. I don't want to lose. I don't want to talk out of order. There are facts of one in three adults who have records and this creates serious barriers and I believe if we pass this law, reduce recidivism, then the children of these families will be able to be more productive members of society if we are able to pass this law. Thank you guys for the time and opportunity to be able to talk in front of you today. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you. Senator Gomes, please. c ------~-41 000652 202 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 SEN. GOMES (23RD): I was looking at you and I just recognized you. You were our star in our press conference that day. Alright. You were the one, you were the star at the press conference. Everybody was much impressed by you. JONATHAN CASADA: Thank you. SEN. GOMES (23RD): I kept looking at you and then I said that's the kid that was there that day. JONATHAN CASADA: I'm really impressed with you guys sitting up there all this time. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Hey, you did a wonderful job that day and everybody was so impressed by you. You were like the star of the conference. Thanks for coming again. ~ REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Thank you for your patience and waiting to speak. It makes a difference. REP. VAIL (52ND): Hold on a second. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Representative Vail? REP. VAIL (52ND): So you're a carpenter? JONATHAN CASADA: Yes sir. REP. VAIL (52ND): Did you learn that skill in prison? JONATHAN CASADA: No, sir, no. I was brought up doing carpentry. I kind of grew up with farm style and I kind of went to trade school, but I didn't get 000653 203 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE c PUBLIC HEARING to finish high school for it, so I'm not certified through the state of Connecticut, but the years I did go to trade school, there were advocates for the unions. So, I tried the unions and yet still being in the union, I couldn't get on state jobs; UCONN jobs. I couldn't get on St. Francis jobs. Prevailing wages jobs, I couldn't get on those jobs. REP. VAIL (52ND): Because of your record? JONATHAN CASADA: Yes sir, but I can get the job as a laborer. I can get the job as a laborer. REP. VAIL (52ND): Were there any programs while you were incarcerated that, although you didn't use them, were there carpentry programs or other skilled labor? c JONATHAN CASADA: Not in the youth facilities, but they did offer education and furthering your education by Broadening Horizon. A lot of the youth ... I'm am inner city youth myself, so a lot of the kids, they don't consider themselves very important. They don't look at themselves as high standard. There are classes to help you to start to see yourself as a better person and opening and broadening your horizon from what happens in your daily neighborhood life. REP. VAIL (52ND): So that program that you received at Manson Youth? JONATHAN CASADA: There's some at Manson Youth. REP. VAIL (52ND): That were actually beneficial to you, do you think? c 000654 204 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING ~ JONATHAN CASADA: Yes, yes. There were again, you can't blame it all on the system. You have to put your initiative, front foot forward. There were programs there that definitely wanted me to do better. The Yale kids who came to speak, they came, they were Yale at the time that I was there, but there were volunteers that used to come down and they would tell you, you know, what's going on in their life, young youth that had better opportunities and they would share like what is going on. You would be like wow I deserve to be in college right now except I'm incarcerated. You know I want to still do these things and those programs definitely helped out, peer programs. When I grew up, some people didn't think marijuana was a drug. You know, they thought it was more recreational use. There are tier programs that show 0 you. SEN. GOMES (52ND): I thought so. JONATHAN CASADA: There are tier programs to show you that it is bad. It really deteriorates your brain and start to show you down and you're not completely on point with this type of thing. REP. VAIL (52ND): That explains a lot Senator Gomes. (Laughter) SEN. GOMES (23RD): In my generation, they talk about the 1960s. In the 1960s, it wasn't about who 000655 205 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE 0 PUBLIC HEARING smoked marijuana, it was who didn't smoke marijuana, so, so. JONATHAN CASADA: But yet still, there are kids that are held back because that is a gateway. Now one day there are kids doing worse things and they are experiencing worse. There is actually a heroin epidemic going on. A lot of young kids from suburbs are actually trying molly. I am in Newington now, sir. I am originally from Hartford and my mother bought a house in Manchester. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Are you a good enough carpenter to want to get an apprenticeship program? JONATHAN CASADA: Sir, I actually opened my own business. I did the apprenticeship program. I was only getting $16 per hour. Honestly, I hear these c guys crying and wanting more prevailing wage, $15 is really not enough to live, $16 wasn't enough to live. As of now, I opened my own business. I pay $500 per month for my own insurance. My wife gets it through her company, but we still have to pay for the kids. I have four children and they have to get insurance. Then, I have overhead for my business which is almost $2500 per month for insurances, my bonding, my Better Business Bureau approvals. To sustain these things, I got to keep working, you know? So would I take a job, I would because being a business owner is very stressful. It's not many frills that come with it, but it provides for my family and really, I would have to leave for a job that was a substantial amount of income to be able to pay my mortgage and my bills. Something like a career c ------...._------~·H-· 000656 206 March 3, 2016 dm/jh LABOR AND PUBLIC 4:00 P.M. EMPLOYEES COMMITTEE PUBLIC HEARING 0 with benefits and 401K. I don't have one of those things right now, so. SEN. GOMES (23RD): Now I know why you were the star of our press conference. You're into everything. JONATHAN CASADA: Well, I'm trying. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Anybody else? Thank you very much for taking the time to stay and talk with us. JONATHAN CASADA: Thank you guys for the opportunity. REP. TERCYAK (26TH): Here we go, Teresa Sandoval Schaffer, oops, no. Come down. What's your name? S\139 GRETCHEN RAFFA: Gretchen Raffa. Hi all. Good if£, 5 ?DO evening Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak and 0 honorable members of the Labor Committee. My name is Gretchen Raffa, director of policy and advocacy with Planned Parenthood. As advocates for reproductive freedom, we must consider all aspects of a woman's life including those that affect her economic stability. We believe every person deserves the right to a livable wage to care for themselves and their family with dignity. The sub-minimum wage structure violates one's human right to an adequate standard of living and for decades has perpetuated an unjust system of wage earning for tipped restaurant workers. The vast majority of tipped restaurant workers are women, many of whom are mothers providing for their families and there is a devastating impact on the 0 000724 0 March 2, 2016 Re: Use of Criminal Records for Employment Decisions Dear Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, Senator Hwang and Representative Rutigliano: I write on behalf of the Consumer Data Industry Association (CDIA) to share our thoughts and concerns related to House Bill 5237, legislation seeking to ban certain questions from employment applications, and restrict employers' use of criminal history records of applicants and employees. By way of background, CDIA was founded in 1906 and is the international trade association that represents some 120 consumer data companies. CDIA members represent the nation's leading institutions in credit reporting, fraud prevention, risk management, and employment reporting. Like most Americans, CDIA and our members, value second chances and we firmly believe that formerly incarcerated people should be given an opportunity to move on from their past, and begin a new chapter in their lives. However, we maintain that second chance should not come at the expense of denying employers the ability to properly safeguard their customers, employees, and other vital c assets. As a general principa~ CDIA and its members support prudent public policy which allows employers to have the flexibility to thoroughly screen job applicants. As currently constituted, this legislation would deny employers the flexibility that is necessary to thoroughly evaluate a job applicant. CDIA does not oppose the removal of questions from job applications regarding an applicant's criminal history. However, we oppose any attempt to restrict an employer's access to an applicant's criminal history record. Access to these records serve a critical public interest by enabling users to make more informed hiring decisions. I hope this information has been helpful to you and your committee. Please feel free to reach out to me and CDIA throughout the legislative process, as we are happy to offer our subject matter expertise in this debate. Respectfully submitted, - ·-- -~:-,. -- /> ~--,_ Ramon o_ Looby Senior Director, Public Policy & Qovemment Relations 1090 Vermont Avenue. NW • Suite 200 o Washington. DC 20005 • Fax {202) 371-Q\34 o c www.cdiaonline.org 000725 c March 2, 2016 H.B. No. 5237 AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT Dear Senator Gomes, Senator Hwang, Representative Tercyak and members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Joanie Masot and I am a Southington resident. I am testifying today in support of H.B. No. 5237 "Ban the Box." I have personally been on the side of not being able to obtain employment due to my past criminal history. I believe when you are completing an application for employment and check the box that you have a criminal background or have been arrested your application is automatically filed away and not looked at again. You are not even given a chance to explain personally as to your record/conviction. I do believe that persons with a criminal background/history should be given the opportunity to explain their history. This should not be a box or question on the application and can be discussed at a later date if the person is being granted further consideration after having their application reviewed and have an interview set up. . Automatically filing or trashing the application once the box is checked in pre-judgment which the world is full of. There are many trustworthy citizens in our state that have worked hard to turn their lives around c and become law abiding citizens. Without being able to obtain employment is a continued cycle and adds to poverty. I am grateful to be given the chance to obtain employment with a criminal history. Being hired and able to take care of my family has been one of the most valuable points in my returning to the community and maintaining my recovery and well-being. I ask you today to give others a chance and "Ban the Box." Thank you for your time and attention in this very important issue. Joanie Masot Southington, CT 06489 860-505-7581 c 000726 c Testimony for HB 5237: An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment March 3, 2016 Dear Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak and other distinguished members of the Labor Committee: My name is Kali Guise, and I am a sophomore at Connecticut College, currently residing in New London. I stand in support of HB: 5237 An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment. This