By Steve Gordon
I got to see and hold my wonderful 15-month-old granddaughter Wednesday at my son Jim's home. She is starting to walk and words are slowly coming out of her mouth.
Jim has some things he needs to work out with me as we reestablish our relationship and would like me to help him with some projects outside around his house. As a new family the finances are a tough act trying to keep up with the expenses, or potential expenses. We can do some of his projects but some might be more than I can handle.
The bottom line is what has to be worked out is to prioritize what he and his wife want done and then tackle them one at a time. It will be a work in progress done in stages. We joked about winning the big lottery, but at that point you don't fix up an small older place, you move to a newer one that has the room a new family will be needing.
But this isn't so much about winning big in the lottery or home improvement projects as it is a bonding process where I can earn his trust and a place as part of his family, as his dad. Projects are easier when they are at your own place because you can work on your timetable, even as little as an hour here or an hour there. When you are doing it at someone elses house you are on their schedule, and Jim and his wife Chrissy have a whirlwind life centered around Casey (the baby) and family. His wife comes from a big family.
It has been a long time since I raised Jim as a baby but being a grandparent gives a different perspective to the process. How can you look into those young innocent eyes and be stern when this little girl does something she shouldn't have. You know, the game of dropping something on the floor from the high chair (on purpose) and babbling "Uh Oh" with an innocent expression.
We had a nice dinner and the small kitchen area makes cleanup more difficult than it might normally be. But things got cleaned up and time to get baby ready for bed. One problem, baby wasn't ready to go to bed. But eventually the eyes drooped and she laid down on the floor and went to sleep.
I wanted to talk to them just a short while to say a few things I felt ought to be said to both Jim and Chrissy. I started with the obvious that my actions messed up a lot of peoples lives and said I was sorry for that. To this I added that I was proud to be a father, father-in-law and grandfather and said I wanted to earn my way to be part of their family telling them I loved them. Hopefully some day they can feel proud to be a son, daughter-in-law and of course granddaughter of me. It isn't a biological right.
That was the basis and if flowed from there as I got into a couple of specific things I felt needed to be put on the table. We got off topic throughout as things came up and back on topic and it was nearly midnight and all three of us had to get up for work the next morning. Even if they didn't have to be up, I am sure Casey would have them up.
Oh, I also got to show off my new pick-up to them. Now we progress onward in a positive manner and all parties know that open communications both ways is the key and it needs to be practiced everyday.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Again with the ML car registration
By Steve Gordon
If you have read through the blog you would be aware of the Megan's Law registration ordeal. Well...it isn't so much an ordeal as walking on coals, but it is unpleasant. You would also be aware my requirement to register is based on a domestic offense and not some random act on the street with a stranger, or worse, a minor.
Enough of the reiteration.
I purchased a new vehicle last Saturday. My 1996 Blazer has seen better days. Even though the engine was new and only had about 6,000 miles on it and it had a new computer module and some other stuff including two new tires, I drew the line at a couple thousand more dollars for a transmission. It was a $25,000 car brand new but it has outlived its usefulness to me and my family.
Here is a brief history. My son picked it out on the lot when we were just looking around. My old Blazer was getting tired. I drove it, the now ex-wife agreed to get it and we did. My son Jim learned how to drive in it. When I went to prison in 2000 Jim took control of it (his mother had her own vehicle). My family and I wanted to have it sold for money to pay a real lawyer vs. having a public pretender. The ex-wife got involved and that wasn't going to happen.
My brother Jay, who died in July 2011 of cancer at age 54, took the car and basically hid it to protect it. We still wanted to sell it while it had value but smaller minds had other plans. It wasn't until 2003 when the ex-wife got her personal injury trial and the Blazer was at the heart of discussion to drop the suit even as I agreed to give her basically everything. So she had her trial and got a $500,000 judgment against me when I was in prison and I am speculating it cost her over $100,000 to get it with lawyer fees and his percentage of the judgment.
Bottom line is there was nothing to win. Our estate together wasn't worth $500,000. The Masters Hearing for the divorce was two days after the trial. We went in and as I had offered before, she could have basically everything except for a list of personal things and the Blazer. The Master listened and Pat objected. When I pointed out she already had two cars to which Pat meekly answered yes the Master said she didn't think she needed three cars.
In a round about way the Blazer became a $500,000 vehicle. Here is what it was about. It was a personal thing for me but it was also keeping something of value. As it turned out it became very useful. I signed it over to my brother to use and in 2010 before I came home he and my father made the decision to put a new engine in it.
You can second guess that, but fact is having my own vehicle was a good thing. I did not have to rely on anyone for a car to get around and thus I had some freedom to come and go as I wanted and as necessary. I paid for the upkeep, gas and insurance and paved the road to having responsibility after 10 years away from society.
Guess I kind of got off topic, but maybe a little history made a good story.
Back to the where we started with the Blazer, its days were numbered. It was time to let go and move on and make an investment in a newer more reliable vehicle. That is where the 2005 Dodge Dakota club cab enters the story. I had established a credit rating once out by getting a couple credit cards and using them and then paying them off on time. By doing so I was eligible to get a car loan and purchase the pick-up on my own. I stress ON MY OWN.
Going back to the reason for this story I had to notify the PA State Police and...as usual the treatment was on the fringe of courteous and it took 45 minutes for them to do five minutes worth of paperwork all the while with me parked on a hard wooden bench in a lobby in front of a huge glass window. While there another guy came in and said last time he was there to update his registration it took three hours.
I understand the need to keep records, but it nothing changes what is the purpose to have people show up in person for each change when such a thing can be handled easily via mail or Internet? Oh, I know, they need to practice with their little digital camera. But it is done. Hopefully WHEN my Pardon is signed this will all be a thing of the past.
.JPG)
.JPG)
If you have read through the blog you would be aware of the Megan's Law registration ordeal. Well...it isn't so much an ordeal as walking on coals, but it is unpleasant. You would also be aware my requirement to register is based on a domestic offense and not some random act on the street with a stranger, or worse, a minor.
Enough of the reiteration.
I purchased a new vehicle last Saturday. My 1996 Blazer has seen better days. Even though the engine was new and only had about 6,000 miles on it and it had a new computer module and some other stuff including two new tires, I drew the line at a couple thousand more dollars for a transmission. It was a $25,000 car brand new but it has outlived its usefulness to me and my family.
Here is a brief history. My son picked it out on the lot when we were just looking around. My old Blazer was getting tired. I drove it, the now ex-wife agreed to get it and we did. My son Jim learned how to drive in it. When I went to prison in 2000 Jim took control of it (his mother had her own vehicle). My family and I wanted to have it sold for money to pay a real lawyer vs. having a public pretender. The ex-wife got involved and that wasn't going to happen.
My brother Jay, who died in July 2011 of cancer at age 54, took the car and basically hid it to protect it. We still wanted to sell it while it had value but smaller minds had other plans. It wasn't until 2003 when the ex-wife got her personal injury trial and the Blazer was at the heart of discussion to drop the suit even as I agreed to give her basically everything. So she had her trial and got a $500,000 judgment against me when I was in prison and I am speculating it cost her over $100,000 to get it with lawyer fees and his percentage of the judgment.
Bottom line is there was nothing to win. Our estate together wasn't worth $500,000. The Masters Hearing for the divorce was two days after the trial. We went in and as I had offered before, she could have basically everything except for a list of personal things and the Blazer. The Master listened and Pat objected. When I pointed out she already had two cars to which Pat meekly answered yes the Master said she didn't think she needed three cars.
In a round about way the Blazer became a $500,000 vehicle. Here is what it was about. It was a personal thing for me but it was also keeping something of value. As it turned out it became very useful. I signed it over to my brother to use and in 2010 before I came home he and my father made the decision to put a new engine in it.
You can second guess that, but fact is having my own vehicle was a good thing. I did not have to rely on anyone for a car to get around and thus I had some freedom to come and go as I wanted and as necessary. I paid for the upkeep, gas and insurance and paved the road to having responsibility after 10 years away from society.
Guess I kind of got off topic, but maybe a little history made a good story.
Back to the where we started with the Blazer, its days were numbered. It was time to let go and move on and make an investment in a newer more reliable vehicle. That is where the 2005 Dodge Dakota club cab enters the story. I had established a credit rating once out by getting a couple credit cards and using them and then paying them off on time. By doing so I was eligible to get a car loan and purchase the pick-up on my own. I stress ON MY OWN.
Going back to the reason for this story I had to notify the PA State Police and...as usual the treatment was on the fringe of courteous and it took 45 minutes for them to do five minutes worth of paperwork all the while with me parked on a hard wooden bench in a lobby in front of a huge glass window. While there another guy came in and said last time he was there to update his registration it took three hours.
I understand the need to keep records, but it nothing changes what is the purpose to have people show up in person for each change when such a thing can be handled easily via mail or Internet? Oh, I know, they need to practice with their little digital camera. But it is done. Hopefully WHEN my Pardon is signed this will all be a thing of the past.
