a

441

BD 121 980

AufPonTITLE

INSTITUTIONSPONS AGENCY

PUB DATECONTRACTNOTE

AVAILABLE PROH

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

1., 4'.DOCUAIEHT 8suaz

c8 006 /35

Hun* Janes U.NationalClearinghouse on Offender EmploymentRestrictions. Final deport -

American Bar AshocAation, Washington, D.C.Manpower Administration 0 ) Washington* D.C.Office of-Research and Devel teen-t-:

1 Feb 76 -DLMA-82-11-12-0233p.4 Not available in hard copy due to marginalreproducibilityNational Technical Information Service* Springfield,Virginia 22161 (No- price) given)

HE-$0.83 Plus Postage. pc Not Available from EMS..Certification; Correctional RehabilitatIbn;*Criminals!*Discriminatory Legislation; Employment;Employmdnt Practiceiv*Employment.Problems; *EqualOpportunities (Jobs); /nformation.Disiemination;Labor Legislattl0;-'Frogram Descriptions;. Program,Development; Rehabilitation Programs; *State Action;State Legislation

IDENTIFIERS *Exoffenders

AABSTRACT g

. The report describes a proIect, the National I

Clearinghouse on Tehder Employment Restrictions, designed todevelop a program 'help inthe removal,oflormal'barriers to jobopportunities for ex-offenders. The report desTibes the projedttseffort in gathering research and de4elopment slaterials relatin tolicensing restrictions other employment Problems of ei7offen

` packaging and distributing such iaaberials to bar associations andother groups; conducting worksho*psepanels* and conferenced; andproviding consultative services ifi the removal of such -restrictions.Thd'report also summarizes State efforts tp alleviate ex-offenderemployment restricti9ns inir 21 States where restrictions have -beenremoved and in the 4 State and AA District of Columbia wherelegislative action is pending or has been defeated. The .reportfinally examines the general effect of'remedial legislation in,the 21States where its in effect and discusses specific effects of such'legislation in COnnecticato New Jersey, Arkansas, -Illinois, Colorado,'Washington and Hawaii. (JR) 4-

I - Nzi

.

******* ***************************************************************4 Documents acquired by ERIC include many informal unpublished ** materials not available from other dourtes. ERIC makes every effort ** to obtain the best copy available. Neverthelss* items of marginal ** rep;oducibility are often encountered and this affects the qualry ** of the microfiche'and hardcopy reproductions ERIC makes availab e *

** via the ERIC Doctiment Reproduction Service (EDRS),,,EDRS is not ** responsible for the quality of the original document. Reproductions ** supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original. .************************************************************************

,41.

FINAL RI

FEB 9 6 tcm

NATIONAL CLEARING vow. Ct4

OFFENDER X:mnovriLivr rummer Kos

woos

COL con t No.82-11-72-02

u s oupagnmeas 0Suilat,ts.DuCATtow *NIMA AA 0

itATOustaottocotasTTIoNituT9 OP

'AK 00(AiNieul Has DUN Rem).putau Ann tf Al as cCi ve D FROMLINtifiN.Geali$0,0,14 ONassoori:Avmseroinoopt. ORIGIN.

sTaTeo 00 NOT Necessanfty ;tomeSemi 06, Kum PIA/0014111. 401/11Ulte OFeoucalsood POSITION Oa POL tCv

O

Th I st re.r.ilr. I. !Tot - ! rt. r ;0$ 1 tl tin.1 t.'4,'L I ti;T.ir II 1"f t t,14,,t I :4.0r.101.1,1 nrynn n n t r.n 14? -I . r' "41' t'cln I ritstorr en.ftert.in!!'I'itItitIi nr lgoit1 ri 1. Is tv.ii 1.1:: r ihvertwr ht,rr.°rift. r:ti If, Are onronr1 I to expri,:.:: r I gern (11 t.crvoly I' rI, +10 t'!" rlt.l. It I Ift:11"i 10(1. tip (Prri 4'

11.10$1 iry tr t ratty{, t I' it.or. 41,)trArt firI^ T. for Ii (1.trt t.!. ,1 thin re! tr

BEV Int Mt

4.

2

a '

Itt

.

9wEEr '

11111110cRAPHICCI.A141716074414. 8Z -1 1-7)--.02.,5 1,.. ,

-44.

1 '.1 -1-.4.I. .. 1 " " "1.

Final Peport: Nati en'al CI ea ri nghouse on Offender't.mr$1 oyment Restrict! ens

----'-.

7. Avil,:.,(s 1

Jjnes V. Hunt.6:64. 10.1 A 11.:.

Amer-I-can ear Assoc lati on1800 N. St. N. 1-1,,

Wash_ Inept-I, D. e. -0036

12. 1441111 Idt I It r I.., II sr.,. ,n.l 4,I,14.

U.S. Department of LaborManpower AdminintrationOffice of Reoenrch end Dgyelopment601 D Street, DX., Waabington42.C. 20213

1$. ".upplemt ns.oty Non,

16. A11111

.

;

2 / 1

II. 1'. rl ..r....., 4, I..., It. iH

10: ksp. 1 11 .41. thin N...

1 1...1 ,.all I .611 Fr.

1)!. - I I - --1+1

.1). , t. 1.,$1 A 1414,1,1...16.1

Flnal:1;11/14.12/31/74S4.

A n nal report del.a, 1 .operati onal strategy of the elearirehouse. ineffecti ng i0.5 fp a 1 of removi ilg lest sl ti ve- and regulatory barriersIrlployoeit. for ex offenders. Netts the 21' fitatea 1n which effeati ve c LI onwoo achIivect arta thr, La L ur, of pro great). au of 12/31/75 in'. the remainingstater.

17, key V t.11 .srui 1101 15014 m Ari.ol$* 17o O. 014 "C

I

U

Correct ion,,, Employment Po I is Dia a ri on, Occepati °Fla 1 Li /1/9)S in);Offender Fintpi0jrnerI Restri eti Lawn.

176. kle I if f )rj eat I I 6 60.

lit INA II I 1. 1.1/t

18',A"01,11"v "7k" Dintrilnition It iunllmi d.Available from ilntionnl Techntrn 1 InformationService, Springfield, Va . 27151.

Ion.. .4 1 III 1.1 V

19. M1 . 114$ < 14 Ili.-1.,

-$1 1 1-'11 II

71 1 I-1')7 1

.1111N FM1101.141 III 1..t.,r,

0

DO NOT DUPLICATE THIS falt nF PAOK.IN t'sVING vOTtES OF ?MAL REPORT

INSTRUCTIONS' FOR COMPLETING FORM NTIS35 (10 70) q P it.a s.he * ( OsZA 11

..touti.st SthhIsitliS 4. tlt It I/III./ 1//./11.1 P4 11..fIN IPti fo. orfor die redetal Government,(storlelines to 1P0-180 ('00).