bill would eliminate barriers to employment for individuals with a criminal record. My mother is a mobility instructor for the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind, and many of her clients are individuals who are formerly incarcerated. Therefore, I have grown up meeting incredibly kind, decent people who are unable to move forward in life due to their past mistakes, which they have already spent time acknowledging in prison. I feel that as a society, but more specifically as the state of Connecticut, we should not be engaging in policies that will hold people back, but instead should be helping them move forward, as well as finding ways to solve the underlying problems that are causing individuals to become incarcerated. c This bill achieves these goals, for it allows individuals to have a greater chance of bettering their own lives, but improves the economy as well. By giving formerly incarcerated people a better chance to work, we would be reintegrating these people into society, meaning that they would be paying taxes and buying goods and services which would increase sales taxes. Individuals with jobs are also less likely to experience recidivism, which means that they would not enter back into the criminal justice system, and in turn would not be an extra expense for the state to account for. "Banning the box" is essential to many citizens of Connecticut, for one in three adults experience difficulties in gaining employment due to their records, and a formerly incarcerated person is 50% less likely to receive a follow up for a job due to their record. So though this bill is in the best interest of Connecticut from an economic viewpoint, it is also crucial in giving people a second chance to properly contribute to our society. If we wish to live in a more just and humane world, than this bill is a necessary next step. I strongly support Fair Chance Employment and hope the committee will vote favorably on HB 5237. Thank you for your time, Kali Guise c 000727 Bridgeport 2470 Fairfield Avenue c Bndgeport, CT 06605 Child T: 203.549.0075 Advocacy F: 203.549.0203 B Coalition www.bcacct.ara Connecticut General Assembly- Labor and Public Employees Committee Board of Directors Legislative Office Building Diane L. Brassell 300 Capitol Avenue Chairwoman Hartford, CT 06106 Scott K. Wildennan Vice Chair and Secretary Testimony of the Bridgeport Child Advocacy Coalition Stanley Bernard 2"" Vice Chair March 3, 2016 Peter H. Roberge In Support ofH.B. 5237: AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE Treasurer EMPLOYMENT Gwendoline Alphonso, PhD Dear Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, and members of the Labor and Edith B. Cassidy Public Employees Committee: Robert Francis MariaGeigel The Bridgeport Child Advocacy Coalition (BCAC) fully supports H.B. 5237, an Linda Goldenberg act that gives prospective employees a fair chance at employment. Saleh Hanaif William J. Hass, Ph.D. Margaret Hiller When individuals emerge from jail or prison with a criminal record, they are not Salvatore J. Mollica done repenting for past behavior in the eyes ofmany.ln this case, employers. In Nadine Nevins Connecticut, countless job applications include a criminal history section where Frances Newby prospective employees must disclose their criminal record. While this may seem Jane F. Norgren c like a logical set of questions to inquire on, it unfortunately leads to Gina leVan Simpson insurmountable stigma and an individual's application to be promptly discarded Linda S. Smith, MS without second thought. Tanya Rhodes Smith Allyson Stollenwerck I in 3 American adults have a criminal history. They struggle to earn employment Preston C. Tisdale, Esq. no matter their education level, how long ago the offence was, or the type of Helen B. Wasserman crime. Individuals looking for a job with a criminal past are shut out before they Katherine S. Yacavone can even make their case to a prospective employer, leaving little options left of how to earn money for themselves or their fiunily. Individuals unable to attain Mary Pat C. Healy gainful employment may have to depend on state subsidies for food, housing, or Executive Director child care, turning this situation into a costly fix for the state. Communities of Janice Park, Emeritus color are especially disenfranchised by criminal history application questions; people of color are disproportionality arrested and convicted of crimes, thusly they suffer the most throughout the reentry process. Despair, powerlessness, and anxiety are words that come to mind when we think about what people must be going through when struggling to gain employment because of a past misstep they already paid for. Using criminal history inquiries to unfairly screen out potentially very qualified applicants not only affects them getting jobs; but their ability to build a healthy character, develop relationships, and contribute to the community. A criminal conviction should not translate to a life ofun-or underemployment. If we are indeed sincere in our attempt to reduce recidivism and support the formally . incarcerated, we must break down this barrier once and for all. c 000728 c L~adingAge .. Connecticut Testimony to the Committee on Labor and Public Employees Submitted by Mag Morelli, President of LeadingAge Connecticut March 3, 2016 Regarding HB 5237, An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment LeadingAge Connecticut is a statewide membership association representing not-for-profit provider organizations serving older adults across the entire field of aging services, including not-for-profit skilled nursing facilities, residential care homes, home health care agencies, hospice agencies, adult day centers, assisted living agencies, senior housing and life plan communities. On behalf of LeadingAge Connecticut, I am pleased to submit the following testimony on HB 5237, An Act Concerning Fair Chance c Employment. LeadingAge Connecticut requests that the Committee take into consideration and address how the statutory changes proposed in this bill and specifically those contained in lines 31-35, will impact the mandated Applicant Background.Check Management System (ABCMS) established by the Department of Public Health and authorized pursuant to Section 19a-491c. The ABCMS is currently in force for nursing homes and home health care agencies and will be expanded to other health care providers named in the statute. Thank you for your consideration and attention to this testimony. Respectfully submitted, Mag Morelli, President {203) 678-4477, [email protected] 110 Barnes Road, Wallingford, CT 06492 www.leadirwagect.ors c 000729 c To the distinguished members of the Labor Committee: My name is Raymond Wallace, Executive Director of Guns Down, Books Up, and I am here today to urge the passage of HB 5237, An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment. As a young man in my early 20's, I found myself making a lot of bad decisions. During a football garne, as a fight had broken up, I picked up the football and started walked way. Police officers shortly pulled up and charged me with robbery. In a separate incident, I was in a truck with 6 of my friends and a gun was found under the driver's seat. The cops charged all 6 of us for possession. I ultimately did 3.5 years in a Connecticut penitentiary for these misdeeds. I was around 30 when I was finally released, and it's been a struggle ever since. To live in Connecticut you need to make at least $20 a hour to survive with a family and kids. I applied to jobs all across New Haven and Connecticut to in order to support myself and my family. In many cases I would be given an interview and feel confident on my chances only to be turned away after seeing that I had a record. On several occasions, I was escorted out of the office after a background check. These incidents would crush my confidence for weeks, knowing that without my record I would've received the job. I went back to doing what I knew best, dealing drugs. Let me make this crystal clear, I in no way wanted to resort to this. I had to feed my family and survive, c and under my circumstances this was the only avenue I had at the time. Six years ago, after seeing a close friend of mine gunned down right in front of me, I decided to start a non-violence non-profit, Guns Down, Books Up, aimed at children. Seeing all the hardship I had gone through because of some stupid decisions in my youth, I was committed to helping kids in New Haven avoid the same path. We did a variety of things from feeding the homeless, feeding the elderly, holding book fairs, establishing youth sports leagues and youth mentoring programs and we eventually grew to holding an annual summer festival called Unity Youth Weekend. We accomplished these things on a shoestring budget, usually with the help of a few compassionate benefactors in the community. Even though I was ecstatic in being able to help the youth in my community, after couple years I considered closing down the organization. I was never able to find consistent full time work, and the pressure mentally and financially was becoming an impossible burden. While I wanted to continue helping my community, I felt like the community had given up on me. I think everybody needs a second chance. I know there are a lot of good people who have made mistakes that could really contribute to society if they are given another opportunity. c 000730 c I am an exception. Even though I spent most of my adult life without consistent work, I was lucky that some people believed in me and gave me the opportunity to succeed. I was eventually offered a position to run after school mentoring programs in New Haven schools from my work with Guns Down, Books Up. Most people will never be that fortunate. · Still to this day I am struggling. The work I do manages to pay the bills but an anxiety and uncertainty about my future still exists. This bill will help me and so many others like me become valuable members of the community once again. I urge you to pass HB 5237, An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment. Thank you! Sincerely, Raymond Wallace Executive Director, Guns Down, Books Up c c 000731 c before the Labor & Employees Committee In support of Raised HB 5237 ~~!!JI'Io!fillng Fair Chance Employment" March 3, 2016-4:00 PM at Hill Reslonal Career High School. Senator Gomes and Representative Tercyak and distinguished members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, my name is Wilson Ramos. Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony today In support of Raised HB 5237 • An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment." On February 26, 2016, I attended the public hearing where Senator Ed Gomes (D-Brldgeport) stood on the podium and shared a story about how a 17-year-old teenager went from a difficult situation to advocating on behalf of our communities as an Individual and as a Senator. I myself have a similar story to share, as I too have a criminal record that follows me around like the plague. I strongly believe that this is a first step to reducing barriers so that Individuals with criminal records are given an c opportunity to prove that there is more to the person than any past transgression. 