.JPG)
.JPG)
One final note: The pictures above are of a garden bridge I build last summer. The flags were for the 4th of July. Under it is one of my brother Jay's old trucks from when he was a kid and I dug it up when putting the bridge in. This kind of makes this a piece of real estate to remember my brother. Further, the last thing I remember my brother saying to me was, "At least we got the Blazer running." Today a set of keys for the Blazer rests with the truck under the bridge. I can wait for spring and all the plants around the bridge to grow in.
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Reconnecting with my son
By Steve Gordon
A couple weeks ago my son called and asked if I would meet him. Of course I would, and did. We met at a pool hall and shot some pool and talked a little. Seems he can't completely let go of some things that happened over the past 10 or so years while I was in prison and wants to talk about them.
I don't want to reopen those things but I recognize his needs so this is something I can do. Then down the road we can potentially finally put a lot of stuff to rest. During our hour or so shooting pool a few things were said that got me to thinking afterward that I need to learn how to be a dad again.
He said he was hoping, but not expecting, that I would call him and ask him ("invite" is the word he used) to the recent auto show in Philadelphia. The funny thing is that it crossed my mind but I did not do it. In conversation he always talks about how busy they are going here and there and with the one-year old so I (foolishly) opted out of calling him.
Guess I dropped the ball on that. Now where do I go. Because he came out and said he wanted to talk I am feeling that it now falls upon me as the dad to try to arrange how we do this. I will give him a call this weekend and see if we can get this started. I will keep you posted.
While we were shooting pool it was obvious I am not very competent at pool. Jim plays in a pool league and seems to know his way around on the felt. Guess I will have to settle for that and being a better player on the outside greens of a golf course. Balance is good.
A couple weeks ago my son called and asked if I would meet him. Of course I would, and did. We met at a pool hall and shot some pool and talked a little. Seems he can't completely let go of some things that happened over the past 10 or so years while I was in prison and wants to talk about them.
I don't want to reopen those things but I recognize his needs so this is something I can do. Then down the road we can potentially finally put a lot of stuff to rest. During our hour or so shooting pool a few things were said that got me to thinking afterward that I need to learn how to be a dad again.
He said he was hoping, but not expecting, that I would call him and ask him ("invite" is the word he used) to the recent auto show in Philadelphia. The funny thing is that it crossed my mind but I did not do it. In conversation he always talks about how busy they are going here and there and with the one-year old so I (foolishly) opted out of calling him.
Guess I dropped the ball on that. Now where do I go. Because he came out and said he wanted to talk I am feeling that it now falls upon me as the dad to try to arrange how we do this. I will give him a call this weekend and see if we can get this started. I will keep you posted.
While we were shooting pool it was obvious I am not very competent at pool. Jim plays in a pool league and seems to know his way around on the felt. Guess I will have to settle for that and being a better player on the outside greens of a golf course. Balance is good.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Progressing along with the Pardon/Clemency process
I received the following letter today from the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons. Herein are the highlights"
"This letter is to inform you that your clemency application has been filed by the Board of Pardons.
Please be advised that agents from the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole conduct investigations for the Board of Pardons. ...you will be contacted by a Parole Agent to arrange a meeting in your home...
As soon as all pertinent information has been compiled, the application will then be reviewed by each Board member, and a public vote will be taken to determine if you will be granted a public hearing. You will be notified of the results of the Board's review.
Please be advised that the clemency process is very lengthy and complex. It currently takes approximately three (3) years to complete..."
And so the wheels of a government agency slowly begin to grind. It took nearly two months to get to this point, but the fact that the application has been filed is good. At least I got the initial paperwork right. I wonder how many applications don't make muster in this first step? Anyway, I will wait for the next step and so on and so on, looking forward to each one to hopefully come to positive resolution.
The fact is the main purpose for this was employment issues with background checks and even places where I am currently prohibited from working for having a felony conviction. By the time the process is complete and a Pardon is granted I will be 68-years-old. I am not sure how to express my view regarding the initial goal being relevant at that point, but I can tell you that I want this Pardon nonetheless.
I didn't think it would be a three (3) year process and was thinking more like one year. Government agencies I guess don't move at breakneck speed. With my application I provided many attachments to be reviewed and considered. I suspect that most if not all of these will be checked to verify authenticity and gather more information. I welcome that because I have nothing to hide.
Taking it all into consideration, I reiterate that I really want this Pardon. I want the state of Pennsylvania to review my application, look at who I am as a person right now today. Isn't that what this is about? I also want the Board to look at my past lifestyle and recognize that it is not, and never has been, a lifestyle of criminal thinking and intent.
This of course would involve having them believe that the likely hood of my ever acting out again is basically non-existent. I word it that way because is there ever really a "never" for anything in life. I can believe in myself that the actions I took will not happen again but the Board has to evaluate it from the perspective that if it happened once it could happen again. I get that.
I will do the interviews, answer the questions, jump through the hoops, etc. and in three years I want the governor of the state of Pennsylvania to grant this Pardon to me which in effect says I recognize that you are a good person. I am doing and will continue to do all the right things to earn this. This may be melodramatic, but in the end I want my children and grandchildren to be proud of a father and grandfather who does not have the label of ex-offender attached to him in the fine print and in the eyes of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Keep you posted, but it will probably be a while.
"This letter is to inform you that your clemency application has been filed by the Board of Pardons.
Please be advised that agents from the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole conduct investigations for the Board of Pardons. ...you will be contacted by a Parole Agent to arrange a meeting in your home...
As soon as all pertinent information has been compiled, the application will then be reviewed by each Board member, and a public vote will be taken to determine if you will be granted a public hearing. You will be notified of the results of the Board's review.
Please be advised that the clemency process is very lengthy and complex. It currently takes approximately three (3) years to complete..."
And so the wheels of a government agency slowly begin to grind. It took nearly two months to get to this point, but the fact that the application has been filed is good. At least I got the initial paperwork right. I wonder how many applications don't make muster in this first step? Anyway, I will wait for the next step and so on and so on, looking forward to each one to hopefully come to positive resolution.
The fact is the main purpose for this was employment issues with background checks and even places where I am currently prohibited from working for having a felony conviction. By the time the process is complete and a Pardon is granted I will be 68-years-old. I am not sure how to express my view regarding the initial goal being relevant at that point, but I can tell you that I want this Pardon nonetheless.
I didn't think it would be a three (3) year process and was thinking more like one year. Government agencies I guess don't move at breakneck speed. With my application I provided many attachments to be reviewed and considered. I suspect that most if not all of these will be checked to verify authenticity and gather more information. I welcome that because I have nothing to hide.
Taking it all into consideration, I reiterate that I really want this Pardon. I want the state of Pennsylvania to review my application, look at who I am as a person right now today. Isn't that what this is about? I also want the Board to look at my past lifestyle and recognize that it is not, and never has been, a lifestyle of criminal thinking and intent.
This of course would involve having them believe that the likely hood of my ever acting out again is basically non-existent. I word it that way because is there ever really a "never" for anything in life. I can believe in myself that the actions I took will not happen again but the Board has to evaluate it from the perspective that if it happened once it could happen again. I get that.
I will do the interviews, answer the questions, jump through the hoops, etc. and in three years I want the governor of the state of Pennsylvania to grant this Pardon to me which in effect says I recognize that you are a good person. I am doing and will continue to do all the right things to earn this. This may be melodramatic, but in the end I want my children and grandchildren to be proud of a father and grandfather who does not have the label of ex-offender attached to him in the fine print and in the eyes of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Keep you posted, but it will probably be a while.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Excessive Sentencing
By Steve Gordon
The following letter to the editor to the Vietnam Veterans of America magazine appeared in the January/February 2012 issue:
"A grassroots movement is underway to dismantle Missouri's 85 percent mandatory minimum sentencing laws on first-time offenders, a law that affects many veterans, is unjust, and is an unnecessary tax burden on Missouri citizens.
There is a petition to get it on the ballot for revision as soon as possible. This petition can be endorsed by anyone of voting age in any state. In no way are we attempting to minimize the acts for which these men and women have been responsible. However, administering nearly a life sentence in first-time non-homicide cases - and even in some cases of non-injury - and to have no incentive for rehabilitation is truly counterproductive to everything out nation stands for.
We have endorsements from a multitude of lawmakers for this change, and the NAACP and Missouri CURE are devoting their resources to revamp this policy. This is not a "get out of jail free card." It is for first-time violent offenders who have completed positive behavioral programs and have remarkable institution records. These men and women were caught up in the "get tough on crime" one-upmanship of political campaign promotions. The proposed change will lower the basic mandatory minimum of 85 percent for first-time offenders to 50 percent mandatory sentencing - based on past and current behavior, personal rehabilitation, and parole board discretion.
Information on the petition can be found on the Missouri CURE website, http://www.mocure.org/. If you wish to contact the CURE concerning this information, call 877-525-2873 or email missouricure@hotmail.com."
George Kniest
Jefferson City, Missouri
Here in Pennsylvania there was a belief when I was in prison only a few years ago that there is an 80 percent rule but the authorities and the Pennsylvania Parole Board deny this. Even in the face of this non-existent rule the feeling went that the Parole Board used its discretion in the matter.
In cases like mine, I completed all the required programs and more, had no misconducts, and had a job, got good work, housing and program reports that resulted in having full institution support for parole five times, and I was denied parole five times. There were other similar cases I knew of while incarcerated.