I. Repo.* Numb. Give each report n unIrple niplonnumerie desianntion consisting of theletters 1/1MA followed by the contract or gcakt number and sn`additional numberindicating, the first, second, etc., report under the project, e.g.,DLMA 812.

1.eae 1,1

2)a.

70-18.1.

3. flee *priest' o Age ea aeon Number. If t r. -1 1.4 1 1 I, fp I ..ft IP $1 out

4- ,stle and Sub,. *le. 1 it .t...0.1 . I. v I ! I i 6.- I 664. Ir i ho ,rlai d prorol-ere, iv t i. a .0 st I1. Itl II III tfIA141 011 IO root is prelkItC1 in IT{Ofe*itt ear 64014M tr 111111 11}. 111 1 P. ...I, Pn I .1. I.1 *e ttIt It 11 oh. 1... 'lig a.flumr.

s Une the date of 1u:1a:tor delivery to the Department of Labor), not thedate of, approval of the draft or the termination, of the contract or grant'period.

6. Porloemog Orgentaoron Cod,. I .4

7. Author( a). 1..t n o. 111 h." 11 1 .. I II. 114. 1 I 1 . 11.1111. Altd.sus...n pi it slihrecteom re.16..mone I Ift

O. -Performing Orgeroseron Rrpocc Nv...6or

9. Porforron9 Crigtocohon Nome read *hr..An 11,40'1.10114 i, , t 41.14, 111,044 t.

as 030170ft-1.

.1 . or, 1111. 111,11

I al 111Is1

U1 010 tlt ....... 1. I

1, 18 4.18 1.I f.rs ...It I CI t44 n66.46 444.4 4%4161..0, i"1 41,1 11 "II a II.. / 14 t .1" t .t III., I !JIM. Ili 444 xr. 44 b

10.. Pcblecc Tod. Write tfit N.unlm'a I.PnVe blAnk

11..COntrOCt'SqflOt Nonehet. In 111 oplr P 1.. p. III/ "1. , "!, 1... I. If 1. rt u I

12 4pon toeing "tangy Nome and Achfreaa. Already filled inprefaced by IJIs.

13. Type of Report and Period Co.parcl. 1. 1. .. 1.110 .118%. III 111.11. sl1s ..10. t ;1

Soonaorg Agency Cody. I ..s.

13 Sortmlementor'y Nntea I t r t 10 1..1 I VIII. I at Is 1110p 11 h I . I 'tt III 8 el. pi...". t ut11 .

VI., I flit i 11 p 011It Pp. 1. . 1 h I. I 01 ,14. t

16 A1)Iteng1 fin 1.118 / +'.al Vhetel I. 1,1 A t..I It 1 I, 1..h. othe- Poo tmo 1 Olt 14 r4444,

N 41. 4 16.. I ...It I M. fti tI I, .1 1.11, t ill If' s 1,1.11 It t

17. 111 Words and 100 hc.cfq. 3eirct Irbm nttached Key Words-Descriptorsthose terms thnt identify tin; cnbJectv inverAirnted nod the, vetbods used Choo ecarerully. for these toms hK UCPd an Indft,entrIes roe retrievnt or r

tb) IrlentF4er 444.6104tr. Embq Eiarrallrr, Vet nntiler , code nnmcs, etc., or herrelevant termr not in 110 or %try word' .

COSATIneld ;111PC 1r4trl P1.1.4.1101Prl entepories. F. ter only the.lade nuntbells . J. to .1,.f; I monte fielf3 and croup(s).

18 0, .0t.1, Ito] 1 col roller 7virrf.r c.r eel, 1 ctf: 1 r nng r\nd give nddrer of,t-source, tocrtIter wf th pr r ( I I' tiny).

19 a, 20. Secortv

21 1.1.onbra 61 Pnrya .1

1. ,f II22 PCr II IV,. l fs I

I I .1 I

-MY

p .1 I I I 1... II

....... ' I s 11.1... 1.11,1111..n

p VI.. 01 I ..1 ,.1 t

PREVACE

1

V

ale National Clearinghouse on Offender Employment Restrictions,a project sponsored jointly by die American Bar Association's

Commissionon Correctional Facilities and Services, and Section of CriminalJustice, was funded by a contract.with the'Unitod States DepartMentiftabor's Employment and Trainin4

Miitinistration, through its office ofResearch and Development.

As stated in more detail in this report, the Clearinghouse pro-.

ject was to gather and disseminateinformation on the removal.of

3roaarbitrary restrictions on job opportUnitied for ex-offendorsr Theserestrictiohs, from a corrections perspective,

hinders attempts to

rehabilitate offenders and, from a manpower standpoint, impedes

efforts to develop offenders as a manpower resource by closing off

many lawful avenuesof,,employrrt for :them.

The project, which becalm operational on December 1, 1971, wasinitially blinded for

'8-month

period. Since then, it'has been.

extended twice through modification of the contract between the Depart-ment of Labor and the American Bar Association by their mutual con-.

sent.

This final cpportsummarizes the work of 06 pro-

jest from its inception to its termination.

r

I

r

- 2

This report was prepared, and the project funded, under Contractt:s

No. 82-11-72-02 with the Employment and Training AdminisLratim, U.S.

Department of Lab0r under authority of the Manpower Development and

Training Act. 'Researchers undertaing suchprojects are encouraged to

express their own judgmdnts freely. Interpretations or viewpointi..stated

in this decumegt do not necessarily represent the official position or

policy of the.Department of LahOr.

La

a

James W. Hunt, Project DirectorNationaliClearinghouse onOffender Employment RestrictionsAmerican Bar Asscciation

0"1800 M St., N.W.Washington, D.C. 20036202/331-2250

1E1

6

I .

menicr

The objective of the National Cloaringhouse on Offender Employ-,

scent Restrictions was to develop a program to help, in the removal of feata

barrie2s to job o tunnies for ex-offenders. Specifically as

stated in its fund contract, the project was to : (1) utilise

existin4 information by gathering research and development material

prepared by the Department of Labor and other agencies relating to

the-employment problems of offenders, package it, and distribute it

- 3 4.

fJ

JI

to bar associations and other groups; (2) conduct /a search of state

laws restricting the occupational licensing of former offenders;

(3) conduct worksh00, conferences and panels on an "as invited"

basis dealing with offender job restrictions; and (4) provide cen-

sultatims, services to assist in the removal of such restrictions.

IMPLEMENTATION AND UTLIZATION

A. Gathering makerial

The first activity of the-Clearinghouse, initially staffed with

three consultants and an administrative assistant,* was to gather

*James W. Hunt has servtd as director and Charlotte A. Charapp has been

the administrative assistant for the projeri since its inception. James

E. Bowers was assistant project director from Janubry 1972 to September

1973, and Neal Miller was assistant director from February 1972 to July

1973. Since October 1973, Donald D. Cooke has served as assistant director

and as editor of the p/oject newsletter, "The Offender Emplcyment Review."