1support this bill because I am one of many that committed mistakes that were primary due to negative Influences, lack of role models, and not having the support that one needs to pursue great opportunities, to name a few. Like many others, I have met the requirements that the state has deemed fitting to the crime committed but stlll have a difficult time to secure employment in the foeld that 1 pursue. To further distinguish myself, here is a summary of myself; I am Latino, graduated from Central Connecticut State University (CCSU) with a Bachelor's Degree In Management with a concentration in Human Resources, I am currently pursuing a Master's Degree in Technology Management with a concentration In Computer Networking and an official Certificate in Lean Manufacturing and Six sigma (as a dual tract program at CCSU). I have completed 5 courses In Information Technology lin; Networking, Security, Server Administration, Office 365 and I am certified In Adult First Aid/CPR/AED. 1 am a member of a Human Resources Association and volunteer at the Alzheimer's Association and other places. This Is all listed In my resume, what Is not listed in my resume Is who I am as a person; 1 am a c 000732 c Testimony of Wilson Ramos before the Labor r. Employees Committee In support of Raised HB 5237 "An Act Concemlnc Fair Chance Employment" March 3, 2016-4:00 PM at Hill Rectonal Career Hlch School. father, a brother, a friend, more Importantly I am a person that values others not by their past transgressions but by who they are. I not only speak for myself but for all those that are not here today, I urge you to consider passing this bill, so that people get a second chance to prove their worth based on the skills, knowledge, abilities, and other defining characteristics they possess or will possess. I am a firm believer that a simple quote has the potential to Influence and change many things and with that being said, I want to end with this quote by Christopher Earle, "It is when we fall that we are given the opportunity to rise up and reach new heights. • c Thank you for your time and opportunity to share my story, Wilson Ramos c 000733 Caring 4 U, LLC c d/b/a Comfort Keepers 500 Howe Ave., Suite 200 Shelton, CT 06484 203-924-4949 [email protected] March 3, 2016 Committee on Labor and Public Employees Testimony Regarding HB 5237 AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT Dear Members of the Committee: I am Kenneth Gurin, former President of the Connecticut Chapter of the Homecare Association of America (HCAOA) for the past 5 years. I am also the owner of Comfort Keepers, an employer based Homemaker and Companion agency registered with the CT Department of Consumer Protection, in business for over 13 years, servicing Upper Fairfield /Lower New Haven counties. I am here today in OPPOSITION of HB 5237 AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT and request that the Committee not act on the bill as written. At the very least, homemaker-companion agencies should be excluded from the bill before the bill is approved. Currently, there is the requirement of conducting a "Comprehensive Background Check" of home care agencies registered with the Department of Consumer Protection in c Connecticut, as follows: Sec. 20-678. Employees of homemaker-companion agencies. Submission to comprehensive background check. Written statements regarding prior criminal convictions or disciplinary action. Each homemaker-companion agency shall require that any employee of such agency hired on or after October 1, 2006, submit to a comprehensive background check. In addition, each homemaker-companion agency shall require that any employee of such agency hired on or after October 1, 2006, complete and sign a form which contains questions as to whether the current or prospective employee was convicted of a crime involving violence or dishonesty in a state court or federal court in any state; or was subject to any decision imposing disciplinary action by a licensing agency in any state, the District of Columbia, a United States possession or territory or a foreign jurisdiction. Any employee of a homemaker companion agency hired on or after October 1, 2006, who makes a false written statement regarding such prior criminal convictions or disciplinary action shall be guilty of a class A misdemeanor. Moreover, as part of a franchise, our agreement with our franchisor, requires we do a 7 year criminal background check, that covers all known areas where the applicant has lived during the most recent 7 year period. If House Bill 5237 becomes law, we would be in violation of our franchise agreement. Moreover, we would be at risk of losing our liability and bonding insurance if we knowingly placed a caregiver with a prior and c 000734 c recent history of larceny stole from a client in which the agency knew about the criminal history and did not deny employment. House Bill 5237 would prevent employers from requiring certain employees or prospective employees to disclose any criminal history until the employer has made a conditional offer of employment to the employee or prospective employee. It would effectively bar employers from asking about criminal convictions until prospective workers have already reached the interview stage. The bill would prohibit homemaker-companion agencies from denying employment solely on the basis of a misdemeanor conviction that occurred more than two years earlier or a felony conviction that occurred more than five years earlier. State law requires homemaker-companion agencies to inquire of applicants whether they have been convicted of a crime involving violence or dishonesty. Under the bill, homemaker companion agencies would be required to make the inquiry but precluded from denying employment solely on the basis of the conviction - even if the conviction was in fact for violence or dishonesty. It is an inherent conflict with state law and policy and puts homemaker-companion agencies in an untenable position with frail, elderly clients. Current law and the bill allow an employment application form that contains criminal c history record information of a job applicant to be made available to professionals who have access to client funds, such as broker-dealers, investment advisers and insurance producers, for obvious reasons. Homemaker-companion agencies, for similar and perhaps more important reasons, should also be able to have and use such information. The Labor Committee should reject House Bill 5237. However, if the committee approves the bill, homemaker-compamon agenc1es should be exempt or excluded from its application. Thank you for your consideration in hearing my testimony today. Sincerely, Kenneth Gurin c 000735 c Luke A. Bronin Mayor Thank you Sen. Gomes, Rep. Tercyak, and members of the Labor ru:id Public Employees Committee for the opportunity to offer testimony in support ofH.B. 5237: "An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment". If enacted, this bill would complement the Second Chance Society legislation enacted last year by removing an unnecessary obstacle to employment for individuals with criminal records. While the bill would not prohibit private employers from conducting a background check or taking an applicant's criminal history into account when making hiring decisions, the bill would remove questions regarding an applicant's criminal history from the initial job application. As a result, individuals seeking a second chance will be less likely to be discouraged from submitting a job application, and employers will be c more likely to assess a candidate based on his or her full qualifications. This bill recognizes that past mistakes, particularly those mistakes made during youth, should not be a permanent barrier to employment. This bill would strengthen Hartford's efforts to reduce crime by promoting second chances for individuals with criminal records. The intent of this bill is simple: when an employee is otherwise qualified, a past mistake -unrelated to the nature of the job the individual is seeking- should not represent an insurmountable barrier to opportunity and employment. Several states have already adopted this common sense approach to employment decisions, including Massachusetts, New York, and Rhode Island. I urge the committee's favorable action on this bill. Respectfully, LukeBronin Mayor 550 Main street Hartford, Connecticut 06103 Telephone (860) 757-9500 c Faeolmlle (860) 722-6606 000736 c March 4, 2016 My nam s Anderson C m New Haven, CT. I am currently working as a Recovery Support Specialist nuum of Care since I 0/2015. Continuum employs roughly 50 other returning citizens. Continuum saw how we could help and looked beyond the box. I stand in support ofHB: 5237 An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment. This bill would eliminate barriers to employment for individuals with a criminal record. I was released from prison 8/17/2007. I matriculated into Gateway Community College in 912007. During the first 8 months after my release, I was unable to get a job; the box banned me from employment. When employers looked at my application, the felony box blinded them from seeing my true self and all the skills and talents that I have to offer. Finally, I was hired at The Quinnipiac Polling Institute in 3/2008. Quinnipiac Polling Institute saw me as a student and looked beyond the box. In 5/2008, I earned a certificate in Addiction Counseling. Crossroads saw me working to change my life, hired me, and looked beyond the box. Crossroads employed me from 5/2008 to 712009. In 12/2009, I completed the requirements of my Associate's Degree. While living at the Beth-El Shelter, two shelter employees noticed me and referred me to their other job New Prospects. In March 20 I 0, New Prospects saw my passion for recovery and hired me; they looked beyond the box. New Prospects employed me c from 3/2010 to 10/2010. Then, from 10/2010 to 9/20I4, with an Associate's Degree in Addiction Counseling, recent and relevant work history, and certification as a dislocated worker, the BOX BANNED me from employment. Unemployed for FOUR YEARS, I survived on CT Unemployment and Obama's Stimulus Package from 10/2010 to 12/2012 and then I moved to North Carolina for one year. I returned to CT in 12/2013. A friend created work for me in his insulation company. A friend who knew me for who I was, who I am, but MOST IMPORTANT, who I could be. A friend who looked beyond the box. This friend referred me to one Of his customer's cOmpanies. With this reference, the company ; looked beyond the box and hired me. In 9/2014, another friend hired me to manage his independent living facility, where I had been living since I I/2013, and as a prep cook/pot washer at his restaurant. He knew me, hired me, and looked beyond the box. I remained employed at this restaurant until! got my current position at Continuum of Care. Sometimes passion can get you in the door. Nevertheless, IN MY EXPERIENCE ONLY PROPER SELF-CARE EMPOWERED ME TO PESERVERE THRU MY STRUGGLES. This Bill is very near and dear to my heart. I am where I am and who I am simply because of relationships that are near and dear to my heart. I was able to find employment from people who knew me or · companies who were willing to look beyond the box, but there were many jobs that I could not access, jobs that screen employees based on their criminal records. Because I was unable to access many jobs, I c 000737 c have experienced long periods of unemployment which limited my ability to contribute to my community. This Bill to ban the box will allow returning citizens the opportunity to be interviewed by potential employers, who can HOPEFULLY LOOK BEYOND THE BOX to consider the whole person! I support Fair Chance Employment and hope the committee will vote favorably on liB 5237. Thank you for your time, Anderson Curtis c c 000738 ~ (3 c ~I L -YALE COLLEGE- DEMOCRATS March 2•d, 2016 Testimon~~=~ 345 Temple St. New Haven, CT 06511,020 Co-Chair of the nmmal Justice Legislative Committee, Yale College Democrats Legislative Coordinator of the Yale Undergraduate Prison Project In favor: H.B. No. 5237 An Act Concernmg Fair Chance Employment Bill No. 5237 introduced by the Labor and Public Employees Committee is particularly 11Uportant to me as a resident of Connecticut and of New Orleans. Louisiana not only has one of the highest incarceration rates in the country, but more than 80% of