It would seem the Pennsylvania Parole Board overstepped its use of discretion. Of course there are two side to that story and they can be arugued forever without resolution. As for Missouri, this would be a positive start to prison reform that is sorely needed across the nation even as I have an issue regarding allowing discretion.
Our nations prisons are overcrowded. The prisons in Pennsylvania are so overcrowded the state has taken to housing prisoners in county prisons and also other states at a great expense. From experience I can tell you that there are a great many people in prison, even violent offenders, who do not need to be there.
Don't get me wrong, some people belong in prison. Their behavior has shown them to be a danger to the community so these people need to remain in custody for the safe guard of society as much as for their own safety. As bad as some are, no one should be put at risk of injury or death and the lifestyle these people choose subject them to that.
I only received the VVA magazine today and I haven't had time to look up the statistics, but I do know that past statistics did not have the Keystone State in good standing in regard to the number of people in prison and the time they spend in prison. It is a list of states in statistics that you want to be on the bottom of. Pennsylvania was on the top.
But this is getting off track. The point I want to make is that prison reform is needed and talk about it needs to be acted on. Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett just slashed the budget in regard to money for education for a state in debt. The Philadelphia Public School system is restricting use of the schools to save money. Why can't we reform the prison system, mandatory sentencing, and Parole Board discretion and take the money saved and put it back into education?
My final word is a call for across the board flat sentencing. To the state legislatures I suggest that they act on reform and stop talking about it.
The following letter to the editor to the Vietnam Veterans of America magazine appeared in the January/February 2012 issue:
"A grassroots movement is underway to dismantle Missouri's 85 percent mandatory minimum sentencing laws on first-time offenders, a law that affects many veterans, is unjust, and is an unnecessary tax burden on Missouri citizens.
There is a petition to get it on the ballot for revision as soon as possible. This petition can be endorsed by anyone of voting age in any state. In no way are we attempting to minimize the acts for which these men and women have been responsible. However, administering nearly a life sentence in first-time non-homicide cases - and even in some cases of non-injury - and to have no incentive for rehabilitation is truly counterproductive to everything out nation stands for.
We have endorsements from a multitude of lawmakers for this change, and the NAACP and Missouri CURE are devoting their resources to revamp this policy. This is not a "get out of jail free card." It is for first-time violent offenders who have completed positive behavioral programs and have remarkable institution records. These men and women were caught up in the "get tough on crime" one-upmanship of political campaign promotions. The proposed change will lower the basic mandatory minimum of 85 percent for first-time offenders to 50 percent mandatory sentencing - based on past and current behavior, personal rehabilitation, and parole board discretion.
Information on the petition can be found on the Missouri CURE website, http://www.mocure.org/. If you wish to contact the CURE concerning this information, call 877-525-2873 or email missouricure@hotmail.com."
George Kniest
Jefferson City, Missouri
Here in Pennsylvania there was a belief when I was in prison only a few years ago that there is an 80 percent rule but the authorities and the Pennsylvania Parole Board deny this. Even in the face of this non-existent rule the feeling went that the Parole Board used its discretion in the matter.
In cases like mine, I completed all the required programs and more, had no misconducts, and had a job, got good work, housing and program reports that resulted in having full institution support for parole five times, and I was denied parole five times. There were other similar cases I knew of while incarcerated.
It would seem the Pennsylvania Parole Board overstepped its use of discretion. Of course there are two side to that story and they can be arugued forever without resolution. As for Missouri, this would be a positive start to prison reform that is sorely needed across the nation even as I have an issue regarding allowing discretion.
Our nations prisons are overcrowded. The prisons in Pennsylvania are so overcrowded the state has taken to housing prisoners in county prisons and also other states at a great expense. From experience I can tell you that there are a great many people in prison, even violent offenders, who do not need to be there.
Don't get me wrong, some people belong in prison. Their behavior has shown them to be a danger to the community so these people need to remain in custody for the safe guard of society as much as for their own safety. As bad as some are, no one should be put at risk of injury or death and the lifestyle these people choose subject them to that.
I only received the VVA magazine today and I haven't had time to look up the statistics, but I do know that past statistics did not have the Keystone State in good standing in regard to the number of people in prison and the time they spend in prison. It is a list of states in statistics that you want to be on the bottom of. Pennsylvania was on the top.
But this is getting off track. The point I want to make is that prison reform is needed and talk about it needs to be acted on. Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett just slashed the budget in regard to money for education for a state in debt. The Philadelphia Public School system is restricting use of the schools to save money. Why can't we reform the prison system, mandatory sentencing, and Parole Board discretion and take the money saved and put it back into education?
My final word is a call for across the board flat sentencing. To the state legislatures I suggest that they act on reform and stop talking about it.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Pardon Me
by Steve Gordon
I have not written on this site for a long time. I have been wrapped up in getting things back together and writing on a golf related blog and working. Yes, I found a job even if it is a minimum wage part-time job doing prep work and related jobs in the kitchen of the Chick-fil-A in Newtown, PA.
But I am not writing about that. I applied for a Pardon last fall. It is as the letter accepting my application described "a lengthy process." I have to state up front that I am not looking for absolution for my offense. What I am looking for is to clear my record for background checks.
This is a big deal for anyone trying to enter the job market these days. Jobs are hard enough to find let alone being labeled as as ex-offender and going against similar or higher qualified people who do not have a criminal record. And here is a new insult. I wanted to sign up to be a volunteer worker at the Merion Golf Club for the 2013 US Open golf tournament but I couldn't because you have to pass a background check.
I recently got a letter from the Board of Pardons for some more detailed information. I filled out the information they asked for and returned the original and five (5) copies as requested. Next step is for the application (and the numerous inclusions I provided) is to be reviewed positively and have a public hearing scheduled. For this all the authorities and victims would be notified and would be given the opportunity to provide their thoughts.
This pardon is a long way from being approved and sent to the governor's desk to be signed. I just wanted to put this out there and urge anyone who does not have a long record of criminal behavior to apply for a Pardon. Worst case scenario is they say no and nothing lost. Best case would be to have the Pardon granted and be given a clean slate to compete in the job market and other things.
Do it.
I have not written on this site for a long time. I have been wrapped up in getting things back together and writing on a golf related blog and working. Yes, I found a job even if it is a minimum wage part-time job doing prep work and related jobs in the kitchen of the Chick-fil-A in Newtown, PA.
But I am not writing about that. I applied for a Pardon last fall. It is as the letter accepting my application described "a lengthy process." I have to state up front that I am not looking for absolution for my offense. What I am looking for is to clear my record for background checks.
This is a big deal for anyone trying to enter the job market these days. Jobs are hard enough to find let alone being labeled as as ex-offender and going against similar or higher qualified people who do not have a criminal record. And here is a new insult. I wanted to sign up to be a volunteer worker at the Merion Golf Club for the 2013 US Open golf tournament but I couldn't because you have to pass a background check.
I recently got a letter from the Board of Pardons for some more detailed information. I filled out the information they asked for and returned the original and five (5) copies as requested. Next step is for the application (and the numerous inclusions I provided) is to be reviewed positively and have a public hearing scheduled. For this all the authorities and victims would be notified and would be given the opportunity to provide their thoughts.
This pardon is a long way from being approved and sent to the governor's desk to be signed. I just wanted to put this out there and urge anyone who does not have a long record of criminal behavior to apply for a Pardon. Worst case scenario is they say no and nothing lost. Best case would be to have the Pardon granted and be given a clean slate to compete in the job market and other things.
Do it.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Special Day
By Steve Gordon
Today was a special day. Last week I received a letter from the Pennsylvania State Police that I was to report for my yearly registration update for Megan's Law. To begin with the whole spirit of ML has been distorted and many people are being registered as sex offenders in the name of protecting society when their offenses had nothing to do with children or random sexual assaults that would have endangered the community in the first place.
OK, enough of the soap opera.
So...I went to the local State Police office in Trevose to turn in my form. I didn't expect to be welcomed warmly or with open arms but the receptionist (or whatever her title is) was very cold and impersonal, but stopped at the point of being rude. In this situation you learn to cope with these kind of closed minded people. For the entire time I was there I was never called or referred to by name by anyone.
I went in and announced why I was there and turned in the form completed that only needed my signature and the signature of a registering official. Then it was being called to the counter and being asked for a copy of the letter and told to go sit down; go to the counter to give them your drivers license and told to go sit down; go to the counter and asked if I had a job, if I owned a car, if I went to school and then told to go sit down. These were all questions on the form I did not fill in because I have or do none of those things.
It took about 1/2 hour in all and there was no one else there being attended to. Why would filing a simple form and having your picture taken with a hand held digital camera take so long? While sitting on the hard wooden bench in a cold lobby I could hear through the glass and I am pretty sure I heard some conversation that I showed up on their computer as unregistered. That is funny because someone clearly knew where to find me to send me the letter to report to re-register annually as required.
To tell the truth, the longer I sat there the more uneasy I got. Paranoia is a funny thing and I didn't know if I should expect Corporal C.P. Tavernier and/or some other trooper to come out and handcuff me believing I had been unregistered for a year or if a Bucks County Sheriff would appear to take me to the county prison for not being registered. For the record I was registered and even looked myself up once.
