Rebuilding Lives. Strengthening Communities.

Review occupational licensing restrictions on formerly incarcerated
individuals that do not promote tangible public safety goals.
Recommendation
Issue
Solution
MAYORAL POLICY CAUCUS ON PRISONER REENTRY
22
Many state statutes restrict licensure or re-licensure in jobs
based on an individual’s criminal background. In Illinois, of
the 98 state statutes regarding professional licensing, 57
contain restrictions for applicants with a criminal history,
impacting over 65 professions and occupations. 47 Of those
professions, 22 statutes automatically bar employment for
individuals convicted of crimes of dishonesty or directly
related to the practice of the profession involved. 48
These restrictions may, in certain cases, reflect reasonable
safety concerns. Obviously, society would not want a child
molester to drive a school bus or a former drug addict to
work in a pharmacy. But no rationale exists to prevent
someone who stole a car from cutting hair. While these
laws were passed to increase public safety, they often have
the exact opposite effect. According to the Legal Action
Center in New York, New York, these laws may actually
“endanger public safety by excluding people with criminal
records from mainstream society and opportunities to lead
law-abiding lives.” 49
In some cases, prisoners participate in vocational training
through the Illinois Department of Corrections (IDOC) and
then become qualified for professions that they cannot practice
once released due to licensing restrictions. Stateville,
Menard, and Vienna Correctional Centers all offer vocational
training in barbering, for example, but Illinois state law
prohibits individuals with a felony record from obtaining a
barber’s license. “The situation might be best described as a
‘Catch-22,’” says Glenn Martin, Co-Director of the National
HIRE Network in New York, New York. “The very fact that
someone has been in prison causes him to fall short of the
state licensure standards for the same trade that the state
itself trained him for in prison.” 50
If the goal is to move individuals from criminal activity to
legal employment, the proliferation of licensing restrictions
impedes that goal because it effectively diminishes the number
of legitimate jobs that a formerly incarcerated person
could pursue upon release. These restrictions, then, more
often extend punishment than serve society.
Through recently passed legislation, the State now offers
two certificates—Certificates of Relief from Disabilities
(CRD) and Certificates of Good Conduct (CGC)—which
attempt to reduce the number of barriers prohibiting
individuals with criminal backgrounds from obtaining their
professional license. 51 The major differences between the
certificates relate to the main purposes underlying the
certificates, who is eligible, and how one applies. 52
In effect, both types of certificates remove bars that would
result automatically from a non-violent felony conviction.
Basically, the certificates create a presumption of rehabilitation
in the licensure process, and licensing bodies must
consider them when reviewing the license application of an
individual with a criminal record. 53
“Change needs to happen. More than
52 percent of former prisoners go back to
prison because they have no other thing
that they know. They can’t get jobs.
So they go back to what they do know
[criminal activity]. I don’t ask about
criminal backgrounds. The former
prisoners who work for me appreciate
the jobs that they are given. This provides
a foundation where they go on with their
lives and make a better life for themselves.
They are trying to make a transformation.
We [as employers] need to give them
that credit and not slap them down.”
James Andrews
President and Owner, Andrews Paper Company