defendants in New Orleans cannot afford a lawyer or do not have the means to represent themselves. Not only did one of my mom's closest friends have to wait over a month in jail before her trial, but she pleaded guilty to a crime that was out of self defense, simply because she was afraid of the potential twenty year sentence she could have been given if she did not agree to the plea. Once she is out ofjail, she will have to admit to her former c incarceration on job application forms. People are often coerced into taking a plea bargain despite their innocence to avoid harsher sentences that will often be carried out if someone exercises their right to trial. Innocence is therefore very difficult to prove, especially for those who cannot afford a private attorney. From my own childhood experiences, I understand the disappointment that arises when the very institutions that are meant to protect you and operate according to constitutional law, are unreliable and unpredictable. Growing up in New Orleans, I have had friends who were incarcerated either for minor misdemeanors or for self-defense crimes. Their difficulty finding employment later has led to financial instability and often emotional distress. One of the organizations my mom has worked with is Resurrection after Exoneration. The members' stories about what it was like living on death row for decades before being found innocent were astonishing. There are a lot of misconceptions about formerly incarcerated members of society, which lead to the unconscious bias ingrained at a systemic level. Not only are people wrongly convicted and often given harsher sentences than deserved due to the plea bargain system, but poverty, lack of access to quality education, mental health and disenfranchisement play important roles in committing crimes. In my work with the Yale Undergraduate Prison Project, I have witnessed the way all these factors contribute to incarceration here in Connecticut. The "ban the box" bill would ensure that employers don't deny an applicant due to his or her criminal background, rather than looking at other qualifications. This would ultimately give employees a second chance to prove that they can lead productive lives. The ban the-box bill has already been implemented successfully in New Haven so it is time equal opportunity is enforced statewide. c 000739 c Testimony of Patrick Sullivan March 2, 2015 Co-Director of Advocacy & Awareness 68 High St, B 21 Yale Undergraduate Prison Project New Haven, CT 06511 In favor: H.B. No. 5237 An Act Concermng Farr Cnance Employment My name is Patrick Sullivan, and, on behalf of the Yale Undergraduate Prison Project, I urge the committee to pass House Bill5237. This proposal, essential to reforming the policies surrounding Connecticut's crunmal justice system, recognizes that we must eliminate the potential for discrimination against formerly incarcerated individuals in order to support equality of opportunity in hiring practices. Furthermore, it breaks down a significant barrier in the reentry process thereby facilitating the growth of a safe, strong and empowering community. Employment is arguably the most important factor in successful reentry into the community following incarceration. The question of former incarceration, or "the box" as it is commonly known, creates a huge obstacle for all people with a criminal record. Employers use those facts to discriminate against formerly incarcerated individuals at every step of the process. For example, a recent study done by the National Institute of Justice demonstrated that a criminal record ''reduced the likelihood of a callback or job offer by nearly 50 percent." By delaying the process of the background check until after a conditional job offer has been made, this bill would drastically curtail employment discrimination against ex-offenders. c In my work with the Yale Undergraduate Prison Project, I mentor and tutor young men my age whose applications, when they leave prison, will be repeatedly thrown out, simply because they have a criminal record. For a few months, I worked with a young man who was sentenced, as a twenty year old, to one year in prison. In our conversations, I would ask him a few questions to get the discussion going or ask him to clarify something or expand on athought, but most of the time I wasn't sure which way the mentoring was going. For the rest of his life, however, he will have his job applications taken out of the pile because he is required tu check a box on a form. As he struggles to get a foothold in this discriminatory job market, I urge you consider the impact that this bill would have on his life and the lives of thousands of people across the state of Connecticut. Passing this bill does not mean, as some opponents argue, compromising safety in any way. Background checks still exist, but that question would not inform initial job offers. Passing this bill, however, does means stopping unequal, often racially discriminatory questions on employment forms. Passing this bill means listening to residents of the state of Connecticut, evidenced by the more than 400 letters I have here. Passing this bill means reducing recidivism by eliminating discrimination in hiring practices, investing in employment opportunities that make our communities stronger, and empowering all people in the state of Connecticut. Thank you for your time. c 000740 c dts ((XJ:r....s Connectk:ut Association for Human Services casey MtGuane, Preskfent 237 Homlton Street. Suite :ws James Horan, Chief Executive Oftker Hartfurd, Coonectlcut 06106 860.951.2212 www.cahs.org 860.951.65U fax Testimony Regarding H.B. 5237, An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment Good Afternoon Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak and Respected Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, My nail\,(;~ Erica-~ and I am a Policy Analyst at the Connecticut Association for Human Services (CAHS). CAHS Is 'a-state~~onproflt agency that works to reduce poverty and promote economic success through both policy work at the tapitol and program work In low-income communities. I am here to support H. B. 5237, otherwise known as the "Ban the Box" policy.· • "Ban the Box" Promotes Racial Equality The racial dispar~ies present in the criminal justice system are well-known. Though African American's make up around 12.3% of the nation's population, 40% are behind bars. African American men are 6x's more likely to be incarcerated than white males and 2.5 times more likely than Hispanic 2 c males1• • The cumulative effect of this disparity Is that today, fifty years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act and 150 years after the ratification of the Reconstruction Amendments, more black men are 3 In prison, )all, on probation or parole than were enslaved in 1850 • Research has shown that at the one-year mark of being released, between 60 and 75% of previously Incarcerated individuals are unemployed'. Those that are employed make around 40% less In annual earnings than they did prior to incarceration and have limited upward mobility'·•. After submitting job applications, those with criminal records are half as likely to receive an Interview; for African American 7 applicants, their chances of receiving an interview is reduced to 33% • "Banning the box" will ensure that all Connecticut residents have a fair opportunity to be considered on their qualifications first, instead of being denied because of past mistakes. 1 C\emons, J. T. (2014. Blind lnfustk:e: The Supreme Court, Implicit racial bias, and the racial disparity In the criminal justice sYstem. American Criminal Law Review, 51, 689- 713. l Drake, B. (2013). Incarceration gap widens between whites and blacks. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from: htto://www.oewresearch.omlfacHankf2o13/09/06/!ncarceratjon-•ao-between·whltes-and-bladcs-wldens/. 3 Alexander, M (2012). The New Jim Crow: MO$S Incarceration In the Age of CoforbHndness. New York, NY: The New Press. 4 Travis, J. (2005). But they on come back: Facing the challenges of prisoner reentry. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press. 5 The Pew Charitable Trusts. (2010). (()1/ateral costs: Incarceration's Effect on Economic Mobility. Washington, DC: The Pew Charitable Trusts. 6 Tierney, J. (20131 February 9). Prison and the poverty trap. The NeW York Times. Retrieved from , http://www.nytlme:;,~;om/20U/02/19/selenee/long-pri£On-terms-eyed-as-contr!butlng·to-poverty.html?pagewanted .. ~ll. 11 7 Pager, o. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937-975, c A Century of Strengthening Children, Families, and Communities 000741 - Testimony of Eric W. Gjede Assistant Counsel, CBIA Before the Committee on Labor and Public Employees March 3, 2016 Testifying on HB 5237 AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT Good afternoon Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, Senator Hwang, Representative Rutigliano and members of the L;~bor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Eric Gjede and I am assistant counsel at the Connecticut Business and Industry Association {CBIA), which represents more than 10,000 large and small companies. throughout the state of Connecticut. CBIA has concerns regarding HB 5237, but we wish to reiterate our willingness to work with the committee on this issue. Criminal background checks are a legitimate way for businesses, particularly small businesses, to screen employment applicants. In fact, there are at least four bills {HB 5466, HB 5412, HB 5400 & HB 5306) proposed this session that preserve and expand the state's and municipalities' ability to use these background checks. However, we also understand and support individuals that have learned from their experiences and wish to - reenter the workforce. We do have concerns about HB 5237, a few of which I will list below: 1. The proposed look back period of5 years for felonies and 2 years for misdemeanors is relatively short. The standard industry practice is a look back period of 7 to 10 years. 2. The financial penalty for a violation of this section proposed in (k) is extremely high, especially given that some violations are inadvertent and as a result of databases controlled by the state that are not up to date. 3. This bill does not include language that supersedes the few Connecticut municipalities that already have ban the box laws. !Jniformity in these laws are critical for businesses- particularly those businesses with multiple locations. Thank you for allowing us to testify on HB 5237. We look forward to continuing to work with the committee on this issue . • Conned"ic:ut Business & Industry Association 350 Church Street, Hartford, CT 06103-1126 I 860.244.1900 I 860.278.6562 {f) \ ~;bia.c:om \ @)CBIANews 000742 V-cj & ~ 7 ... • ... 11.• t.1n PlCiilC STATE OF CONNECTICUT ij c * .