Upon completion of this process and signing three copies I was asked about treatment and if I was a sexually violent predator. If they looked my file up, which clearly they did, they would have known that so why ask?
This was a totally a humiliating experience, but I should come to expect that I suppose. We live in a world of people with so many (unfounded) paranoia's that it is the rule, not the exception. The good news is I only have to do this eight more times - unless they change the law again to make most everyone a lifetime registration. At least they don't have special license plates on the cars as I understand some places do. They tried a while back but it didn't get passed in the legislature. But...I don't own a car.
I think I will go sit down now, in a comfortable chair, and read my book, Unbroken, by Laura Hillenbrand about an American Olympic miler, Louis Zamperini, who was first stranded in the Pacific for 40 some days and then a POW in Japan until the end of WW II. It's a good story, and a good book will always divert your attention away from stressful situations.
Today was a special day. Last week I received a letter from the Pennsylvania State Police that I was to report for my yearly registration update for Megan's Law. To begin with the whole spirit of ML has been distorted and many people are being registered as sex offenders in the name of protecting society when their offenses had nothing to do with children or random sexual assaults that would have endangered the community in the first place.
OK, enough of the soap opera.
So...I went to the local State Police office in Trevose to turn in my form. I didn't expect to be welcomed warmly or with open arms but the receptionist (or whatever her title is) was very cold and impersonal, but stopped at the point of being rude. In this situation you learn to cope with these kind of closed minded people. For the entire time I was there I was never called or referred to by name by anyone.
I went in and announced why I was there and turned in the form completed that only needed my signature and the signature of a registering official. Then it was being called to the counter and being asked for a copy of the letter and told to go sit down; go to the counter to give them your drivers license and told to go sit down; go to the counter and asked if I had a job, if I owned a car, if I went to school and then told to go sit down. These were all questions on the form I did not fill in because I have or do none of those things.
It took about 1/2 hour in all and there was no one else there being attended to. Why would filing a simple form and having your picture taken with a hand held digital camera take so long? While sitting on the hard wooden bench in a cold lobby I could hear through the glass and I am pretty sure I heard some conversation that I showed up on their computer as unregistered. That is funny because someone clearly knew where to find me to send me the letter to report to re-register annually as required.
To tell the truth, the longer I sat there the more uneasy I got. Paranoia is a funny thing and I didn't know if I should expect Corporal C.P. Tavernier and/or some other trooper to come out and handcuff me believing I had been unregistered for a year or if a Bucks County Sheriff would appear to take me to the county prison for not being registered. For the record I was registered and even looked myself up once.
Upon completion of this process and signing three copies I was asked about treatment and if I was a sexually violent predator. If they looked my file up, which clearly they did, they would have known that so why ask?
This was a totally a humiliating experience, but I should come to expect that I suppose. We live in a world of people with so many (unfounded) paranoia's that it is the rule, not the exception. The good news is I only have to do this eight more times - unless they change the law again to make most everyone a lifetime registration. At least they don't have special license plates on the cars as I understand some places do. They tried a while back but it didn't get passed in the legislature. But...I don't own a car.
I think I will go sit down now, in a comfortable chair, and read my book, Unbroken, by Laura Hillenbrand about an American Olympic miler, Louis Zamperini, who was first stranded in the Pacific for 40 some days and then a POW in Japan until the end of WW II. It's a good story, and a good book will always divert your attention away from stressful situations.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Phladelphia Inquirer, Monday, March 28, 2011
JANE M. VON BERGEN / Staff
Steve Gordon of Southampton hasn't secured a job since his release from prison despite decades of work experience.
Ex-offenders hope Philadelphia passes 'ban the box' bill this week
By Jane M. Von Bergen
Inquirer Staff Writer
Sometimes the facts are easy:
A 39-year-old mother of four raising her family on welfare and food stamps finds a check next to a Dumpster. Her monthly welfare payment is days away, and there is no food in the house. She signs it, committing fraud.
"I went home and told my kids, 'God sent me a piece of paper that says we're going to eat tonight.' "
That happened to Evelyn Houser, now 70, of North Philadelphia in 1981. In 2010, that conviction - her only brush with the law - meant she wasn't considered for a temporary U.S. Census job.
"It's like a slap in the face," she said.
Sometimes, though, the facts are hard:
Distraught over his dissolving marriage, a man flips out when his estranged wife visits. He ties her up, beats her, and tries to rape her before slashing himself with a knife. That was in 2000, a repeat of a less serious offense in 1972.
In May 2010, Steven Gordon, now 64, was released from prison, and no one will hire him despite decades of experience in food service that includes managing cafeterias providing hundreds of meals a day.
"I'm living with my parents," said Gordon, of Southampton, Bucks County. "If it weren't for them, I'd probably be living in a refrigerator box under a bridge somewhere.
"I put myself in this position. I recognize that. But I have the skills. I know how to do things, but I can't get my foot in the door."
The foot in the door is what City Council is hoping to accomplish Thursday, when it will likely pass a "ban the box" ordinance.
The box is the one on applications that candidates check when asked about arrests or convictions. The box would have to disappear, whether on paper or online.
Also, most employers in the city would no longer be able to ask applicants about their criminal backgrounds until after the first interview. After that, employers could run any checks and ask any criminal history questions they wished.
If Council passes the ordinance, Philadelphia will join many other cities - including Boston, Chicago, and New Haven, Conn. - with similar laws.
Philadelphia's proposed ordinance "doesn't force employers to hire to anyone," said William Nesheiwat, director of legislation for Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller, a Democrat, the sponsor.
"It requires the employer to give candidates the opportunity to be judged strictly on their merits during the application and the first interview, because everyone understands the value of a first impression," he said. "Our goal is to create something that helps the individual with a record but does not hurt businesses and their clients."
Groups such as Community Legal Services and the National Employment Law Project favor the measure. The Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce opposes it.
"Our members remain concerned that the legislation still poses significant challenges for employers," chamber vice president Joseph W. Mahoney Jr. wrote in a letter to Miller. "The bill presents liability problems for potential employers who may become targets for antidiscrimination litigation."
Michael Aitken, director of governmental affairs for the Society for Human Resource Management, the nation's largest professional HR group, said employers should have the right to do criminal checks. But, he said, most wait until later in the hiring process because those checks are expensive.
Philadelphia's proposal is broader than those in other cities because it is the only one that would apply to most private employers. Elsewhere, the laws apply primarily to city employees, and sometimes to companies that do business with the city.
But some cities provide more protections to ex-offenders.
Boston sifted through its jobs to determine which ones required background checks. It determined that criminal checks would be necessary for government jobs involving money-handling or caring for the young, but not for collecting trash.
The applicant's criminal history is usually not checked until after a conditional offer, and if the applicant is turned down due to the record, there is an opportunity for appeal.
"Where we need a criminal-background check, we're going to run that background check," said Boston's assistant director of human resources, William Kessler. "Then we look at the nature of conviction, how old the conviction is, any evidence of rehabilitation, and we'll make a determination."
Pennsylvania already has a law, rarely enforced, requiring employers to consider only relevant convictions when hiring. New Jersey is considering ban-the-box legislation.
Meanwhile, Rob Hill, 30, of Philadelphia, hopes the city's proposal passes. He grew up in a chaotic home with a dying mother and two younger siblings. As a teen, he became addicted to drugs and then sold them, winding up in jail. "I remember feeling a sense of accomplishment that I could give my mom money when she needed it."
Hill was released in 2006. Now he's a college graduate with a degree in sports management who can't get a job.
"No one is giving me a chance," he said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact staff writer Jane M. Von Bergen at 215-854-2769 or jvonbergen@phillynews.com.
To learn more about this issue, read Von Bergen's "Jobbing" blog: www.philly.com/jobbing
Steve Gordon of Southampton hasn't secured a job since his release from prison despite decades of work experience.
Ex-offenders hope Philadelphia passes 'ban the box' bill this week
By Jane M. Von Bergen
Inquirer Staff Writer
Sometimes the facts are easy:
A 39-year-old mother of four raising her family on welfare and food stamps finds a check next to a Dumpster. Her monthly welfare payment is days away, and there is no food in the house. She signs it, committing fraud.
"I went home and told my kids, 'God sent me a piece of paper that says we're going to eat tonight.' "
That happened to Evelyn Houser, now 70, of North Philadelphia in 1981. In 2010, that conviction - her only brush with the law - meant she wasn't considered for a temporary U.S. Census job.
"It's like a slap in the face," she said.
Sometimes, though, the facts are hard:
Distraught over his dissolving marriage, a man flips out when his estranged wife visits. He ties her up, beats her, and tries to rape her before slashing himself with a knife. That was in 2000, a repeat of a less serious offense in 1972.
In May 2010, Steven Gordon, now 64, was released from prison, and no one will hire him despite decades of experience in food service that includes managing cafeterias providing hundreds of meals a day.
"I'm living with my parents," said Gordon, of Southampton, Bucks County. "If it weren't for them, I'd probably be living in a refrigerator box under a bridge somewhere.
"I put myself in this position. I recognize that. But I have the skills. I know how to do things, but I can't get my foot in the door."
