Is There No End To This Nonsense? Apparently Not.

I really hadn't planned to beat this horse to death, but it just won't die. Here's another in a recent series of baffling obama administration regulatory rulings. (H/T for this one to Curmudgeonly & Skeptical .)

U.S. Puts Limits On Employee Background Checks To Protect Minorities

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's updated policy on criminal background checks is part of an effort to rein in practices that can limit job opportunities for minorities that have higher arrest and conviction rates than whites.

"The ability of African-Americans and Hispanics to gain employment after prison is one of the paramount civil justice issues of our time," said Stuart Ishimaru, one of three Democrats on the five-member commission.

But some employers say the new policy -- approved in a 4-1 vote -- could make it more cumbersome and expensive to conduct background checks. Companies see the checks as a way to keep workers and customers safe, weed out unsavory workers and prevent negligent hiring claims.

The new standard urges employers to give applicants a chance to explain a report of past criminal misconduct before they are rejected outright. An applicant might say the report is inaccurate or point out that the conviction was expunged. It may be completely unrelated to the job, or an ex-con may show he's been fully rehabilitated.

Sounds reasonable, right? But the government always finds a way to screw things up. For example:

The EEOC also recommends that employers stop asking about past convictions on job applications...

And the first time an employee with an uninvestigated violent criminal record attacks another employee or customer, guess who's going to get sued? Not the EEOC, that's for damn sure.

The guidelines are the first attempt since 1990 to update the commission's policy on criminal background checks. Current standards already require employers to consider the age and seriousness of an applicant's conviction and its relationship to specific job openings. And it is generally illegal for employers to have a blanket ban based on criminal history.

So why fix what ain't broken?

EEOC commissioners said the growing practice (of using online databases for background checks) has grave implications for blacks and Hispanics, who are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system and face high rates of unemployment.

"You thought prison was hard, try finding a decent job when you get out," EEOC member Chai Feldblum said. She cited Justice Department statistics showing that 1 in 3 black men and 1 in 6 Hispanic men will be incarcerated during their lifetime. That compares with 1 in 17 white men who will serve time.

Ah, I'm beginning to see the light. And speaking of the government making a mess of things, consider this:

Nurses, teachers and day care providers, for example, are required by some state laws to have background checks. The new guidelines say a company is not shielded from liability under federal discrimination laws just because it complies with state laws.

Comply with state laws, get screwed by the feds. Comply with federal law, get screwed by the state. It's a no-win situation.