~ ltmPnc tn .IUfur, ~ * * CoPlnll ton ASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN AFFAIRS :'ilf-: COMMISSION y u ' •• T I l I 1 ~ Address: Dear Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, and esteemed members 18-20 Trinity Street of the Labor & Public Employees Committee of the Connecticut Room202 General Assembly: Hartford, CT 06106 Tel: 860-240-0080 Fax: 860-240-0315 My name is Alok Bhatt. I serve as Legislative Analyst for the Asian Email: [email protected] Pacific American Affairs Commission (AP AAC). Website: http://ctapaac.com In promoting civil rights, economic viability, and quality of life in the Chair State of Connecticut, AP AAC writes in strong support of House Bill TnmgLe 5237: An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment (Fair Chance Act). Vice-Chair Sylvia Ho, Esq. As l\1 state and as a society, we must ensure that formerly incarcerated Secretary individuals in our state are not passed over for employment because of a UswahKbao Treasurer past for which they have paid their debts. Without a chance to Alan Tao reintegrate into the community, the risk of recidivism greatly increases'. To sustain its social and economic well-being, the State of Connecticut Commissioners must take steps to ensure that formerly incarcerated individuals have an Arlene Avery opportunity to find employment. Theodore Feng Theodore Hsu George Matbaoool Greater employment equity signifies greater economic growth for the M. Angela Rola State of Connecticut. Furthermore, it demonstrates that we do not hold c ArvindShaw people to their past. An-Ming Truxes Executive Director I thank you for your time and consideration of this important matter. Mui Mui Hin-McConnick Legislative Analyst AlokBhatt Sincerely, Alok Bhatt Legislative Analyst, AP AAC 1 http://www.cjcj.org/uploads/cjcj/documents/tbe_post-release.pdf 18-20 Trinity Street, Hartford, CT 06106 TeL (860) 240-0080, Fax (860) 240-0315 E-MaU: [email protected] c Web Site- http://ctapaac.com/ 000743 c ~ ~tat.r nf Qtnnnedirut African-American Affairs Commission Slate Capitol 210 Capitol Avenue- Room 509 Hartford, CT 06106 860-240-8555 distinguished members of the labor committee. My nam is Subira Gordon a d I am the legislative analyst for the African American Affairs Commission. improve and promote the economic development, education, health and political well-being of the African-American community in the State of Connecticut. The AAAC is a steering committee member of the CT Fair chance coalition. 0 1 am writing to provide testimony in support of HB 5237 AAC Fair Chance Employment. Research shows that African Americans have a disproportionate impact with the police which has negative long term effects on African American communities across the nation and especially in Connecticut which is the most segregated state. In my capacity as a legislative aide and then now as a legislative analyst I have heard many heart breaking stories from individuals who have made mistakes in their lives which has resulted in a criminal record and are being penalized for that mistake decades after the fact. I would like to thank the labor committee for raising this bill and giving it a public hearing as this I believe is the most important piece of legislation this year. While the state continues to grapple with financial instability there are communities of color who are left out of the job market and have no access to gainful employment which will help them and their families no longer be a burden on the ever shrinking safety net. c 000744 c A criminal record should exist for the police to be aware of your criminal history not as a barrier to employment. This bill does two things, one removing the criminal record question from application and additionally limits the amount of time that employers can use that record as a disqualifier for employment, both of which are instrumental in helping individuals get access to employment. Many people who have records and are able to make it through the door and even when they do get an interview are then turned down for the job based on the fact that they had a criminal history. Last year the legislature passed a second chance society bill that addresses some of the wrongs that have existed in the criminal justice system that created criminals out of individuals who are now seen today as having a substance abuse problem. Changing many offences to mi~demeanors is helpful however even with a misdemeanor many people are still not able to access employment. c As a society we have to have a conversation about how long does a person have to be penalized for a crime, and after serving time in prison and being on probation shouldn't that person have paid their debt to society? I want to thank you for having this hearing in a city that has already taken the initiative to make this a municipal policy. Again thank you for giving this important piece of legislation a public hearing Thank you Subira Gordon Legislative Analyst African American Affairs Commission c 000745 c Testimony In Support Of HB5237 AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT March 3, 2016 Chairman Gomes, Chairman Tercyak, Sen. Hwang, Representative Rutigliano, Representative Esposito and distinguished members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee: My name i~ I am General Counsel for one of Connecticut's largest Homecare employers, Companions and Homemakers, Inc., and I thank you for this opportunity to advocate for amendment to Proposed Bill S237, amendment that honors the intent of the bill without jeopardizing the safety and well being of Connecticut seniors, and will uphold current Connecticut law requiring background checks for homecare workers. Current Connecticut law, Title 20, section 678 reads "Each homemaker companion agency, prior to extending an offer of employment or entering into a contract with a prospective employee, shall require such prospective employee to c submit to a comprehensive background check. . . (and) shall require that such prospective employee complete and sign a form which contains questions as to whether the prospective employee was convicted of a crime involving violence or dishonesty. . . " The proposed bill would require all employers to make an employment offer before conducting a background check. Thus, the bill conflicts with the well reasoned requirement that homecare workers be subjected to background checks prior to an offer of employment. Moreover, the proposed bill would prohibit a homecare employer from denying employment solely on the basis of prior criminal convictions, even for crimes of violence or dishonesty. The reasons Connecticut enacted C.G.S. 20-678 are well-founded and clear: persons receiving services from a homemaker-companion agency acquire those services due to physical or mental impairment leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. Physical limitations, Alzheimer's, dementia, and often a lack of a close support network of family or friends leave many of our elderly dependent upon others to help them with matters of great personal intimacy, matters involving banking, personally identifiable information, health and medication. In c liPage 000746 c such a position of dependence, the senior often may not even know they are being exploited; and, if they do know, may lack the means to take preventative steps or put an end to the abuse. And, though it speaks to the obvious, homecare services are administered in a private home setting. There is often no other person in the home other than the caregiver and client; an atmosphere of privacy that would permit physical or fiscal abuses to go undetected for long periods of time. As a result of these unique factors - dependence, vulnerability and isolation - homecare workers should continue to be screened under the higher standard established by C.G.S. 20-678. The proposed bill is intended to protect a large and specific section of our society - job applicants with criminal convictions in their past - from the threat of discrimination. Such intent is not realized if it is accomplished by a law that increases the risk of physical abuse, financial abuse or identity theft for an elderly or frail person seeking assistance in their own home. c Homemaker companion agencies should not be subject to a standard that does not permit them to deny homecare employment to someone with criminal convictions for crimes involving dishonesty or violence. Such employers should be exempted from the provisions of this bill; exemption consistent with current Connecticut law. Respectfully submitted by David L. Denvir General Counsel Companions and Homemakers, Inc. c 21Page 000747 c CITY OF NEW HAVEN BOARD OF ALDERS Darryl]. Brackeen, Jr. 98 Fowler Street, Unit 2R Alder, Ward 26 New Haven. CT06515-1423 Vice-Chair Telephone: (203) 479-2855 Education Committee £..mail: [email protected] Member Human Services Committee Legislation Commirtee Ad Hoc Living Wage Commission Affirmative Action Commission Black & Hispanic Caucus Testimony in Support of HB: 5237. An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment Good Evening, my name is Darryl Brackeen. Jr. I am the Alderman, on the New Haven Board of Alders representing the 26"' District in New Haven. For the record, I support HB: 5237 An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment also known as "Ban the Box." Many of our city residents have been greatly affected by the injustice as a result having to indicate their past criminal history when filling out an application. A mistake 0 from the past shouldn't become a life sentence to joblessness. Every day across America, hardworking qualified men and women who are diligently seeking employment and have often found stumbling blocks and hiring obstacles because of their past arrest or conviction. The current system in place today creates a trigger that would automatically disqualify ex-offenders when checking off one simple box which would therefore place them into a secondary category or out of the applicant pool. For example, I have heard stories from several individuals who have had negative experiences and has complete distrust in the system as it exists today. After hearing from these individuals, every one of them asked one basic question, "Why should I have to check off a box when I have served my time? I want to be a productive citizen!" This is an example of the systematic injustice that has plagued our state and country for decades, resulting in leaving more than 70 million Americans behind. This figure represents nearly one in three U.S. adults with· a record, therefore, becoming victims of a vicious cycle. Unfortunately and quite frequently. many young adults who look like me become a statistic and a number in the American prison industry,where people get out, can't find work that sustains them and their families, and in a moment of hopelessness, they may fall back into their old ways, leading them back into the prison system. In reality, many of these young people have not had the opportunity to lay a foundation to their futures. A poor choice from the past should not become a life sentence to joblessness and hopelessness. Many people claim that while incarcerated, individuals should take advantage of various training programs offered. However, after speaking with many who have taken advantage of those programs while incarcerated, have found that those programs are not up to par with what the job market demands when ~ey are relea•ed. It is my belief that the legislation before us to Ban the Box in the slate of Connecticut has been a long time coming. This proposed legislation will give ex-offenders a fair chance or better yet, a fresh start. In the City of c New Haven, our Mayor, Toni Harp and our Community Services Administration has made Ban the Box and the 000748 c re-entry of offenders back into our society as a priority. As a result, it led to the creation of Project Fresh Start, which has carried the torch for justice concerning banning the box on all city job applications, giving citizens the tools they need to receive viable employment. This is the kind of progress that is needed across this state. This is the time to make our democracy work for everyone, no matter who they are or where they come from. I urge you to support this legislation, HB: 5237 An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment, for the good of all people and our society. Thank you. a=·9~ Darryl J. Brackeen, Jr. Alderman, 26th Ward 0 c 000749 c fl~tt- State ~ecticut COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND OPPORTUNITIES Central Office- 25 Sigourney Street, Hartford, CT 06106 'A-tilt9 e.; Testimony in SUPPORT of HB-5237, AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT Good afternoon Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, Senator Hwang, Representative Rutigliano, Vice Chairs and Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Cheryl Sharp, and I am the Deputy Director of the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. I am here to speak in favor of HB-5237, An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment, otherwise known as 'Ban the BoX'. However, CHRO recommends lhat the enforcement of this provision be part of the CHRO enforcement procedures rather than those of the Department of Labor. The mission of the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO) is to eliminate discrimination through civil and human rights law enforcement and to establish equal opportunity and justice for all persons within the state through advocacy and education. Eliminating barriers to equal employment opportunity is one of the Commission's core issues. Individuals with criminal records of any kind have an extremely difficult time finding employment after their periods of incarceration. Because of longstanding issues with our criminal justice system, 1 individuals of color c are statistically more likely than Caucasian individuals to have criminal records and therefore have even more difficulty finding employment because of those records. Employment enables individuals to care for their families and contribute to society. Individuals with criminal records should not be automatically precluded from consideration for a job that may not be related at all to the crimes that were committed. CHRO's federal counterpart, the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC) has issued an Enforcement Guidance on this very issue. 