Fran June to August 4972, Michael G. Charapp served as research assisiant,

and from May to September 1974, Elizabeth M. Smiling was. research assistant

and liaison to ccumunity organizations for the project.

existing material relating to the employment difficulitics of former

offenders and restrictions.on their job opportunities for use in

providing assistance to efforts to alleviate these problems. This

material included such DOL reports, studies and programs as Progpssor

Herbert Miller's The Closed Door: The Effect of a Criminal Record

on pmployment with State and Loci]. Public Agencies," Dr. George

Ponall's "Employment Problems of Released Prisoners," publications

by the Experimental Manpower Laboratory, for Corrections, and the Federal

wing program.

Raviewwasalso made of projects sponsored by the Law Enforcement

Assistance Administratica,the various task force reports by the

President's Commission on Law Enforcement, and related publications by

such organizations ,as the National Council on Crime and Delinquency

and the American Correctional,Association. Law review articles.dealing

with employment and civil disabilities of former offenders provided

another sours of information. 4

In addition to this material relating to the employment probleas

of offenders, procedures on how to alleviate offender employment re-. .

strictions were also gathered. This included both actual and model .

legislative procedures.

Practical information on how to remove restrictions was provided'

.to the project by such people as Paul Skelton, `director of Florida's

Department of Administrative Services, woo was instrumental in4Florida's

adoption in 1971 of a trade licenting and public employMent law affording a

former offender fair consideration for a license or governmental job,

and by Franklin ,G. Allen, who was chairman of thg ccthinittee of the

karyland Bar Association dealing with the alleviation, of offender job

restrictions in that state.

8

A special advisory committee to prbvide advice and guidance to

the project .eras also established representing such diverse back-:

grounds as buSiness, labor,:government, manpower and corrections. They Were:

Cbmmittee Chairman, Carl M. Loeb, Jr., New Yak, New York, past

president, National Council on Crime and Delinquency; James V.

A..nnett, BethesJa, Maryland, former'di3Otor of the U:S. Bureau of

Prisons; Brian D. FOrrow, NeurYgrk, New York, Generale Counsel, Allied

Chemical Corporation; William Leeks., Columbia, Svuth Carolina,

Director of the South arolina Department of CorrectiOns; Herbert

S. Miller, Washington, D.C., Deputy Director, Institute of Criminal

Law and Procedure, Georgetown University Law Center; Leonard Nord,

Olympia, Washington, Director, Washington State Department of Personn ;

Nick Pappas, Washington, D.C., Manpower Specialist, Law Enforcement

Assistance Administration; Boyd E. Payton, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,

Deputy Regional Director for Manpower, U.S. Department of Labor Region

III; Leo Perlis, Washington, D.C., Director of Community Services,

AFL-C10; Howard Rosen, Washington, D.C., Director, Office of'Iesearch

;

and Development, Manpower Adainistration, U.S. Department of Labor;

John Armore, Washington, D.C., Director EX-Offender Program, National

Alliance of Businesimen.

0

B. Disscsninating material

Gathering and reviewing material was a necessary firsts step for

the Clearinghouse, but, more importantly, a strategy to remove offender

J6b=resrictions also had to be devised. To achieve ntedUnumfesults,

informatiln bad to be dissem4Qtbd.to a broad spectrum of public

ccJ

a

minded persons, and 'groups who could act as "change agents" to alleviate

barriers to employment on the state and local level. Consultative-* 4

, ...'servrr49s and workshops were bio ways" of achieving this result; hokiever,

Oho ptoject Lacked the re uiCes to provide consultation on anthe re

50-state kas` and workshops would. reach only a limitd'g

nunber of persons. I$ was therefore decided that information would be

dieseminated on a broad basis in the form of how-to-do-it manuals,

-rattier than through lengthy research reports, with follow-upassistance

through consultative services and workshops provided by the project

4,-on a selective basis. , O 4

I

This strategy led to the following publications by the pFpect:*

Handbook.- Th4projebt began receiving inquiries and requests

for informa ion soon ailer it began operation on how to alleviate. .

offender employment restrictions. An initial task, early in 1972,

was therefore to =wile one re rence work "a'sumroary of the than

known ways of rdmwing restrictions. This resulted in 'the publica-

tion of "Penoving offender rmkoymen tRestr,ictions," a handbook. which ,

!.summarized the various techniques for removing restrictions together

.0Appendix "A" lists the proji.,ct's publications and the persons andgroups who rmunsted 10 or :Tore copies. Part II of this report. con-

, tains copies of these publications:

with an appendix containing the actual text of laws that.peesons aryl

groups could refer to as guides in drafting remedial legislation.

The major topics covered were remedial laws and court decisions r-

lating'to public employment, trade licensing, restoration of rights,

and the expungement and sealing of arrest and conviction records.1,

. A second edition of the handbook was published in 19.33,"Prer-

fleeting new developments. Because of the great number of requests--

for as many as 300 at a timethe handbcxkmas also made available

in a summary version. without the appendices containing the text of

various remediaflaws so as to facilitate greater distribution.

77. 777. .7-7.-77. 7

.7 -7. - 7 . . r

. . 7 . 77-

". Newsletter. TO report on the employment problems of offendeis

and provide up-to -date information on efforts to alleviate these

probiems through nenpo.4er prograMs and the removal of joleftestrictions,

the, project developed a newsletter, "Offender Maployment Review."

The thirteen issues of the newsletter included special feature stories.

on Mlles "fl=loyment Problems of Released Prisoners," Miller's

"The Closed Door," the Experimental Manpower Laboratory fir Corrections,

the.DCIL6*ding program, the exTfplary rehabilitation certificate pro-

gramgra £or ex- servicemen,, and court decisions relatint to employment ?ights-

of former offenders.. other subjects Included state legislative activity,

guidelines forarivLte enployers to consider in hiringtx-offenders

and,,refiectingthe growing interest of rvddcrs, the work

of other groups relating to job development and .placement programs for

former offenders.

.1 lm

A

Booklet. A.booklet iuglimrizing Miller's "The Closed DoOr" was prbpdgbd.

for general diptribution. Entitled "Expanding Governmdat Job Oppor-

tiinities for Former Offertdcrs,; this publication included a model public

employment law drafted by ft-ofesSol :ti.1161r. guidelines.that.a govern-

ment agency% .could folly In detennining the anployability of former

04.

on the occupational licensing of formee'offenders was conducted under

offenders, and an executive order relating to the public employment

of ex-Offenders.

