Request Statement

      We the Employees and Potential Employees of your companies request the following practice to be stopped asap and the following solution to be implemented in its place.  It is a practice that causes undue harm to both the company and the employees.  It limits talent pools that could be utilized and places our companies in positions of weakness rather than strength.  It is the practice of maintaining a "No Hire" or "Not Re-Hireable" list of previous employees. 

Harm Defined

      As a general practice it is thought to protect the company from undue liability by potential employees that may cause it harm.  But what is the definition of "Harm".  In a reasonable, Human Centric company, "Harm" would be defined as major physical or financial damage caused by an individual or their actions.  For example, violent outburst such as punching a fellow employee or perhaps throwing one's desk would be such a physical reason.  Embezzlement or causing a direct negative impact on earnings due to direct action, would be examples of financial "Harm".  To any reasonable person these would be understandable reasons for not getting hired to specific roles or even for not being considered for them.  However, there are cases where a person causing such "Harms" is still hired on to companies for roles where they may be in a position to again make the same behavioral choice. 

     As we've defined "Harm" to include majorly impacting actions, let's take a look at what some companies use No-Hire lists for beyond that and why they should go away.  What further harm is done by maintaining these lists and how we go about working without them.   

 To Use or Not to Use "No-Hire" Lists

     In general a list to protect your company and your employees from undue harm makes sense. However, the reasons people can be placed on the list may not.  With the definition of "Harm" above most people would not be put on such a list for say, insubordination to a specific manager, performance based issues or even petty personal grudges.  But in reality they do.  As a practice some managers at companies feel it's their duty to keep out "dangerous" employees.  Normally said employee isn't dangerous to the company, but rather "dangerous" to the manager in question.  Which should be a red-flag against the manager, but normally puts the employee in a position of limited employment options, which we will outline below.  Placing someone on a "No-Hire" list at your company for any reason other than violence or theft is an indication of your inability to manage people.  Not the person's inability to be safe and productive in your environment.  Further, it unduly limits your available talent pool opening up opportunity for your competition.

 Conversion from "No-Hire" to Blacklist

     When you document something or write it down it has a greater chance of being accessed by people who shouldn't have access to it.  In some cases this can lead to leaked corporate secrets, litigation or limitation of an person's right to work.  Think about that set of words for a minute, "A Person's Right to Work".  That means regardless of your warm fuzzy, I can drink a beer with this person, personal views, that person has a right to a job, has a right to be considered on their abilities and potential contributions, not based on a potentially Biased review by a singular entity.  Here's where that becomes a real problem, what happens when that information gets out.  When your potentially biased decision leaks beyond the safety of your walls and impacts that person's ability to get other employment?  We call that a Blacklist. 

     There's a major difference between a "No-Hire" list and a Blacklist.  The "No-Hire" list generally stays within the company proper.  A Blacklist is shared somehow with other companies.  These companies then review the list and for any number of reasons, agree not to hire people from said list.  Which you may be thinking, "Well our No-Hire list won't leak", but they do.  In some cases these lists are managed by third parties which by the nature of definition of Blacklists, makes them Blacklists.  Once you've documented whom you wouldn't hire, there's always potential for others to obtain and use that information.  Whether it's against you or the employee.  Another possibility is that your people leak the information to people they know at other companies.  It is very common for people at Company A to call people they know at Company B, where a potential employee may have worked.  Obtaining what is known as a backdoor reference.  If they are able to see you've documented the potential employee in question "No-Hire" then they can provide that info to their "friend" at the other company.  This action alone causes your "No-Hire" list to become a Blacklist.  Actively limiting someone's ability to obtain gainful employment, directly or indirectly, is Inhumane, but sadly not that illegal.

      In an article I wrote, I looked at some of the laws around Blacklists and they are surprisingly light.  Even in a highly Employee Centric state like Washington, once proven, it is punishable by a $1,000 fine and/or 30 days in jail.  There are no Federal protections I could find.  With such light punishments, it's no wonder companies willingly, but possibly unknowingly, participate in such activities.

 Summation of Issue and Consequences

     As you can see, we've defined "Harm" to the company as violence and theft.  Both major issues.  We've defined the impact your "No-Hire" potential Blacklists can have on both your company, self-limitation of available candidate pool, opening potential liabilities, and the person in question, lack of employment opportunities.

The Solution: Perspective Reviews

     Instead of a "No-Hire" list, which can cause both the company and individual undue harm, we request that companies standardize the practice of a "Hiring Consideration List".  The first thing people are going to say, is that it is another list and will become the same as a "No-Hire" list.  It's always possible, which is why we ask you implement it in the following manner:

     First, this list isn't really a list, but rather a perspective report.  It is one that will be completed on all employees managers included.  As it will be completed on all employees, there will be no individuals singled out in this report.

     Second, nowhere within the Perspective Review will it state, "Not Re-hirable" unless accompanied by a police report, court documents or other evidence of violence or theft.  Instead, it will be required for the manager to clearly define any conflict situations that may have arisen and the resulting outcomes including termination of employment.  Further, managers are required to provide evidence.  Lack of evidence should be viewed as personally vengeful by the manager and overlooked in future consideration of hiring said potential employee.

     Third, any manager within your company can make the decision to re-hire.  There are many instances where managerial conflict is the reason for termination.  It's always possible that working under a different manager, with a different style will yield incredible results with an employee.  There is no one style fits all management.  However, not all managers are style adaptable.  That's why some people perform well on one team at a company and not well on another.  But should that be a reason that keeps you from potentially great talent?  Any reasonable company wanting to get a head would shout, "NO!"  And so should you. 

For the Company Signing the Petition

     It is a reasonable and human company that signs this petition today.  It is a company that agrees to abolish the "No-Hire" list and replace it with a more comprehensive Managerial Review as outlined above.  The Company agrees to limit employment with them only on the basis of safety, violence or theft issues.  Further, the company understands that by doing this, they will open their candidate pool, find better managers and styles, be more diverse as a whole and operate in a more Human manner.

For the Employee/Potential Employee Signing the Petition

     It is anyone and everyone that should sign this petition.  It provides a fair and normalized operation to the hiring/termination process.  Removing a unjust and unfair practice that has proven to limit social economic mobility.  It is a reasonable request to make of our employers, current and future.  It is also an agreement between us all, to not use the previous employment information we may have access to, to limit the employment of others.

      I look forward to a day when a bad experience or bad management no longer limits the abilities of other to find gainful employment.  I hope you do too, thank you for your support!