The foot in the door is what City Council is hoping to accomplish Thursday, when it will likely pass a "ban the box" ordinance.
The box is the one on applications that candidates check when asked about arrests or convictions. The box would have to disappear, whether on paper or online.
Also, most employers in the city would no longer be able to ask applicants about their criminal backgrounds until after the first interview. After that, employers could run any checks and ask any criminal history questions they wished.
If Council passes the ordinance, Philadelphia will join many other cities - including Boston, Chicago, and New Haven, Conn. - with similar laws.
Philadelphia's proposed ordinance "doesn't force employers to hire to anyone," said William Nesheiwat, director of legislation for Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller, a Democrat, the sponsor.
"It requires the employer to give candidates the opportunity to be judged strictly on their merits during the application and the first interview, because everyone understands the value of a first impression," he said. "Our goal is to create something that helps the individual with a record but does not hurt businesses and their clients."
Groups such as Community Legal Services and the National Employment Law Project favor the measure. The Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce opposes it.
"Our members remain concerned that the legislation still poses significant challenges for employers," chamber vice president Joseph W. Mahoney Jr. wrote in a letter to Miller. "The bill presents liability problems for potential employers who may become targets for antidiscrimination litigation."
Michael Aitken, director of governmental affairs for the Society for Human Resource Management, the nation's largest professional HR group, said employers should have the right to do criminal checks. But, he said, most wait until later in the hiring process because those checks are expensive.
Philadelphia's proposal is broader than those in other cities because it is the only one that would apply to most private employers. Elsewhere, the laws apply primarily to city employees, and sometimes to companies that do business with the city.
But some cities provide more protections to ex-offenders.
Boston sifted through its jobs to determine which ones required background checks. It determined that criminal checks would be necessary for government jobs involving money-handling or caring for the young, but not for collecting trash.
The applicant's criminal history is usually not checked until after a conditional offer, and if the applicant is turned down due to the record, there is an opportunity for appeal.
"Where we need a criminal-background check, we're going to run that background check," said Boston's assistant director of human resources, William Kessler. "Then we look at the nature of conviction, how old the conviction is, any evidence of rehabilitation, and we'll make a determination."
Pennsylvania already has a law, rarely enforced, requiring employers to consider only relevant convictions when hiring. New Jersey is considering ban-the-box legislation.
Meanwhile, Rob Hill, 30, of Philadelphia, hopes the city's proposal passes. He grew up in a chaotic home with a dying mother and two younger siblings. As a teen, he became addicted to drugs and then sold them, winding up in jail. "I remember feeling a sense of accomplishment that I could give my mom money when she needed it."
Hill was released in 2006. Now he's a college graduate with a degree in sports management who can't get a job.
"No one is giving me a chance," he said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact staff writer Jane M. Von Bergen at 215-854-2769 or jvonbergen@phillynews.com.
To learn more about this issue, read Von Bergen's "Jobbing" blog: www.philly.com/jobbing
Monday, March 21, 2011
Interview
By Steve Gordon
Today (3-21-11) I got a phone call from Jane Von Bergen of the Philadelphia Inquirer. She wanted to interview me about the recent proposed legislation in Philadelphia to eliminate the box on job applications that asks if you were ever convicted of a crime.
Of course I had an opinion and spoke my peace as I kept her on the phone too long and potentially made her late for a meeting. My apologies Jane.
My position is basically that this is a good thing but only a first step to ex-offender employment. It creates a better opportunity to get a job interview on a more level playing field without the stigma being in place and having the job application tossed without the applicant being given a chance to present himself or herself. It shouldn't matter whether it is a job for an entry level blue collar job or something more advanced.
At this point I refer you to the March issue of Graterfriends as published by The Pennsylvania Prison Society. There is an article I wrote earlier this year and they felt it was relevant to publish in the issue.Employment is a problem all over, but it is more of an issue with those who may not even have enough money for their next meal let alone a place to sleep and call home. Can you spell potential for re offending?
The article published reiterates a lot of what I have written before, but now it is getting out for more people to read. I would like to think it instigated the legislature but this has been a problem long before I came on the scene. However if it helps push along the issue then perhaps I have made a mark for positive reform for ex-offenders.
Back to the legislation that Mayor Michael Nutter has said he will sign. Why just Philadelphia? Why not other cities like Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Scranton, or Allentown to name a few? The problem with that is it is just thinking small. This should be statewide and put in front of Governor Tom Corbett. NO, NO, NO. That is still thinking small. This is a national problem. This should be national. No job application anywhere for any kind of job should have that box on it. It should go the way of the question of a persons date of birth.
Further, no first interviewer should be able to ask the question. The problem there is that in a first interview when work history is talked about there will be a gap in the work history that will have to be explained.
One reality is that there will always be discrimination. A criminal history, black, white, asian, man, woman, young, old, etc. It is a long list. However, how much of this discrimination is relevant to any particular job? It is supposed to be who is most capable of doing the best work for the job being hired for. I am willing to bet that there a plenty of HR people out there second guessing hiring the best dressed, sweet talking applicant with the best resume when someone else, perhaps even an ex-offender, would have fit into the company and done the job better.
Look at it from another point of view if you are an employer. Here is a chance to put an ex-offender back to work and allow that individual to prove themself and then the company can lay claim to helping the community by helping this part of it be productive and useful.
I pursued an issue I had with Applebees managed by a company called The Rose Group. Eventually I got a name and number for someone in HR. I phoned Paul Trzaska and we had a nice conversation about all of the above. I have seen flyers on employment boards that Applebees is ex-offender friendly so I pursued a job as a Host. One facility is within walking distance from my reisdence.
The bottom line is that there is no hard definition except for some restaurtants in certain areas. The ones I applied to are not in those kind of areas. Your neighborhood bar and grill with a family atmosphere is in some way ex-offender friendly. It does get stickey when you get into the area of felony convictions, but again there is not a no hire policy. It seems to be a store-by-store decision. It is a gray area loophole, but at least on paper this company is open to the idea.
The legislation in Philadelphia needs to be expanded and in the process employers need to see that as a group, ex-offenders have a lot to offer and can be productive. A friend who has position in the county calls my offence "a moment in time" and says it does not define who I am. As I try to move on with my life I think the nations employers, big and small, need to do the same and look beyond the glitter and to the meat and potatoes of what a potential empoyee can do for them.
Hire an ex-offender.
Today (3-21-11) I got a phone call from Jane Von Bergen of the Philadelphia Inquirer. She wanted to interview me about the recent proposed legislation in Philadelphia to eliminate the box on job applications that asks if you were ever convicted of a crime.
Of course I had an opinion and spoke my peace as I kept her on the phone too long and potentially made her late for a meeting. My apologies Jane.
My position is basically that this is a good thing but only a first step to ex-offender employment. It creates a better opportunity to get a job interview on a more level playing field without the stigma being in place and having the job application tossed without the applicant being given a chance to present himself or herself. It shouldn't matter whether it is a job for an entry level blue collar job or something more advanced.
At this point I refer you to the March issue of Graterfriends as published by The Pennsylvania Prison Society. There is an article I wrote earlier this year and they felt it was relevant to publish in the issue.Employment is a problem all over, but it is more of an issue with those who may not even have enough money for their next meal let alone a place to sleep and call home. Can you spell potential for re offending?
The article published reiterates a lot of what I have written before, but now it is getting out for more people to read. I would like to think it instigated the legislature but this has been a problem long before I came on the scene. However if it helps push along the issue then perhaps I have made a mark for positive reform for ex-offenders.
Back to the legislation that Mayor Michael Nutter has said he will sign. Why just Philadelphia? Why not other cities like Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Scranton, or Allentown to name a few? The problem with that is it is just thinking small. This should be statewide and put in front of Governor Tom Corbett. NO, NO, NO. That is still thinking small. This is a national problem. This should be national. No job application anywhere for any kind of job should have that box on it. It should go the way of the question of a persons date of birth.
Further, no first interviewer should be able to ask the question. The problem there is that in a first interview when work history is talked about there will be a gap in the work history that will have to be explained.
One reality is that there will always be discrimination. A criminal history, black, white, asian, man, woman, young, old, etc. It is a long list. However, how much of this discrimination is relevant to any particular job? It is supposed to be who is most capable of doing the best work for the job being hired for. I am willing to bet that there a plenty of HR people out there second guessing hiring the best dressed, sweet talking applicant with the best resume when someone else, perhaps even an ex-offender, would have fit into the company and done the job better.
Look at it from another point of view if you are an employer. Here is a chance to put an ex-offender back to work and allow that individual to prove themself and then the company can lay claim to helping the community by helping this part of it be productive and useful.
I pursued an issue I had with Applebees managed by a company called The Rose Group. Eventually I got a name and number for someone in HR. I phoned Paul Trzaska and we had a nice conversation about all of the above. I have seen flyers on employment boards that Applebees is ex-offender friendly so I pursued a job as a Host. One facility is within walking distance from my reisdence.