. License study. A study Of state laws containing restrictions ,

a subcontract fob the Clea irphouse byF the Georgetown University Law

. Center InstitUte of CriOinalfaW.and Procedime. The_sulth of this

study were reported in the projeCtlpOkr."Laws, Licenses and the

Offerder's_Right to Work," which, in an appendixvincluded examples

of actual and nodel.laws that reform grcups,coug (and many did) use

models for drafting remedial laws ift their states:A

. Legislative guide. As'the project matured, it became familiar

with = Various strategies that had been employed to bring about

'97egislati e. change. In prder to help others who planned similar legis-,

lative action the project prepared a booklet entitled,' "Guide to

iegislativeActiont A review 4.1yategies to remove offenaer job.

restrictions." ..

. Legal challenges. In addition to le4islativeactiom a number

of oport'aOtions fiave been brought challenging: the validiWof statutes4

thataEbitrarily locked a person with an arrest or ca-diction record but

of a job. In view of this develoment and the :icily inquiries About such

;litigation, the project prepared the moncyraph "ConStitutiOnal.

Challenges to EmployMent Oisibilkty Statutes' whictediscussed the various legal

arguments -that had been advanced.as grotinds fac striking dowp restrictiveI A

laws. 12,I.

.Volunteeraction. The project.has had great support from

public, private, religious and volunteer groups and been contacted-

by many others asking for information that could be handed dot in

'large.quantities or included in mailings to members. Tteight page

pamphlets were prepared by the project for this audience, the first

entitled "Whak You Can Do to Expand Job OpportUnities for Ex-Offenders";

and the other "An Opportunity for Involvement: What the Volunteer ,

Otgdnilat4n Can De to Aid the Ex-Offender."

. Manpower programs. In addition to infermationabout-ibb

restrictions, the prOject received many inquiries for information .

about manpower programs for offenders. In response to these requests,

the project distributed copies of pOL's booklet "Manpower Programs foi

Offeders," and prepared two pamphlets on this subject. The first,

"The Offender as a Manpower Pesource," summarized a report to DOL by

Roberta Rovner-Pieczcnik reviewing R and D'ffuricaAter projbcts in the

OggCtional field, the second Pamphlet,."Developing Jobs for

Parolees," discussed some of the .tectInigues used to help prospectivew 3

parolee's .find jobs .40 -their release,1 .-

Other significant articles dealing :with ex-offender employment

have also been made available by the project.' These included: Joseph

Cunningham's "Jobs for EX-Offenders", un article dealing with jab

development and placement,programs for offenders that was orioinally-.

printed in the Magazine Case and Comment; Dr. George Pownalls "Employ-,

ment Problems of Released Prisoners," an article that appeared in hanpowor.

Magazine; Dr. Charles Phillips' "A, Case Study: Development and Imple-. -.4

mentaticn of a Manpower Service Delivery to the Criminal Offender," a paper

presented to theIntergovernmental.Group on Social Science Policy;

Judge Donald Ikxotiitz' "Giving the Ex Offender a Break", a paper presenter'

L 13

;

G.

1m. 8a

A

O

.

. ,,,

en the project's b9half fo the Public Personnel Association; DO

publications the federal, bonding program andthe exemplary r ilita-

tion certificate for ex servicemen; AFL -CIO's pamphlet "71-le Man Who

t

rt

0

,./

**

14

I

1

9.

. ,

tr

7

AV

...".D.

1 0 W

4

Lived AgIn: Understanding ona liclping the Releor.ed Prisoner";

U.S. Chamber of Caiine.rce's boo/let, "Marshalling Citizen Priwar to

Modernize Corrections"; National Alliance of Businessmen's "Staying

Out ol Jail is ,No Chance f9 100,000 Americans Each Year"; and the

Civil Service Comnission's. p iJ hlet, "Nrplgymont Of the Rehabilitatal

Offender 4n the Federal Servic "

Th;project also rep red in depth newsletter on outstand-

ing offender manpower programs and 'ob delivery systems and responded

to. the many requests flowing from an public service televisiona

e.announcement concerning the job difficultief of former offenders.

(In regard to offender employment opportunities, the Clearing,-4 . .

1z1

house, to alake itsfariarization with the offender ja/delivery4

i

systqn, met

)and conferred with other national-cgani2ga/Ons invOlved

,k

in improving job opportunities for former offenderse.g. National

Alliance gf Busineismen, AFL-63's HuMan Pesources Development'In-, 4

stitute, Jaycees,.and ABA Young Lawyer? Section--on ways in which the.

4

efforts of national organizations could be coordinated tO effect a0

better delivery of manpower services to. offenders, as. well as conducting

on -site visits to many manpower.p7xams. Project staff also served

on the'advisory committee to the Model Inmate Employment Project, a

three-state Orogt:am sponsored 11,1th, American Correct',

. Mailing List. There was

Association.)

suitable mailing list available at

the beginning of the project, since its activities.spandedthe idgal,

manpower, governmental Id correctional cormunities. For the first

distribution of the newsletter, a mailing list of,approximatelyA00

names was develo ch included bar association$ involved in Correc-

tional reform, offender manpower programs, and'ttte names of other per-

sans and groups that were nuggested by vari rces as likely to be

interested in the work of the project; This mailing list for the riews-

,

P 149+Pr Met nna firriwn hn myrr 6.000 rrnmlmntinq inwycrs,

1>

correctional persannel, probation- and parole authorities, manpuwer

experts, academicians, inmates, (keg is laters , goverment officials

and private organizations. A

In addition to being a vehicle for,communicating information.

relating to offender employment matters, the newsletter also paid41

an important dividend: The "feedback"--letters and callsfrom readers

often fed to the idesitification of persons and groups, previously

own to the Clearinghouse,who could act as "Cliange agents" on the

state and local leVel. Through these contacts, the project was then

able to provide then with the information they needed to take/effective

action to alley/a:6 unwarrpted job restrictions.

This publications -program is outlined below to 'demonstrate

40

flowit was as intended to, implement the project's objeCtives. 'Column

A indicates the.informatio; that was.needed tot courage effective

action to alleviate offender employment probleMs; deiumn B indicates

tha project material that explained how remedial action could be takenf'

A B

Inforrja tiona I Need

What are employmentrestr is lions?

gab

vsa

Now can Restrictionsbe alleviated?

c.

I

16

IResource' Material Available

. Licensing Les trictions("Laws, Licenses andtAle Offender's Right toWork," project report)

Public employment restric-tiotis ("The Closed Door:The Effect of a Criminal Record'on Buployment with Stateand Local Lublin Agencies,"by Proiessor Herbert S.Ruler

. !Onploynentftoblems orReleased Prisoners" (rownalissreport to DOL)

. "Removing Offender EmloymentRestrictions" (Project handbook)

rt-4

What are states doing toremove job barriers andimplement offender man-power programs?

