Second chance hiring: exploring consumer perception of employers who hire individuals with criminal histories

Abstract

PurposeMany employers express concern over consumer response to employees with criminal histories. However, consumers' responses may be less negative than employers assume. The authors examine consumers' response to organizations that hire employees with criminal histories.Design/methodology/approachThe authors surveyed participants randomly assigned to one of two conditions: purchasing services from an employer that hires individuals with criminal histories or from an employer whose inclination to hire individuals with criminal histories is unknown. The authors considered four service providers, among which the length of customers' time and involvement with employees varies: a grocery store, restaurant, auto-repair shop, and hotel.FindingsParticipants were no more or less likely to patronize the restaurant, the repair shop, or the grocery store that hired individuals with criminal histories, and no more or less likely to alter their willingness to pay for these services. Consumers were less likely to stay at a hotel that hired employees with criminal histories, but this difference was mitigated when customers were provided with an explanation of the benefits of hiring individuals with criminal histories.Research limitations/implicationsThis study highlights the need for further research on perceptions that limit hiring of individuals with criminal histories and other similarly marginalized populations.Practical implicationsThis research addresses a common justification – consumer concern – for not hiring individuals with criminal histories.Social implicationsIncreased employment improves individual outcomes, such as access to stable housing and food, as well as larger outcomes, such as public safety.Originality/valueThis paper highlights a population often marginalized in the hiring process. The findings challenge a common justification for not hiring individuals with criminal histories.