2 Due to the disparity in criminal records for minorities, the EEOC has stated that employers may be liable for a Title VII violation if an employer relies solely on a criminal arrest or conviction record in a hiring or firing decision. These violations can be based on both the disparate treatment theory of discrimination (treating one group with a conviction differently than another group with a conviction) and the disparate impact theory of discrimination (a facially neutral test adversely affects some groups more harshly than other groups). The EEOC Enforcement Guidance provides some statistics indicating the rate at which individuals of color are involved with the criminal justice system as compared to white individuals. The numbers are staggering. Our state has a strong interest in rehabilitating former inmates. For many years, denying employment on the basis of criminal convictions unrelated to the requirements of a position has been prohibited with regard to state service (Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46a-80). Individuals should be considered for public and private employment based on their skills and abilities. A misdemeanor 1 http://WNW.civilriqhts.org/publications/reports/cerd-report-fallina-further-behind/discrimination-in-the.html 2 http:Jtwww.eeoc.goyl!awsfguidancelarrest conviction cfro Main (860) 541-3400- Fax (860) 246-5419 www.ct.goylchro- Toll Free In ConnecUout (800) 477-5737- TOO (860) 541-3459 c Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer 000750 0 . CJwt-~ · State of Connecticut !~ COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND OPPORTUNITIES Central Office - 25 Sigourney Street, Hartford, CT 06106 ~.. ~-fbt9 Zg«a(ltt! altd ~ '"" aft f'to/de that is more than 2 years old should not prevent an individual from obtaining a job to support a family. An individual's qualifications for a position should be considered without having a conviction history hanging over their head. If the employer determines that an individual is qualified for the position, this law would permit a look at the criminal record only after the qualification was decided. It allows individuals to compete on an equal footing and obtain employment based on merit, rather than be disqualified at the outset. It is one way to prevent the disparate treatment - because of race, national origin, or ancestry -of individuals with prior criminal records. In addition to our support of this bill, CHRO should actually be the agency charged with enforcing its provisions. CHRO's mission is to eliminate discrimination; CHRO already has a mechanism for investigating and litigating complaints of discrimination· based on race, color, disability, etc., and this includes complaints in which the State of Connecticut is accused of discriminating based on a previous criminal conviction (Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46a-80). In the last year, the Commission has investigated 12 such complaints. Additionally, the CHRO currently receives and investigates such complaints where disparate impact is alleged against private employers. Thus, the complaints this bill envisions already fall within the purview of the CHRO, and this bill merely seeks to broaden the legal theories under which an individual can file a complaint. The CHRO supports HB-5237 with the changes I have described. 0 Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am happy to answer any questions the Committee may have. · Main (660) 541-3400- Fax (660) 246-5419 www ctgovfchm "'Tol Free In Connecticut (800) 477~5737 ... TOO (860) 541-3459 C· Afftnnative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer 000751 c City of New Haven 1 Good afternoon, Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, Ranking, and other members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. My name is Toni Harp; I'm the Mayor of New Haven. On behalf of the city and its residents, welcome! We're delighted you're here. Thank you for bringing today's public hearing 'on the road' to our city. Employment issues loom large in Connecticut's urban centers, where many residents, particularly minority residents, endure unemployment rates far greater than statewide averages, along with widespread underemployment. I'm grateful for this opportunity to testify before you. In just a word, I encourage you to continue your minimum wage 'fight for 15.' Connecticut's legal minimum wage must allow those who earn it the chance to afford essentials in terms of housing, food, and transportation. Today's minimum wage does not. I'm also here in support of the Connecticut Fair Chance Employment Act (H.B. 5237), and I'm here to c urge your favorable consideration and passage. 1bis bill is meant to address another issue of critical concern in this city: pre-judgement- that is to say, prejudicial treatment- ofjob applicants with criminal records. Today many of us are here on their behalf: those who made mistakes, accepted the consequences of those mistakes, and who now are trying to rejoin their community and lead responsible, productive lives. If enacted, HB 5237 would align private sector employers with those in the public sector- and several national compames- and prohibit questions about an applicant's criminal background from initial employment applications. I'm proud to say the City of New Haven has already enacted a "ban the box" ordinance to keep that question off city job applications. This 'ban the box' issue really comes down to two things. The first of these is judgment: who among us has led a mistake-free life? Who among us then, is justified to hold another's mistake against him or her indefinitely? The second point of this is about forgiveness and providing a second chance for those who previously engaged in anti-social behavior. Doesn't it simply make the most sense- common sense- to do all we c 165 Church Street • New Haven, CT 06510 • 203-946-8200 000752 c City of New Haven Toni N. Harp- Mayor -.. ·~·.., ~~.. , · .~ ~~,, II . . -· -., . can to bring these people back into the fold? Shouldn't we do everything possible to help them return to their communities as responsible, productive parts of our social fabric? HB 5237 would ensure that employers first evaluate job applicants based on their skills and qualifications, not past mistakes. This new statewide legislation would bring private employers into alignment with cities like ours, and postpone questions about an applicant's criminal background until later in the hiring process. I So again I thank you for being here, I thank you for your intetest in this matter, and I thank·you for your consideration of this pending legislation. I urge you to 'ban the box' from job applications so more Connecticut residents can enjoy the satisfaction of an honest day's work and an honest day's pay. Thank you very much. ### c 165 Church Street • New Haven, CT 06510 • 203-946-8200 000753 0 Connecticut Wotkingiii Families Organization 30 Arbor Street, Hartford, CT 06106 wotkingfamilies.org!connecticut (860) 523-1699 March 3rd, 2016 . . . . . _ ~ /" I ) Testimony(from Lindsay I'arrell, Co'!!J!'Gti'tut state dire<:tor of the Working Families Organizatio'l:rin.S.UP~Q!U.o£HBs-237 AAC Fair Chance Employment, HB5370 AAC Increaaing the Minimum Fair Wage, HB5371 AAC a Minimum Workweek for Persons Performing Building Maintenance Servtces, and HB5378 AAC the Standard Rate of Wages. Senator Gomes Representative Ienqrak. Senator Huang RCCJ:2resentatiye Rutig1iano and the members of the Awropriations Committee; Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of these important bills. As we are aD becoming acutely aware, inequality is ballooned in the country and in the state in particular over the last few decades. Since the 2008 ctash, here in Connecticut we have c added back a(most all the jobs that were lost (we would have added back all of them if not for attrition and the. decimation of our public sector), but those jobs ate now low-wage service sector positions instead of middle-class salaried jobs with decent pay and benefits. Working Families supports HB5370 to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. The cost of living in this state is incredibly high, and we need to make it possible for all families in Connecticut to support themselves with dignity. Low wage workers keep out economy running; they serve our food, care for our children and elderly, keep our stores stocked and functioning, clean our offices, schools and hospitals, and do so much more for our society. They deserve better. We also cannot afford to keep paying workers so little when productivity is so high. Poverty wages cost taxpayers when wotking families are forced to rely on public assistance. Low wages hurt our small businesses when local fatnilies don not have disposable income to spend at them. It's also bad for our tax base, when workers are paid so little that they ate not contributing. $15 per hour is the new standard, from Seattle to fast food workers in New York State. Anything less is inadequate, and we cannot continue to just try and chip away at poverty, we need to attack it head on with a living wage. Working Families would like to encourage the conunittee add to this bill what SB39 does and eliminate the minimum wage carve-out for workers who sometimes receive tips. Tips c 000754 0 are an unreliable source of income that makes low wage workers, especially women, even more vulnerable. Lets solve both these problems with one strong bill. We would also like to testify in support of HBS237 for fair chance employment. We all know that low-income people and people of color are more likely to get a criminal record because of an unjust, prejudiced criminal justice system. Allowing employers to easily discriminate against potential employees because of a criminal record only codifies this continued injustice, Removing barriers for job applicants is also just smart policy. It reduces recidivism, because people have more options for building a life after release, which saves dollars and gives our state more security. Also, making it easier for people to find jobs increases the state's economic activ:ity, growing our consumer spending and our tax base. Lastly, we would like to support HB5371 and HBS378 because the service workers in our buildings deserve security and fulane1ai stability. Thank you for your considetation of these bills, and we hope that the committee will pass them all. c c 000755 0 Collnectlcut General Assembly _____ COMMISSION OFFICERS COMMISSIONERS Mary Lee A. Kiernan, Chair Maritza Bond Catherine Emsky, V'UJ Otzir JoAnn Calnen Lucia A. Aschettino, Stm~my April Capone Hilda C. Nieves, T~ 3PCSW Susan Eastwood PermaRent Commission on the Status of Women Apcil Guilbault EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Karen Jarmoc Carolyn M. Treiss Antonia Mo'nn Melanie O'Brien Helene Shay Susari Tolivu Patricia E.M. Whitcombe HONORARY MEMBERS Barbara DeBaptiste Connie Dice Testimony of Patricia T. Hendel Permanent Commission on th~ Status of Women Patricia Russo Submitted to the Labor and Public Employees Committee March 3, 2016 Re: H.B. 5237, AN ACT CONCERNING FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT S.B. 39, AN ACT CONCERNING THE MINIMUM FAIR WAGE AND -EMPLOYEES WHO CUSTOMARILY AND REGULARLY RECEIVE GRATUITIES. S.B. 314, AN ACT CONCERNING THE TEMPORARY FAMILY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BENEFITS. c Senators Gomes and Hwang, Representatives Tercyak and Rutigliano, and distinguished members of the Labor Committee, my name is Jillian Gilchrest and I am the Senior Policy Analyst for the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women (PCSW). Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony on in support of H.B. 5237, An Act Concerning Fair Chance Employment. I have also included testimony on two additionaJ bills, but will not be spealting on those today. In March of2014, the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, Forward Together, and Research Action Design launched a collaborative project with 20 community-based organizations across the country to address four decades of unjust criminal justice policies. They found that the collateral impacts of those policies last for generations and are felt most deeply by women, low-income families, and conununities of color.' HB 5237 is an important piece of a comprehensive movement to reform the criminal justice system, reduce the nwnber of people going into prison, and make it easier for those already in to get out and have a chance at a law-abiding life. In particular, HB 5237 can improve the lives of Connecticut women who have been incarcerated or have experienced the economic and emotional costs of having a relatiVe or partner who has been incarcerated Thailand is the only country in the world with a higher incarceration rate for women than the United States.2 According to the Connecticut Department of Corrections, women make up 7% of Connecticut's prison population. While the lifetime likelihood of imprisonment for women is 1 in 56, the chance that a women of color will be incarcerated is much higher-1 in 19 for black women and 1 in 45 for Hispanic women.3 The crimes for which women are most frequently incarcerated differ than those of 1 Who Pa}'li? The T tue Cost of Incarceration on Families, September 201 5 1 Prison Policy Initiative, Z015 ~The Senten~ ProjGiii(J Z012 18-20 Trinity St., Hartford, Cf 06106 • phone: 860/240-8300 • '"" 860/240-8314 • lllllall: p~.ct.gov • web: c www.cga.ct.gov/pcsw 000756 0 men, as do the batriers they experience upon reentering the community and workforce. According to research out of Berkley School of Law, a woman with a criminal record is least likely to receive a positive response to a resume submission, and when it comes to African American women, they are most likely to suffer from the stigma of criminalization-whereby they get a negative response whether or not they have a criminal record! Studies have shown that. employment is the single most important influence on decreasing recidivism, and that two years after release nearly twice as many employed people with records had avoided another brush with the law than their unemployed counterparts. When looking at recidivism rates it is important to look at the recidivism rates of men and of women, because they tell a different story. While recidivism rates for men in Connecticut have been dropping, they remain steady for women.' HB 5237 can help address this inequity by ensuring that when a woman reenters a Connecticut community, she has a fair chance at employment. Women also find themselves impacted by unfair employment practices when a household member has been formerly incarcerated. Almost one in four women and two in five Black women are related to someone who is incarcerated.6 Many key opportunities, such as education loans or housing aSsistance, are limited or prohibited for formerly incarcerated people. The impact of many of these restrictions jeopardizes the economic stability of incarcerated people and the families that support them. 7 The PCSW supports HB 5237 and ensuring that all Connecticut residents have a fair chance at employment. Thank you for your thne today and your consideration of this important public policy. c S.B. 39, AN ACT CONCERNING THE MINIMUM FAIR WAGE AND EMPLOYEES WHO ~LY AND REGULARLY RECEIVE GRATUITIES. In Connecticut, half of employed women are concentrated in two groups of occupations, the service industry and sales and office positions, which are among the lowest-paid.• Tipped restaurant workers are paid a "tipped wage" which means that they are only guaranteed a base wage of $5.78/hour far less than the minimum wage - with the expectation that the difference will be made up in tips. If the worker does not receive sufficient tips in the workweek to meet minimum wage, then the employer is required to make up the difference (the current maairnum tip credit is $3.37). According to the Shriver Report, women account for 70°/o Of tipped workers nationally. Furthermore, low pay and dependence on riPs makes a woman three times as likely to live in poverty as the rest of the U.S. workforce and is more likely than in other industries to be subjected to verbal and physical harassment,9 Tipped wages are unpredictable and arguably have less to do with the quality of service and more to do with the weather or the price-point of the restaurant. However, household expenses at best, are constant, but as we all know, usually increase. As women's contributions to family income increases employed women in dual earner couples contribute an average of 42.4% to the annual family incomelO- it 4 M. Morris., M. Sumner, and J. Borja, A Higher Hurdle: Batr:ien~ to Employment for Formerly locacemted Women (Berkley: Thelton E. Henderson Center fot" Social Justice, University of California, Berldey, School of Law, 2008. 5 OPM, Criminal Justice Policy and Planning Division, Recidivism in Connecticut, 2008 Rdeases, 2015 6 Who Pays? The True Cost o£ lncart:en.tion on Families, September 2015 7 Who Pays? The True Cost of lncarc:em.tion on Families, September 2015 • The Status of Women in Connecticuf s Workforce. PCSW and Institute for Women's Policy Research, November, 2014. •Tipped Over the Edge: Women in the U.S. Restaurant Industry. The Shriver Report, January 2014 . .. V,S, CPngteH Joint Economic Committee. Expanding Accus to Paid Side: U:!aw, March 2010. 1S-20Trinity St, Hartford, cr 06106• phone: 860/240·8300 •fax: 860/240.8314• email: pcsw®cga.ctgov • web: c www.cga.etgov/pcsw 000758 c NFIB The Voice of Small Business: CONNECTICUT TESTIMONY OF NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS (NFIB) OPPOSING HB-5237, AAC FAIR CHANCE EMPLOYMENT BEFORE THE LABOR & PUBLIC EMPOYEES COMMITTEE MARCH 3, 2016 A non-profit, non-partisan organization founded in 1943, NF/8 is Connecticut's and the nation's leading small business association. In Connecdcut, NFIB represents thousands of members and their employees. NF/8 membership is scattered across the state and ranges from sophisticated high technology enterprises to "Main Street" small businesses to single-person UMom & Pop" shops that operate in traditional ways. NFIB's mission is "To promote and protect the right o[its members to own, operate, and grow their businesses." On behalf of those small- and independent- job-providers in our state, NFIB/Connecticut offers the following comments: NFIB/Connecticut has significant concerns with HB-5237 and opposes the bill as currently c drafted. While certainly well intentioned, this legtslatwn would dramatically restrict the ability of small employers to have necessary and relevant information related to the criminal backgrounds of potential and even current employees. NFIB generally opposes blanket shielding of criminal histories because it puts an unfair burden on small business' ability to thoroughly screen applicants for employment Legislation to shield relevant criminal histories also increases the potential for litigation by adding more risks and variables into the hiring process, potentially putting business, employees and customers at risk. In addition, this bill seemingly allows for a new a cause of administrative and/or civil action against employers (lines 162-167), along with an excessive administrative penalty, but without considering any legal recourse for employers who may be put in a tenuous legal position as a result of limited information during the hiring process. This raises serious questions concerning potential liability for employers. If HB-5237 passes as currently drafted, Connecticut employers will no longer have access to valuable public records of often relevant criminal history information for prospective employees, putting their business, employees, and customers in jeopardy, and opening the door for potential liability claims. In addition, small business owners need information upfront and early in the hiring process and this is beneficial to all parties, especially job applicants. The business community generally supports efforts to give people second chances. Small businesses, in particular, tend to have an especially good track record in this regard. But small business owners are much better positioned than the government to determine who to hire, how to hire, and they make those decisions based on many factors and their best judgment based on the totality of the applicant and the circumstances. In order for small business owners to continue to make informed hiring decisions, it is critical they retain access to relevant public records that document criminal histories of applicants or 0 National Federation of Independent Business- CONNECTICUT 304 W. Main Street, #205 • Avon. CT 06001 • 860-248-NFIB • www.NFIB.com/CT 000759 c II FIB The Voice of Small BusinesS: CONNECTICUT employees. As such, NFIB doesn't believe "Ban the Box" is good policy for all businesses and shouldn't be applied with a one size fits all mentality. It is important to note that most small businesses do not have a human resources and/or legal department. Small businesses are often family operations. Even where employees are not related by blood, small business employees are often considered family members to each other. The owners of such businesses require full information about prospective employees to ensure the continuation of the nature of such a business. Regardless of the reason for conducting a criminal background check, it is also important to note that existing laws and regulations already prohibit discriminatory application and usage of selection procedures. Title VII, the federal EEOC and state CHRO all govern and enforce various antidiscrimination laws and procedures when it comes to issues of employment. NFIB believes that federal and state rules, along with the recently revised EEOC Criminal Check guidance for employers, can adequately protect individuals from discriminatory selection procedures. Finally, concerns over workplace security and skyrocketing litigation costs have made pre employment background checks an essential tool for