What information isavailable on offender '-

manpovier ptograms?' .

f 17

/. "Constilut Challentjes

to Civil Dit..thility

Slat utes" (Project

graph)

is Fedora 1 Bonding

PrOc)ram" rxOnphlet)

. "Wp.-mding rAwernmInt Job'Job Opporinni tips for DcOffenders," (Project t.cok-let)*

. "Giving the EX Offendora Meek" (Project pamphletby Judge Donald Horowitz)

. rEXemplary RehabilitationCertificate(Available fromDeL for ex servicemen)

. Issues 1 through 13 of"Offender rmployment Re-view," the project newsletter,reported on current develop-manta in the states relatingto offender manpower flattersand reMoving restrictions

. "The Offender as a ManpowerResource" (Project pamphletsummarizing R and D manpowerPrograms for offenders)

. "Manpower Programs forOffenders" (DOL pamp

"Employment of theRehabilitated Offender inthe FaderalService" (CivilService pamphlet)

. "Developing Jobs forParolees" (Project pamphlet)

. "A, Case Study: Developmantand Lmplamentation of a Man-power Service Delivery to theCriminal Offender in the U.S."(By Dr. Charles 1104.PhilAps)

. "Jobs for the Ex-Offender"(Reprint of article)

.4

What can organizations do?

- 32

Haw can orgy izations initiateremedial leg Litton in theirstates?

. "An Opportunity forInvolvement: Wha t the

Volunteer Organization-

Can Do to Aid the DcOf fender" (Projectpamphlet)

. "What You Can Do toExpand Job Opportunitiesfor IX Of ie.:dere

(Project 'pamphlet)

. "Marshalling Citizen Powerto Modernize *Corrections"

(Publication by.q.S. Chamberof Corrmexce)

. "Staying Out of ail isNo Game for 100,000 Ancricans.Each Year". .(Pamphlet byNational ALliance of Business-,men)

. "The Man Who Lived Again:

'UndersOnding and Helpingthe Released Prisoner"(Pamphlet by AFL-CIO)

. "Guide to Idegislative

Action: A Review ofStrategies to Remove Statutory'Restrictions on Offender JobOpportunities" (Project book-.let)

.

C. Other Activity

WUrkshops. At the outset of the project; it was ahticipated that

substantial time and resources would be devoted towardtspeei I focus

mork.thops and 'conferences. however, there has been limit interest

in suchprograms by potential participants. Fzun project experience,'

thetrost common requests for assistance- -and most effectivehave

came froma-one-on,one basis in contacts with key persons and groups,.

-1such as bar aesociationst the .Urbanieague, public defender offices,

/ Jaycees,' and legislators or their stafft. The project has also been

....frequently called upon to address meetings of public interest groups.

on

. . .

restrictive erraOymen pOctices and participate in .arias dealing

with offender' ernployment assistance programs.

Consultative services. Assistance to'Oersons and groups acting

to remove offender employment restrictions, as ,indicated, has most

often been in the form of providing them with handbooks and ether

necessary material, but the project has also offered to provide then

with =redirect assistance if that is desired. This help, when requested,

Olts varied fram state to state, and ranged from correspondence and tele-

phone conferences toftsite visits. In California, and Washington, for

example, the cpcnsors of remedihl legislation were familiar with the

'employment: restrictions problem and skilled in preparing the necessary

bills. In both states, however, the sponsors sought information from

the project in order to better prepare their legislation and to c

(6) .

reasons for the necessity for such action so that they could encourage,

other legislators to endorse their efforts.

Similarly, information was proVide4 by the projectoto the Maryland

Bar Association, which was instrumental in persUading the State's

Attorney General to issue a landmark advisory opihion concerning the

19

1

licensing of former of fenders.

e On the otherhand, the Cleuringhouhe was involved from the beginning4 ,

in providing .tochnical assistance in drafting a 'bill in Connecticut

to podify restrictions, on the licensing and public employment of '43

offenders in that state. It was, also successful in soliciting thq

support of the State's bar associatIgh for such legislation.

SLATE 11.4RIVIT; 70 ALLIVIATE

OFFINULRflimoymnaRESVRICTTONS

As a result of its activities and Eub4cations, the prolect was

instrumental in .the efforts in many-ofthe states that have removed

irepeiiirphts too the employMent o former offenders. Chart I below lists.

the 21 states that have removed restrictions; chart II lists those

states where action is pending.

States Where Statutory Restrictions on the-Emolcyment Of., Ex-Offenders haw keen &moved, or aairmative.executive

actions have Ay:en taxen

ARKANSAS(:: 1973, act removing ,all adverse references to licensingof former .felon in all state statutes, based on Clearinghouse modeloriginally developed for it by Georgetown University.

7v

CALIFORNIA -- 1972, act removing blanket'felony prohibitions in-licensing statutes but left 'good moral character'_ considerationsopen to adverse interpretation. 1974, bill passed pulling 'goodmoral character' and all similar noncriminal standards completelyout of all statutes and established tighter appeals procedures whena license is (1=itied. Clearinghouse consulted on the bill.

COLORADO -- 1973, act covering both public. employment and licensingbased on example bill contained in Clearinghouse license study.

opmaocricuT -- 1973, 'act covering public miplaprimt and licensing.Clearinghouse testified before cormittee and. worked with drafters.Act amehdc4 in 1974 to all0C.4 appeal throligh state human rights commission.Bill pending in 1975 to protect ex-offendeis in private employment.

FLORIDA -- 1971, nation't first bill covering both public employmentand licensin Amended in 1974 to remove,a cause_r_vqm.isring applicantto have civil ghts restored as a condition or receiving a-license.

HAWAII -- 1974, nation's first bill banning dthcrimination againntex-offenders in priwito (itvloymput. Atr,o ccvers public tvillolownt and

all licensing laws. Active Clearinghouse assistance and support. .

20ol4

ILLINOIS -- 1971, nation's second bill covered all licensed occupationiand trades.

INDIANA -- 1973, all licensing statutes. Clearinghouse license studyused as reference source.

11341k -; 1974, all licensing statutes. `License study used as reference.

191NSAS .1972, all licensing statutes.

MAINE 1972, governor's executive order prohibiting discriminationagainst ex-offenders in state employment. 1975, statute enacted ex-tending ban" on ex-offender discrimination to licenSing. Clearinghouseassistance.

MARYLAND -- 1972, attorney general's opinion ruling against mandatorylicensing restrictions. Clearinghouswoonsulted on action.

MICHIGAN -, 1975, all licensing statutes were covered by successfulbill. Clearinghouse provided assistance.

MINMESCTA -- 1974, licensing and employment. Clearinghouse technical

assistance.

MORTANA -- 1975, all licensing statutes. ClearintRuse and state barassistance and support.

NEW JERSEY.-- 1914/ public employment and licensing. Active Clearinghouseassistance.

4

NEVIMEK106 -- 1974, public employment and licensing.,nActive Clearinghouse0 assistance. *4.

