Re:Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case
by kenbaylor on Saturday April 14, 2018 @02:43AM
(#16836218)
San Francisco was one of the few places in the world to try to address that with it's 'ban the box ' initiative. Crimes must be relevant to disqualify a candidate. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/...
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case
by wutbrodo on Saturday April 14, 2018 @04:03AM
(#16836415)
As I recall, the effect of this was reduced hiring of black and Latino candidates, which employers used as a proxy for criminality.
Re:Google loses ‘right to be forgotten’ case
by desas on Saturday April 14, 2018 @04:06AM
(#16836430)
It's the law in the UK (and presumably similar in the rest of the EU).
Every conviction must be declared for a small number of years if asked. After that period it must only be declared if you're applying for a sensitive job (e.g. school teacher) and it resulted in a custodial sentence.