many businesses - large and small. c Even where not legally required, it is often best practice to conduct background checks for certain jobs and industries. For example, small businesses that are alarm & security systems companies, routinely screen their installers and monitors who have access to people's homes, businesses, and other valuable and security sensitive information. The current legislation is lacking in numerous regards. As previously stated, it is a one size-fits-all approach that makes no consideration for the unique nature of small businesses, their track record in this arena, or the ability of small employers without a human resources or legal department to keep on top of and properly comply with the difficult requirements of this legislation. The bill also does not take into account that if passed, smaU businesses owners who may operate in multiple parts of the state may have to comply with differing sets of laws in addition to state law and federal law, depending on what municipality they are working in. While the legislation currently has a "look back" period of between 2 to 5 years depending on the nature of the crime, these time frames are rather short and more significantly, it treats all felonies, for example, the same, without differentiation for the most violent or serious crimes. While the legislation may prohibit the use of criminal information from "solely" being "the basis" on which an employee does not hire an applicant, there seems to be no legal presumption that would protect employers in this regard from potential frivolous claims by rejected applicants. This legislation is also silent as to an employer's potential liability that could result from the scenario in which an applicant may voluntarily disclose the existence of a past criminal history. Since small business owners are the ones placing the job ads, sifting through resumes and National Federation of Independent Business- CONNECTICUT 304 W. Main Street, #205 • Avon, CT 06001 • 860-248-NFIB • ww'IV.NFIB.com/CT c ? 000760 0 NFIB The Voice of Small Busmess: CONNECTICUT setting up and conducting interviews, they should be able to know from the beginning, and not after the fact, whether or not an applicant has a criminal or arrest history. If it turns out the candidate the small business owner wants to hire has a criminal conviction that makes them unfit for the job they're applying for, the hiring process has to start over again from the beginning. This is wasted time, which is wasted money for a small business, and it is also a waste of time for the applicant, which is unfair to that person as well. In closing, NFIB/Connecticut would like to state that we encourage small employers to make individualized assessments during the hiring process and want there to be a fair hiring process for all parties involved. But hiring decisions are challenging and not without risk and we hope that lawmakers and proponents of this legislation keep that in mind. We appreciated the opportunity to dialogue with proponents of similar legislation last session and we look forward to possible opportunities this session to work with the proponents as well as the Chairs, Ranking Members, and other interested parties. For any questions or additional information, please contact Andy Markowski, NFIBfConnecticut State Director, at 860-248-NFIB. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for your consideration of c NFIB's concerns on behalf of small business regading HB-5237 as currently drafted. National Federation of Independent Business- CONNECTICUT c 304 W. Main Street, #205 • Avon, CT 06001 • 860-248-NFIB • www.NFIB.com/CT 000763 c l:.,, ""· '~franklin pne beers ------~--~------\.) March 2, 2016 Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak, Senator Hwang, Representative Rutigliano Members of the Labor and Public Employees Committee RE: Bill No. 5237 Terror and fear are not something I have personally experienced in the workplace. However, every day I work with many people who have. They are survivors of a recent, unprecedented, globally-infamous instance of extreme workplace vlolen~e which occurred In our home state of Connecticut. As an employee of that company, and its current Director of Human Resources, it is my duty to speak not only 0 on behalf of those survivors who continue to struggle daily with the resulting emotional scars, but also on behalf of the eight souls who were slaughtered senselessly on that tragic day, and the shattered families they left behind. The details of this event were widely publicized in the media at the time, and remain well documented. On August 3, 2010, an employee of Hartford Distributors, Inc. (HDI) located in Manchester, Connecticut, opened fire without warning, killing eight employees and injuring two others. While the shooter systematically made his way through the building, fellow employees cowered in fear, in closets and under desks. Several employees locked themselves in offices, knowing that the shooter was just outside the door. Many of those whose lives were spared witnessed their co-workers running in fear for their lives, only to be ruthlessly cut down by the gunman -and in many cases, killed on the spot. The situation quickly unraveled into a state of hellish chaos- a bloodbath of fear and terror, as it has been described to me. The perpetually burdened survivors recount the details ofthat day as though they had occurred yesterday. It goes without saying that ali employees should reasonably expect to feel safe In the environment in which they work. While employers cannot remove all possibility of workplace violence, it is incumbent upon employers to take every reasonable step to mitigate risks of events like the one which occurred at HDI on August 3, 2010, by implementing safety programs that include fair hiring practices. To "ban the conviction box" on employm~nt applications and thus, limit the time period that an employer may utilize criminal records would severely restrict employers' abilitv to make iudicious hiring decisions. A system which permits an applicant to not disclose convictions prior to a conditional offer of employment is patently irresponsible. HARTFORD DISTRIBUTORS, INC 0 131 Chapel Road • P.O. Box 8400 • Manchester, CT 06042-0400 Tel: 860.643.2337 • Fax: 860.646.3780 000764 c ~, i 'franklin yne beers ------~------A "Fair Chance of Employment" starts with educating employers on non-discriminatory hiring practices. Clearly, that includes not condemning those with prior criminal history. As a Human Resources professional, I advocate for "second chances" for those who may have had prior convictions, and who, after paying their dues to society should be given the opportunity to prove themselves like anyone else. In normal hiring protocol, the interview process allows for meaningful discussion between the job candidate and the interviewer to discuss any prior convictions. Any consideration given to prior convictions forms only one of several inputs to the hiring-decision process, which also weighs the candidate's qualifications, experience, and other factors. The spirit of Bill No. 5237 is highly restrictive to employers and could result in many "unsafe" hi rings across our state. While many of us cannot relate to the incident that had taken place at HOI, we must all remember the lives that are affected by this tragedy. On behalf of the management of Hartford Distributors, Inc., we respectfully request that you do not pass this Bill. We thank you for consideration in this matter. 0 Best Regards, .~. ltft_u~>f/i) f2t.~ Maria 5. D' Amelia, SPHR, SHRM-SCP Director of Human Resources HARTFORD DISTRIBUTORS, INC. c 131 Chapel Road • P.O. Box 8400 • Manchester, CT 06042-0400 Tel: 860.643.2337 • Fax: 860.646.3780 000817 0 Progressive Education and Research Associates, Inc. d/b/a New Haven Peoples Center 37 Howe Street, New Haven CT 06511 (203) 624-8664 peoplescenter.blogspot.com/ peoplescenter®pobox.com Testimony to the Labor Committee ij{2 53 7 / Joelle Fishman, Coordinator New Haven Peoples Center fl J> r~o March 3, 2016 . rrl') ?:;}..L0 63 Raising the Minimum Wage, Hours for Building Cleaners aud Fair Chance Employmeftif6 ~ · 7 Senator Gomes, Representative Tercyak and members of the Labor Committee: Thank you for coming to New Haven. It is very appropriate. Last month, a report by the Brooking. Institute revealed that New Haven has the fastest growing income inequality of any city in the nation. It also showed that the income gap is greatest in the Greater Bridgeport area, with New Haven area nine of the top ten in the country. The report indicates that, like other cities across the country, falling wages at the bottom is the driving force. In our City, we are well aware ofthis reality, which hits African American and Latino neighborhoods hardest. A movement is underway in our city demanding livable wage jobs for communities in need. In preparing for this hearing, a friend who works in health care told me about her co-workers, mostly c single mothers, who are paid minimum wage. They are working as many as three jobs and still have to rely on assistance to pay the rent and put food on the table. Her co-workers want desperately to get off assistance, but their wages are no where near enough to live on. No one who is working full time should have to depend on social services or sometimes even homeless shelters to survive. As coordinator of the New Haven Peoples Center I work with many young people who are holding minimum wage jobs and cannot afford an apartment of their own. They either couch surf staying with friends, or are forced to live with their parents or other family members in order to get by. We were proud when Connecticut was the first to heed President Obarna's call to raise the minimum wage to $I 0 several years ago. Even at that time $I 0 could not be considered a living wage. Today, it is certainly inadequate. The 'Living Wage Calculator" for New Haven shows that one adult and one child would require a minimum wage of $26 to meet housing, food, child care and costs in our county. Raising the minimum wage to $I 5 an hour is necessary and sensible from very viewpoint. It will give workers more adequate compensation for their labor. It will remove costs from social services and therefore relieve the state budget. It will require employers to pay a living wage and contribute to our state economy instead of leeching our economy by forcing their workers onto public assistance. Raising the minimum wage to $I 5 an hour will be a big step toward reversing the fastest growing income inequality in the nation. It is a step that the state of Oregon just took and that many cities are taking to make the minimum wage a living wage. We cannot afford to delay. In fact, to reflect the urgency, we ask the committee to consider quickening the pace of the increase. c 000818 0 Pagel New Haven Peoples Center I Joelle Fishman The Peoples Center also urges support for minimum guaranteed hours for building service workers so they too can afford to live. As well, we favor Fair Chance Employment. A young person who gets arrested for a minor crime, and we know this is unfairly and disproportionately African American and Latino youth, has no future in front of him or her. That young person is tagged forever with little chance of getting a job. How can anyone survive under these conditions? Requiring that employers revise their hiring practices is good for everyone. It is good for those who have done their time and want to start anew. It is good for our economy. We cannot afford to continue discriminatory policies that waste the talents and contributions of an entire generation. In the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. "our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality." The times require bold action to move us on this path. c c