OHIO -- 1973, governor's executive order covering of hiringand guidelines for dealing with "rehabilitated ex-offender."

OREGON -- 1973, all licensing statutes. Active Clearinghouse andstate bar support.

RHODE ISLAM -- 1970, governor's executive order prohibiting dis-crimination by the state.

1,01 UNGTCN -- 1973, public employment and licensing. Active Clearinghouseassistance.

_FEDERAL-1973 (DeceMber), former Prnsidemt Nixon isgupd Fsocutivp

Order 11755 replacing an earlier order (325A) which prohibited work

releasees from being employed'by a federal contractor: The Clearinghouse

was active in the efforts to have E.O.325A repealed (see egg. September

1973issue of the project newsletter).

21

4.

In addition to tilt, action in those st..tte:;, the Cleatinghouse was

actively inVolval in efforts in 1:entucky, No.. Hampshire, New York and

West Virgirtia where remedial bills successfully saved through the1i ..

legislaur s. Bowevbr, as noted in the following 'amitriry of pending

state acti, these bills were vetoal by the governors of these

states.. i . .. _

14._ Staims tIhnre lrelislative Change is Penflinct. hasbeen Vetoed, t,,,------173iTaid in Staeoriouse, or f,hows Proriu*e for therFuture,..,.

.

. (Th6 information for this surimary was compiled by the Clearing-,house through the contacts it developed in the states.)

,ALNSIN71 1975, bill covering private and public,..a_nployment, and,licensing. Got stuck in committed', has *prong supportfor nextsession.

it.

Al/GAMA 1975, bill was VonSider.cd for inclusion in correctionalpackage but was dropped in ,favor of getting other reforms pas;ed. 'Planned for next year.. .. ,i

ARIZGNA 1973, bill stuck in comittep. 1975, efforts have beenmade for an Attorney General's opinion in light of legislators stronglaw-and-order wood. State bar behind effort..

CALIFORNIA 1.975, a number .o f bills dr.aling with civil sex-viceregulations, terming of arrest record information, expungemeat andrelated issues have been considered this year.

COMM= -- 1975, private employment coverage considered as ex-tension of previously passed remedial kills.

DISTRICT OF COLLIMIkt- Arrrnckrent to D.C.'s human rights law woukdprotect ex-convictl;from employment and housing discrimination. \

GEORGIA --- State bar planti.144.1 for 1976 general session:. .

tDA/10 Governor's Criminal Justice Council nearly suLmitted bill 0part of its 1975 package. Coming next year, contacts say.

IOWA 1974, district court decision struck clown state's civil servicestatute related to ex-felons. Now being implemental and covering anarea not dealt with in 1974 legislation.

%

MEMUCKY - 1974, [la:zed Licath houner. but wined by governor. Weaknessesin bill have been rectified and it his passed interim catmittee withreconmendation for full passage in 1976.

LOUISIANA 1974, bill returned tocarmittce. 1975, retorted out butnarrowly defeated in House. Supporters expect passage in 1976.

22

17

MARYLAND -- State birplanning bill for 1976 essions.

MASSACI iuscrrs 1975 session corm idercd a f 'Awed bi II , which iv-in notpassed, and which has no particulair priority_ in vast amount of.corrcc-Seismal change proposals.

.

MMNNESMA -- 19.75 legislature considered private employment bill inaddition to dose previously pasted. Much citizen support.

MI*SOURI -- Bills introduced in 1974 and 1975 but failed. Supportersfeel that considerable change is taking place administratively.

NEBRASKA .--$19734.and '75. Bills 'failed in committee. Supportersoptimistic about next year but bill clearly needs more work.

NEVADA .Session too short this year, but leading legislator wants'assistance for 1976.

NEW HAMPSHIRE -- 1975, bill passed both houses easily but was vetoeda by governor, and legislature couldn't override. Try again"next year.

NEW YORK -- 1975, flawed bill passed legislature buts vetoed by governor,probably fob`, good reason. Planning sessions set for mad7SepteMberto draft strdng,bill for 1976 sessions.

.0HIO 1974, stuck in committee: 1975, private employment coverageadded and mak.cause more problems with manufacturer's groups. Con-sidered very strong for passage this year, however.

.40

PENNSYLVANIA -- 1974, .bed bill didn't pass. 1975,.better bill butfragmented support. Difficult state to coalesce adherents.

TENNESSEE -- State's corrections department plans employment legisla-tion in its.1%76 recommended Package.

tEXAS -- 1975, bill killed in committee. with active NOCD and AFDLCMDsupport, measure looks proMising.for 1976; tooth groups say.

VERMONT 1974, introduded in fiscal session butclotno hearing. '1975,introduced toe late. 1976, corrections commissioner promises earlyhearing and likely passage.

'VIRGINIA -- Corrections picture toe controial for further liberalizing.Interest is there to be tapped when situation calms.

1

WEST VIRGINIA -- 1974, passed both houses but vetoed by governor.1975, passed House but didn't move in Serrate. . Early push set for 19,76

session.Cu

WISCONSIN 1973 and 1974, bills bottled after passing one side.1975, hearings held on new August with groat: cooperative

support from reform groups. .

2 3'

*.

FOLLOW-P srmv, nrioN

The project has talked with persons in several states where remedial

0.

vg,laws.have'been enacted to gain some insiaht into thoir effect.**.i

This informal conthct, without attempting to quahtify the impact of the-

inewlegislation, has been in. off-- the - record talks with various licensingboards,

attornies general offides (charged with enforcing the new law), state

human rightn agencies ih Hawaii _and Connecticut, and other of dials in

oa position to monitor decisions en.,state controlled jobs involviryg.

licenses or public. unploymcn t.

somo'of the yenfIrd4 conclusions drawn fran. these contacts are

that:°

.1) The new laws have had greatest impact in states where licensing

boards fall under the purview of a single agency or where a single

unit in the attorney general's office rules on board_ decisions.

versely, where.board control is scattered among a nuner of state

agencies, licensing decisions appber to continue to be made without

anyone's sure awareness that thq new laws are being observed, or

even that the boards know of the change.

2) Notification by state officials and prison6rrights groups to

former felons of changes in the law has beenlpotty,,and depended on the

initiative of interested individuals when it has been effective.

3) It is extremely difficult for state hiring officials or licensing

boards ,to extract numbers of applications from former felons which

have been received, approved, or rejected. The relatively. few cases

that came to the attention\ human rights' agencies or top state. .

**The Center for Public Representation in Wisconsin has beep in touch withthe, project about a study it is conducting of the impact of thislegislation.

24

LJ

administiators are.00nsidered ash unrepresentative indicatip of. the

flaw of former convicts into licensod trades or state emplaywilt.