The bottom line is that there is no hard definition except for some restaurtants in certain areas. The ones I applied to are not in those kind of areas. Your neighborhood bar and grill with a family atmosphere is in some way ex-offender friendly. It does get stickey when you get into the area of felony convictions, but again there is not a no hire policy. It seems to be a store-by-store decision. It is a gray area loophole, but at least on paper this company is open to the idea.
The legislation in Philadelphia needs to be expanded and in the process employers need to see that as a group, ex-offenders have a lot to offer and can be productive. A friend who has position in the county calls my offence "a moment in time" and says it does not define who I am. As I try to move on with my life I think the nations employers, big and small, need to do the same and look beyond the glitter and to the meat and potatoes of what a potential empoyee can do for them.
Hire an ex-offender.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
New hope
By Steve Gordon
All we can do is push forward and hope for the best. I had what I thought was a very good interview with the Summerwood Corp. this morning. Remember they dismissed me quickly after a phone interview several months ago. This was different and my ex-offender status is a hurdle but not a barrier apparently.
I was told someone would be in touch with me in a couple days. I am guessing (hoping) it would be to set up a second interview. We will see what happens.
Summerwood is the parent company of Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silver and I think they have some association with Pizza Hut.
Footnote: A week after the interview the letter came from Summerwood that they did not have a position to offer me at this time, ya da ya da.
All we can do is push forward and hope for the best. I had what I thought was a very good interview with the Summerwood Corp. this morning. Remember they dismissed me quickly after a phone interview several months ago. This was different and my ex-offender status is a hurdle but not a barrier apparently.
I was told someone would be in touch with me in a couple days. I am guessing (hoping) it would be to set up a second interview. We will see what happens.
Summerwood is the parent company of Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silver and I think they have some association with Pizza Hut.
Footnote: A week after the interview the letter came from Summerwood that they did not have a position to offer me at this time, ya da ya da.
Monday, February 7, 2011
News Release
Friday, February 4, 2011
GENERAL MEDIA NEWS RELEASE
TO: Local broadcast afflilates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS news departments.
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett
The Philadelphia Inquirer
The Bucks County Courier Times
FROM: Steven Gordon
300 Cushmore Road
Southampton, PA 18966
home phone: 215-357-9145
prepaid cell phone: 215-666-3174
email: nevets10@comcast.net
I am a 64-year-old veteran of the US Navy (submarine service) with a solid work history and skills. However I made a mistake and put myself in state prison. I served my entire 10 year sentence and now I can’t put it behind me. I have heard over and over, “We don’t hire convicted felons” even as my offense had nothing to do with the type of employment sought.
In 2000 I did something that was criminal and it was very wrong. I took responsibility. However the generalities and merely reading a file throws the shadow over it. The files do not show that it was not born from criminal thinking and further it does not automatically make me a bad person. It seems the latter gets overlooked.
The Philadelphia Inquirer is currently doing profiles of unemployed workers in this very tough economy and tight job market. The problem is from what I have seen is that it seems all warm and fuzzy stuff, and safe, with people who have college degrees and high qualifications unable to find work. In my estimation they would seem to be missing the mark all around.
My WIA counselor, Irene Dnistrian, at Career Link, Bristol Office in Bucks County answered a request to submit some names for consideration and mine was one of them. I realize not all the people who are submitted get selected but while I cannot be certain, I have a strong feeling my being an ex-offender played a part in it. I also don’t know if the Inquirer or someone at the Career Link squashed it.
Friday, Feb. 4th I attended a Civil Service workshop at the urging of Ms. Dnistrian and the veteran advisor at the Bristol Office, Mr. Rodney Wyatt. It wasn’t long into the workshop when the question came from me about having a felony conviction and being eligible for civil service state employment. The answer was no. There was no need for me to stay for the completion of the workshop.
Here us a question no one answers. If the offense has little or nothing to do with the job being sought, why is it an issue? Even if there is a concern, there is a Federal Bonding Program (FBP) to protect employers. Call the State Bonding Coordinator at 717-787-6915 for verification.
There is an entire segment of our society who are without college degrees, but they are hard workers and yes, some are ex-offenders looking for work. Thursday, Feb. 3rd I went to a Aldi location advertised in the classified ads hiring cashiers. The line was very long. I walked away without putting in an application with the mindset of the reality that the odds of getting a job were slim to start with and how many hundreds of people did not have a “history” who would be placed in front of me even if they hire ex-offenders.
Working with the Career Link I am taking free computer labs and programs like resume writing and how to find a job. I am doing everything asked of me and checking the classified ads and online job boards.
An interview is hard to get, but when I have gotten them I don’t get called back for second interviews. It usually goes ok until the “history” comes up. I listen to friends and counselors and even people who deny me a job say I have a lot to give and good luck. It is getting old and hollow even as those people are trying to be supportive.
All I ask for in my cover letters is to be considered based on my work history and accomplishments and not be judged on the basis of my “history.”
My personal situation is that I live with my elderly parents ages 86 & 89 on fixed incomes. I have nothing because I lost it all in divorce while in prison and my ex-wife holds a $500,000 personal injury judgment over my head such that I cannot even own anything if I had money to purchase it. One lawyer told me I might not even be able to buy a car free of the judgment. Great, when I do find a job I won’t have transportation to get to it.
The reality is that with a couple of missed heartbeats I am potentially another of Americas homeless veterans. I can’t even inherit anything. So I jump through the hoops, live and help out at home and remain unable to self sustain myself in spite of my collecting early SSA and Food Stamp benefits. Fortunately this country takes care of its veterans so I get medical care from the Veterans Administration because I am under the poverty level.
I write two blogs: Reentry to Society at www.restartingalife.blogspot.com and Thoughts from an Idle Mind at www.thoughtsidlemind.blogspot.com. I have talked to and met with local state and federal politicians about the issue. The president (I wrote him from prison before I was released) and politicians make speeches and talk about job plans to put America back to work. What exactly are these plans and where are the jobs?
In Pennsylvania the prison system is overcrowded. Guys getting released have no idea what they are facing upon release. I knew it would be tough, but the definition of this kind of tough borders on nearly impossible. Look at the statistics of how many people in Pennsylvania’s prisons are returned for parole violations or just committed other crimes.
I wonder if anyone has bothered to find out how much of that is related to being beaten down by society. Put these people back to work and the budget would not have to include billions of dollars for new prisons and perhaps we could put money into education and potentially keep people from going to prison on the front end.
Where are the second chances?
Cc: Mr. William DiMascio, PA Prison Society
GENERAL MEDIA NEWS RELEASE
TO: Local broadcast afflilates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS news departments.
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett
The Philadelphia Inquirer
The Bucks County Courier Times
FROM: Steven Gordon
300 Cushmore Road
Southampton, PA 18966
home phone: 215-357-9145
prepaid cell phone: 215-666-3174
email: nevets10@comcast.net
I am a 64-year-old veteran of the US Navy (submarine service) with a solid work history and skills. However I made a mistake and put myself in state prison. I served my entire 10 year sentence and now I can’t put it behind me. I have heard over and over, “We don’t hire convicted felons” even as my offense had nothing to do with the type of employment sought.
In 2000 I did something that was criminal and it was very wrong. I took responsibility. However the generalities and merely reading a file throws the shadow over it. The files do not show that it was not born from criminal thinking and further it does not automatically make me a bad person. It seems the latter gets overlooked.
The Philadelphia Inquirer is currently doing profiles of unemployed workers in this very tough economy and tight job market. The problem is from what I have seen is that it seems all warm and fuzzy stuff, and safe, with people who have college degrees and high qualifications unable to find work. In my estimation they would seem to be missing the mark all around.
My WIA counselor, Irene Dnistrian, at Career Link, Bristol Office in Bucks County answered a request to submit some names for consideration and mine was one of them. I realize not all the people who are submitted get selected but while I cannot be certain, I have a strong feeling my being an ex-offender played a part in it. I also don’t know if the Inquirer or someone at the Career Link squashed it.
Friday, Feb. 4th I attended a Civil Service workshop at the urging of Ms. Dnistrian and the veteran advisor at the Bristol Office, Mr. Rodney Wyatt. It wasn’t long into the workshop when the question came from me about having a felony conviction and being eligible for civil service state employment. The answer was no. There was no need for me to stay for the completion of the workshop.
Here us a question no one answers. If the offense has little or nothing to do with the job being sought, why is it an issue? Even if there is a concern, there is a Federal Bonding Program (FBP) to protect employers. Call the State Bonding Coordinator at 717-787-6915 for verification.
There is an entire segment of our society who are without college degrees, but they are hard workers and yes, some are ex-offenders looking for work. Thursday, Feb. 3rd I went to a Aldi location advertised in the classified ads hiring cashiers. The line was very long. I walked away without putting in an application with the mindset of the reality that the odds of getting a job were slim to start with and how many hundreds of people did not have a “history” who would be placed in front of me even if they hire ex-offenders.
Working with the Career Link I am taking free computer labs and programs like resume writing and how to find a job. I am doing everything asked of me and checking the classified ads and online job boards.
An interview is hard to get, but when I have gotten them I don’t get called back for second interviews. It usually goes ok until the “history” comes up. I listen to friends and counselors and even people who deny me a job say I have a lot to give and good luck. It is getting old and hollow even as those people are trying to be supportive.