4) Almost every 4atethat has enacted remedial legislation has

wrestled with the definition of what constitutes 1:direct relationship"

a provision in the.law requiring thit a former offender not be barred

from a license or public employment unless it is shown that there is

a direct relationship berween,the offense committed and the job or.

license sought.

5) All officials questioned on the point agreed that the law had

a positive egect on icensing and hiring officials' attitudes toward

the ex-offender and that exposure of the issue would hie a long-term

salutary efteeyri the eMployability of ex-offenders.

This does not even consider the.unmeasurable effect that exposure

of this issue'has had on the thous g-of legislators and citizens who

.

were barely aware of th&problem's existence before the issue was raised.

Some-speeifics on individual states:ft

' Connecticut

The authority to issue occupational licenses in Connecticut falls -

aleb

under pany diffrent jurisdictions. Tha'sttuctural problem -a lack of

centralization- -has made it difficult not only to monitairthe oyerall

effect of the legislation enacted in 1973 but; also to enforce a con-

sistent pol4eynriegarding ex-offenders. It has been suggested that malty,

boards are unatlre of the change, and.that some are- still askina Ahr.,nt.

arrests, a practice that the new law prohibits. One assistant attbrncy'

general said he is advising the credehtialing agencies he deals with

(liquor, and a few construction trades) about the law, andrecommendingi

that those who are convicted t4 placed in a community-based progranImpt

suffer license revocation. Ee has little idea of how new licensing

applications are tt4ated.

25

, As for state employment, Connecticut is one of the few slates .

. known to tho project that implemented th6 law with a strong momorandago:

Lin the state's personnel director, urging all state hiring .offices

to be award of the law's -language; to give fair consideratidn to former

,offenders, and to contact the main office when problems of.in reta-.

Lion arise, (The state's corrections commission, it might be bed",

demonstrdted its aompliaitce.with the law by- sending the no to

hiring officers together with a reminder that corrections had aireaN

hired almost 50 ex-Offenders.)

-As in most stater, there has.apparently been a hiring freeze and

insufficient movement of personnel to judgethe-full *pact of the

.---- low.. The human rights commission,which has enforcement powerto insure

the9aw's implementation, has riCeived three complaints baied on the4ft.

Anew law charging discrimination. However, no cause was found'in all

three.

New Jersey

State officials sal their 1974 law was made known to itipprOpriate

officials but that a hiring freeze had diminished its impact for the

molient on job opportunities for exoffenders in the state government.

The assistant attorney general in chatge of most licensing 6breaue, wh

showed limited interest in. the subrject,,

said ,that on

under the new law had occurred.

Arkansas

ne challenge

P

An assistant attorney general in Arkansas feels that their 1972'laier,

has had "oonsiderable effect"; but admits that its impact is "difficult

I.to gauge." He indicated that,licensing agencies appear to be aWere of

the law and that a fairer attitude toward libense applicants is being1

26a.

A

w

- 21 -

I

shown. Pfioi to the law,,for example, 20 -30 percent of all license

revocation hearings 4.nvolved a cammissiori,of a felony by the licensee.

!kw, with the relationship test reepareds'ihat-level has been reducedr

Same boards, moreovesOjavetadapied bylaws to.by at least in ha

implement the law:,

\Illinois

A new state administration took over dbout the time Illinois' lawtl

became effective in 1971. All affected license boards were brought under

one person, the Director of the Department of Edusation and Registration,)

described by colleagues as one with great liberality of thinking toward

ex- offenders. In an informal interview, the'director says that ha

reviewed every'denial--and approVal--for a state license and has the

,._1 t

,..

,final say on all decisions. Those involvingcrircinal records are denied.

,* .

only when the crime ufiequivocably relates to the,occupation. But even a % '

t

then, he says, applicants or revokees are encoura40 to try again soon..

This director, like those of other states which appear to have

Njgone farthest .in Implementing the law, oversees all boards and has per

to appoint their members.

Job - delivery agencie6 in Colorado have been effective in placing -

ex-offenders in state government and in licensed occupations. However,

there seems to be little central direction in the implementation of

Colorado's law in regard to public employment.

As for licensing, the chief of all the boerds' regulations has'

27

Ca - 22 -

said that he personally is visiting all the state's institutions to,

inform inmates of their right to be considered an odcupational

license.

Washiogton

The law is well-known and applied with some frequency by the

assistant attorney general in charge of business and occupational boards.

"The law has definitely made a difference," says this official, "and

has made boards far'nore conservative in denying people licenoes/ In

Wd.phingtonthe law has had the most noticible effect on real estate

salesman. Formerly, all kinds of Crime would rule out an applicant

or icensee, but now the beards are concentrating only on vipel.ations

of fid lazy relationships. Moreover, no crime is disqualifying If it

is more than 10 years old and there is underway an effort to determine

what sorts of crime "directly relate" to specific occup4tions.

As for state employment, the personnel director said that turnbver-

is down so low that-there is no way to know of dramatic_effect in behalf

of ex-offenders despite the department's publicity to agency heads after

the law's passage. The director claims that the State has always had

a liberalclimate Of attitude toward, hiring offenders and that the law

juit gave this tone an official sanction. Ho cases of disputed denial

have come to his attention which were based on the applicant's criminal

pait

Hawaii

im

Probably the most intriguing by-product of the effort to remove

restrictions has been through a prohibition on private employer dis-

orimination'against ex-offenders throughemniment of fair employment

practices statutes, a 'move first taken in Hawaii in 1974. The measure

aroused considerable interest -)

2R

-43

around the country, as six states put forward simiCir legislative

proeosals this year. Akl failed to pasS,.however.

Hawaii's expbrience with C.0 new law has been minimal, with rein-

, statement of grievants resulting from Cm of e. three complaints

brought.thus far, the others.iound to have no cause. Observers of the

Hawaii scene note that the heterogeneity. of the Island labor force has

created an attitude of tolerance which will make it an unlikely proving

i. .

ground for .the efficacy of the statute on the maiig,and .

Ow( In regard to t..- -- . -pt advanced by the Hawaii law that offenders

a -.

should be sitilt within the framework of fair employmentes,

there are some potential attendant problems which should be considered:

It seems likely that if employers are restricted on inquiries into

applicants' criminal pasts they will,resort to increased use of surreptitious

background investigations. Or gaps in an applicaht's past employment

record can raise the presumption of an incarccraticn, and jobs would be

denied without giving the prospective employee opportunity to prove

rehabilitation.

'14

Successful offender job development and Lacement agencies, on the4-

other hand, rather than concealing a client's past, usually disclose

this fact to the employer together with intormaLion about efforts at

'rehabilitation in urging the employer to consider the "Whole" man or woman

in making a decision whether to hire him:,

AlsO, as noted in the draft memo prepared by the Clearinghouse

1"EMploy4.ng the Ex-Offender: Some Legal Considerationsl an errployer nay

be liable for damages if he is sr lesin.hiring a former offender with

violent prepensities and, according to some court rulings, must investigate

the background of prospective employees for criminal or other activity'

that might bear upon an individual's suitability for employment. Anothers .' . 4.... t;

-24-

ndideration is question of what constitutes a "relationship"

between the of tense and the job aought in determining whether the individual

is suitable for enploymeht, a test that still remains laruely subjective.

Before bringing offenders under fair employment statutes, thereforle,.

these other matters should be carefully considered.)

.00

30

1

SUMMARY

The project, a; inlicat(xl, hp?, identified offender employment

disabiloities in every state; prepared and distributed handbooks on

ways in which such aiatbIlities can be removed, developed contacts

with persons who can utilize this material by translating it into

action programs, andprovided assistance in miry States where efforts

--" pave been moue to remove arbitrary /ob barriers.

4.

Addition to this legislative activity, the Clearinghouse

responded to requests for technical information about the oqeration

of offender vent:ewer programs, spoken before at least a dozen meetings

concerned with ex-offender anployment problems, and answered hundreds

of inquiries from prisoners for employment informption.

This close involement with ex-offender job difficulties led

the project to a deeper concern for implementation of the legislative

change it monitored. As a sizeable portionof project mail from pre-

sprit: and former corvicts indicated, and as field contacts confirmed,

the is-a.contiming widespread-problem in effebtim delivery of

employment services to ex-offenders and a need for a catalyzing agents

r

to draw together and better' ccordinate the scattered ex-offender en-r-

ployfre.nt progs.dms that exist in mist carmunities.

Much has yet to be done in this area. The t, for its part,

has sought out effective job placement agencies in,ommunities across

the country to'Nwhich employffient rtiquests from ex-offenders can be

referred and began compiling a list of these organizations which can'

be the basis for a directory of services and agencies that providc

employment assistance to offenders.

During the span ofits existenciztherefore, the Clearinghouse on

Offender Employment Restrictions has strived not only to help in the

31

0

4.

removal of artificial barriers to employment, but to provide such other

assistance as it could to help the former of fenddr becane a manpowero

resstyce.

I

P.

ti

1

SZ:

4

I

41,

DISTRIBUTION OP MATER/AL 1ST TOE NATIONAL CLEARINCROUSB ON OFFENDER moron RESTRICTIONS

.

I*4ooZSSIo2

2*

a46ALo2

.3*

aaau5

J

v,1os

,L.'

asa4ma2

.-,1

7

s.0U

8a

10.a..

9

. 4fo4.0

Id

o

-e4

11.4ADa

a.s..1

Iv. 'q3*a0

i,I>

.4w

14 k .s.

-.;..0asr

1

U.0v

17$..4

Iu.o-

1$'0

Ia40.

r9w

i.e

70.a.

Es...

.

Manpoweroeoera a c, 1 I a . ' 1

'Pl I 4 i . 1 193 SS5 4- 7,436

Cower..-..... 523 599 6C1 719 '5 .1 1 . i 1 i. '4

sea

A.9.5

2_301

.614

leglq.at>rs 's 79 191 25 '0 20 0 S 15 5 5 5, ' 4 S 0 4

125

26'

2511130

240 1

. 1

773

215

5'

73 116.

-33 1

Correct!mns 990 785 755 945 75 .525 12 120 65 sn 330

851.

.130

40

773

1O

120

6n

103,

SSIlvvs-: 211 205 21- 15C 5 SS 10 ssn ' 70 55

Orsini:It:3ns(e.,.. etc. I IC'll.13: '.05r.3,054" 30 930 75 tin 435 13'1 341 '.95nr3.605 340 60 83 t 1 2 0-0 400 :

UUCJCSC$ 4951 10n 49'1 20,2

..

10 33 20 5

__.....,

en 101 In 5 34n1 35 33 55 .66 1 341 45 1 0 :1.0

ntLer 29'1 7Cr. 8!011.1%. 45 82 107 10 . '163. 691 10 404 355 1,40 85. 3n 58 1 763 111 1 i 5.7:5

-local 4,62/15,003 5,635

.

7,5301 540 2,010 304 1,160 1,013 506 1,968 2.070 5.823

.

990

.

556 525 1.1.2415.31 951 1253

1

:,,4S4

Publications prepared by the Clearinghouse.curtent mailing list of over 6,300.)

1. Ma ;Nock - "Fict-o:1.' g Of Ehp1tyment Riitrictione (14 pp.,-Expanfing Government Zob Opportielities forEx Cffan,!,:cs" (6 pp., 1972)

3. License - "Laws, Lic..trses and tme Offender's Right toInOrk: (75 pp., 1972, Rev. 1974)

4, Parole - "Developing Jots for Parolese (12 pp., 1974)S. Bonding - "The re4,2ra1 Bondir.s, Program" iDOL. pamphlet)6. Poer.1 -E:71Trent ProL:lers of Released Prisoners"

(:ar:Jo-ter repritt)7, CSC - of the Pahabilitated Offender in the

Federal Service" (C:11 Service pamphlet)8. Plotkin - "Constit...mional Challenges to Employment Dis-

ability Statutes " (29 pp., 1974)9. Guide - 'Guide to Legislative Action" (23 pp., 1975)

10. AFL-C:0 - "The !'an Vao Lived A:3-aint Understanding andHelptitg the Released Prisoner" (Pamphlet byAFL-C:C4

(It has also prepared and irculated 13 issues of its newsletter, which has a

11.

12.

13.

14.

1972, Rev. 1975)1aulniturtamt: "jobs fcr:the-Lx Offendgor (Reprint from

Case 6Co-rt;t (:973)Volunteer - 147 at tme .b.lnteer Organi:atiCm Can do to '

Aid the pc Offender' (8 pp., 1974)R 6 D "The Offender as a manpower Resc-a7ce (Slxrary

Of COL report;- "Staying Out' of :311 is no Gam-wit: ZOO.:CO.

Americans Eetch'Year" (Pampr4pt by :zatienalAlliance of,Bustresrren)

15. Rehab. Cert. - 'EX Sen.:cement. Exo-plary Pahabllitatich e

Cert;f1=ate-Haw to Apply-16.. C of C - 'Marshalling Citilen Power for Cos:sect:Loos' (Cater

of Commence Pamphlet)17. Horowitz - 'Giving the Ex Offender 1 Brea.--." (12 pp., 1973)113. Pamphlet - Nhat You-Can pp to r.xpand Ocb Opportunities-ft:,

EX Offenders - (C--fold--1972:19. MOnpower- "Manpcuer 11.--ora.:rs -for Cr:few:ars' (OOL20. Phillips -.'A Case Study:*.Deve:oprent and Implementat

,of a Kir.p.v: Service.Oelivery to the C4"an-na1Offender in the U.S.' IDOL paper by Phillips)

A.