All I ask for in my cover letters is to be considered based on my work history and accomplishments and not be judged on the basis of my “history.”
My personal situation is that I live with my elderly parents ages 86 & 89 on fixed incomes. I have nothing because I lost it all in divorce while in prison and my ex-wife holds a $500,000 personal injury judgment over my head such that I cannot even own anything if I had money to purchase it. One lawyer told me I might not even be able to buy a car free of the judgment. Great, when I do find a job I won’t have transportation to get to it.
The reality is that with a couple of missed heartbeats I am potentially another of Americas homeless veterans. I can’t even inherit anything. So I jump through the hoops, live and help out at home and remain unable to self sustain myself in spite of my collecting early SSA and Food Stamp benefits. Fortunately this country takes care of its veterans so I get medical care from the Veterans Administration because I am under the poverty level.
I write two blogs: Reentry to Society at www.restartingalife.blogspot.com and Thoughts from an Idle Mind at www.thoughtsidlemind.blogspot.com. I have talked to and met with local state and federal politicians about the issue. The president (I wrote him from prison before I was released) and politicians make speeches and talk about job plans to put America back to work. What exactly are these plans and where are the jobs?
In Pennsylvania the prison system is overcrowded. Guys getting released have no idea what they are facing upon release. I knew it would be tough, but the definition of this kind of tough borders on nearly impossible. Look at the statistics of how many people in Pennsylvania’s prisons are returned for parole violations or just committed other crimes.
I wonder if anyone has bothered to find out how much of that is related to being beaten down by society. Put these people back to work and the budget would not have to include billions of dollars for new prisons and perhaps we could put money into education and potentially keep people from going to prison on the front end.
Where are the second chances?
Cc: Mr. William DiMascio, PA Prison Society
Saturday, February 5, 2011
State Civil Service
By Steve Gordon
I went to a state civil service workshop to explore potential civil service employment. It was suggested I do so by people at the Career Link. If you are an ex-offender with a felony conviction, don't bother. The person facilitating the workshop told me anyone with a felony conviction is not eligible to work in a state job in Pennsylvania..
You hear that Tom Corbett? More limited opportunities for ex-offenders by the state of Pennsylvania. Where are these job plans and who gets the jobs? Why can't we make an effort to get ex-offenders back on their feet, people who have nothing, a priority and take the money for building new prisons and put it to better use up front?
I went to a state civil service workshop to explore potential civil service employment. It was suggested I do so by people at the Career Link. If you are an ex-offender with a felony conviction, don't bother. The person facilitating the workshop told me anyone with a felony conviction is not eligible to work in a state job in Pennsylvania..
You hear that Tom Corbett? More limited opportunities for ex-offenders by the state of Pennsylvania. Where are these job plans and who gets the jobs? Why can't we make an effort to get ex-offenders back on their feet, people who have nothing, a priority and take the money for building new prisons and put it to better use up front?
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Pinch yourself for a reality check
By Steve Gordon
I started writing this a couple weeks ago and didn’t finish it and then it became neglected. Sorry.
A big pinch of reality tweeked me today. If you have followed this blog you know that my situation is that of having lost basically everything in divorce, I owning nothing, I am coming out of prison at 64-years-old, I don’t have a job, and ...you get the idea.
Lost in between the cracks is the fact that my ex-wife, Patricia Gordon, holds a $500,000.00 (yes, a 1/2 million dollars) personal injury judgment on me. This is even after I turned over basically all of my claim to marital property to her in the divorce settlement in 2003 while I was in prison.
On a bigger scale however it becomes an issue because now it involves the family. Here is/was her mindset. In answering derogatories (a list of questions for the court) for the divorce she put down in her own handwriting that she thought she should get “everything” in regard to the marital property. Well, she pretty much did.
Here is the kicker. All of our marital property together didn’t add up to ½ million dollars.
Trying to figure out the logic of going through the motions on the civil action is fruitless. It is likely she went in the hole financially to pay the attorney for paperwork, research, phone calls, letters, consultations, and time in court. That part wasn’t my fault. No matter, this judgment can (will?) be held over me for the rest of my life. The thing is there is nothing to get.
Those are the facts.
This is becoming an issue now for my parents planning for the family estate because obviously I can’t inherit anything. Some think this was her plan. You know, an attempt to get whatever I might inherit or at best keeping me from having anything.
As you know my situation is that I live at home, collect food stamps, don’t have measurable savings or a job, and have only some Social Security as income. With the stoppage of a couple heartbeats I potentially become another of America’s homeless veterans living in a refrigerator box under a bridge somewhere. My income is below the poverty level and definitely not enough comes from SSA to rent an apartment.
I understand laws are written to protect people, but people take advantage of the law and sometimes courts get it wrong. We are a litigious society. Bankruptcy was suggested as a remote possibility, but I do not owe anyone anything except for the judgment. However the judgment is bankruptcy proof.
There are provisions in bankruptcy for support and alimony where if the debtor can show extreme hardship on him or her and that the party being owed is not in dire need that it is taken into consideration.
Here I am trying to reestablish a good credit rating and yet I can’t own anything. I have a couple credit cards that I use and then pay the balance off each month so as not to accumulate interest.
The car I was driving before it died was a 14 year old vehicle owned by my brother. It was the only thing I saved from the marriage. Pat had two other cars at the time of the divorce and asked for the Blazer as well but was denied. At least the Master for divorce used common sense with that.
She could, and some think she will, come running waving the judgement around when I find a job. A bankruptcy lawyer (here I thought I was finished with lawyers when I got out of prison) said he thought that wages would not be liable but he didn’t give me a definite answer on a free advice phone call. He did say that if I bought a car she might be able to take it. Great, if I get a job (we know it won't be at Applebees) I won’t be able to get to it.
OK, I am done venting. I wish I could get someones attention who could do something to correct inequities in things but as usual, ex-offenders are afforded little standing in society. Then “they” wonder why the prisons are so full and why people go back to prison.
I don’t know. DUH
I started writing this a couple weeks ago and didn’t finish it and then it became neglected. Sorry.
A big pinch of reality tweeked me today. If you have followed this blog you know that my situation is that of having lost basically everything in divorce, I owning nothing, I am coming out of prison at 64-years-old, I don’t have a job, and ...you get the idea.
Lost in between the cracks is the fact that my ex-wife, Patricia Gordon, holds a $500,000.00 (yes, a 1/2 million dollars) personal injury judgment on me. This is even after I turned over basically all of my claim to marital property to her in the divorce settlement in 2003 while I was in prison.
On a bigger scale however it becomes an issue because now it involves the family. Here is/was her mindset. In answering derogatories (a list of questions for the court) for the divorce she put down in her own handwriting that she thought she should get “everything” in regard to the marital property. Well, she pretty much did.
Here is the kicker. All of our marital property together didn’t add up to ½ million dollars.
Trying to figure out the logic of going through the motions on the civil action is fruitless. It is likely she went in the hole financially to pay the attorney for paperwork, research, phone calls, letters, consultations, and time in court. That part wasn’t my fault. No matter, this judgment can (will?) be held over me for the rest of my life. The thing is there is nothing to get.
Those are the facts.
This is becoming an issue now for my parents planning for the family estate because obviously I can’t inherit anything. Some think this was her plan. You know, an attempt to get whatever I might inherit or at best keeping me from having anything.
As you know my situation is that I live at home, collect food stamps, don’t have measurable savings or a job, and have only some Social Security as income. With the stoppage of a couple heartbeats I potentially become another of America’s homeless veterans living in a refrigerator box under a bridge somewhere. My income is below the poverty level and definitely not enough comes from SSA to rent an apartment.
I understand laws are written to protect people, but people take advantage of the law and sometimes courts get it wrong. We are a litigious society. Bankruptcy was suggested as a remote possibility, but I do not owe anyone anything except for the judgment. However the judgment is bankruptcy proof.
There are provisions in bankruptcy for support and alimony where if the debtor can show extreme hardship on him or her and that the party being owed is not in dire need that it is taken into consideration.
Here I am trying to reestablish a good credit rating and yet I can’t own anything. I have a couple credit cards that I use and then pay the balance off each month so as not to accumulate interest.
The car I was driving before it died was a 14 year old vehicle owned by my brother. It was the only thing I saved from the marriage. Pat had two other cars at the time of the divorce and asked for the Blazer as well but was denied. At least the Master for divorce used common sense with that.
She could, and some think she will, come running waving the judgement around when I find a job. A bankruptcy lawyer (here I thought I was finished with lawyers when I got out of prison) said he thought that wages would not be liable but he didn’t give me a definite answer on a free advice phone call. He did say that if I bought a car she might be able to take it. Great, if I get a job (we know it won't be at Applebees) I won’t be able to get to it.
OK, I am done venting. I wish I could get someones attention who could do something to correct inequities in things but as usual, ex-offenders are afforded little standing in society. Then “they” wonder why the prisons are so full and why people go back to prison.
I don’t know. DUH
Friday, January 21, 2011
Background checks
By Steve Gordon
Here is an ironic twist of things. I had a job interview with a company called Vertical Screen. It was to do Human Resource Research. VS is contracted by companies to do background checks of potential new employees where education and employment history is verified and criminal background checks are done.
I am sure in my cover letter I made mention of being an ex-offender but apparently someone did not read the second paragraph.
The interview was going good until we hit that speed bump. The interviewer said it would be a major problem but did not say it was insurmountable. The only other thing he had issue with is my computer skills as compared to the many others applying for the positions available. I rated myself above average but I guess others rated themselves higher. If there is a second interview I was told there would be testing. I have been taking free computer labs to get up to speed but even with that I do recognize that I am below the curve with other job seekers.
When I got home I took my one suit off and replaced it in the closet. After some quiet time I dressed casual and drove up to the local Applebees and walked in and put in an application for a Host position. I saw the job posted on their web site and I applied online. But on this day I thought making personal contact with the local managers would not be a bad thing.
It wasn't. They are hiring and the manager I spoke with was very pleasant even as we discussed my status of being an ex-offender. Perhaps Applebees is the company who will give this ex-offender a chance to prove himself?
Applebees hasn't called and it has been over a week. I think I will check in tomorrow after my interview with the Red Cross for a head cook at a nearby facility. People keep saying I have a lot to offer only in this very tough economy and job market an ex-offender isn't where employers are looking to pull people from.
I will keep trudging along and continue with the free computer labs. There is no other reasonable choice.
Here is an ironic twist of things. I had a job interview with a company called Vertical Screen. It was to do Human Resource Research. VS is contracted by companies to do background checks of potential new employees where education and employment history is verified and criminal background checks are done.
I am sure in my cover letter I made mention of being an ex-offender but apparently someone did not read the second paragraph.
The interview was going good until we hit that speed bump. The interviewer said it would be a major problem but did not say it was insurmountable. The only other thing he had issue with is my computer skills as compared to the many others applying for the positions available. I rated myself above average but I guess others rated themselves higher. If there is a second interview I was told there would be testing. I have been taking free computer labs to get up to speed but even with that I do recognize that I am below the curve with other job seekers.
When I got home I took my one suit off and replaced it in the closet. After some quiet time I dressed casual and drove up to the local Applebees and walked in and put in an application for a Host position. I saw the job posted on their web site and I applied online. But on this day I thought making personal contact with the local managers would not be a bad thing.
It wasn't. They are hiring and the manager I spoke with was very pleasant even as we discussed my status of being an ex-offender. Perhaps Applebees is the company who will give this ex-offender a chance to prove himself?
Applebees hasn't called and it has been over a week. I think I will check in tomorrow after my interview with the Red Cross for a head cook at a nearby facility. People keep saying I have a lot to offer only in this very tough economy and job market an ex-offender isn't where employers are looking to pull people from.
I will keep trudging along and continue with the free computer labs. There is no other reasonable choice.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Job interviews
By Steve Gordon
I have not updated much lately being involved in many things as winter and the holiday season approaches. I have had two job interviews in the past week which is a break through of sorts because getting to talk to a real person about a job is not commonplace these days. Companies prefer to screen applicants using email and Internet applications.
It must be a massive job to go through hundreds...thousands of applications and resumes. I really do understand that from a HR point of view. On the other hand from the job seekers perspective, it takes the human touch and the ability to sell ones self away such that the best qualified person may not be the person getting the job. How wonderful it is to shake hands with a computer key board and say hello and how are you and then sit down and talk? The one with the prettiest or most impressive resume could get the tap on the shoulder, but they may not be the best person for the job.
Here is where the Pennsylvania Career Link comes into play, for me anyway. They have a 3-day resume writing program with the Bucks County Opportunity Council. At first I thought what can be so interesting about three 1 1/2 hour sessions taking about writing a resume. I was surprised and having done it I recommend it even to persons who do not have a long job history.
My new resume? I love it. I can't say that it got me the two interviews, but I can't say that it didn't. I believe it did however. Even as it includes my extensive work history as the old resume did, it is all about presentation. You actually can sell a piece of yourself on paper (or electronically if you will) with a resume. I am ready to take on a new program now, Ace the Interview.
About my interviews now. One was with Bottom Dollar Food, a new grocery chain moving into the SE Pennsylvania area. To be honest I can't remember how I made initial contact. It was either online or by a newspaper classified listing. It doesn't matter really because I got an interview.
HR people from BDF set up shop in a conference room at a local hotel and conducted generic interviews for all positions for a new store expected to open soon. After filling out some paperwork the interview was a series of questions read from a paper. I suppose they were in someones mind relevant, but it was very mechanical if you get my drift.
Yes, I get that it was a screening process, but while there was human contact it was still very sterile. To be honest I am not sure I put my best foot forward in that situation. That is not to say I tanked the interview, I just think it could have gone better, or differently. I am waiting for a call back telephone call but my mindset is to hope for the best and expect less. It would be a job I have the ability to perform so I hope the interviewer saw that through the interrogation.
The second interview was at an Old Country Buffet by their management company. While the interviewer quipped, "Welcome to the table of hell" as we walked to the interview booth, it was far from that. Rick was personable and friendly and very real. It was late afternoon and I think I was his last interview of a long day. It turned out I was only the second qualified person he spoke to with another day of interview to follow. The unfortunate part for me was that the other person was much more qualified in one important area of experience.
Not to lose hope however, because there are various OCB locations in the area and the interviewer spoke of one opportunity that was potentially only months from opening up. Even with that one hole in my work experience, there is a chance I could eventually land a good position and get back to work. Remember, hope for the best.
I have not mentioned the ex-offender and age issues. With BDF the interviewer did not know if the company had an ex-offender barrier or policy. You would think a properly trained HR person would be aware. As I explained how my experience would translate into retail grocery sales the age issue did not surface. In the interview with OCB we talked about both and neither seemed to be a major barrier.
It is good to know that some companies in corporate America are not so paranoid as to exclude qualified individuals based on such things. I have been quick to jump on corporate America and all the proposed job plans the politicians espoused about during the recent elections. I am still waiting to see where all these jobs are going to come from to put people back to work, so I have not let corporate America off the hook. I just want to say that the management company for OCB seems to be more open minded than some. There is a huge valuable resource of work experience in ex-offenders and at some point somebody is going to have to recognize that and tap into it.
May the best person get the job is all I ask.
I have not updated much lately being involved in many things as winter and the holiday season approaches. I have had two job interviews in the past week which is a break through of sorts because getting to talk to a real person about a job is not commonplace these days. Companies prefer to screen applicants using email and Internet applications.
It must be a massive job to go through hundreds...thousands of applications and resumes. I really do understand that from a HR point of view. On the other hand from the job seekers perspective, it takes the human touch and the ability to sell ones self away such that the best qualified person may not be the person getting the job. How wonderful it is to shake hands with a computer key board and say hello and how are you and then sit down and talk? The one with the prettiest or most impressive resume could get the tap on the shoulder, but they may not be the best person for the job.
Here is where the Pennsylvania Career Link comes into play, for me anyway. They have a 3-day resume writing program with the Bucks County Opportunity Council. At first I thought what can be so interesting about three 1 1/2 hour sessions taking about writing a resume. I was surprised and having done it I recommend it even to persons who do not have a long job history.
My new resume? I love it. I can't say that it got me the two interviews, but I can't say that it didn't. I believe it did however. Even as it includes my extensive work history as the old resume did, it is all about presentation. You actually can sell a piece of yourself on paper (or electronically if you will) with a resume. I am ready to take on a new program now, Ace the Interview.
About my interviews now. One was with Bottom Dollar Food, a new grocery chain moving into the SE Pennsylvania area. To be honest I can't remember how I made initial contact. It was either online or by a newspaper classified listing. It doesn't matter really because I got an interview.
HR people from BDF set up shop in a conference room at a local hotel and conducted generic interviews for all positions for a new store expected to open soon. After filling out some paperwork the interview was a series of questions read from a paper. I suppose they were in someones mind relevant, but it was very mechanical if you get my drift.
Yes, I get that it was a screening process, but while there was human contact it was still very sterile. To be honest I am not sure I put my best foot forward in that situation. That is not to say I tanked the interview, I just think it could have gone better, or differently. I am waiting for a call back telephone call but my mindset is to hope for the best and expect less. It would be a job I have the ability to perform so I hope the interviewer saw that through the interrogation.
The second interview was at an Old Country Buffet by their management company. While the interviewer quipped, "Welcome to the table of hell" as we walked to the interview booth, it was far from that. Rick was personable and friendly and very real. It was late afternoon and I think I was his last interview of a long day. It turned out I was only the second qualified person he spoke to with another day of interview to follow. The unfortunate part for me was that the other person was much more qualified in one important area of experience.
Not to lose hope however, because there are various OCB locations in the area and the interviewer spoke of one opportunity that was potentially only months from opening up. Even with that one hole in my work experience, there is a chance I could eventually land a good position and get back to work. Remember, hope for the best.
I have not mentioned the ex-offender and age issues. With BDF the interviewer did not know if the company had an ex-offender barrier or policy. You would think a properly trained HR person would be aware. As I explained how my experience would translate into retail grocery sales the age issue did not surface. In the interview with OCB we talked about both and neither seemed to be a major barrier.
It is good to know that some companies in corporate America are not so paranoid as to exclude qualified individuals based on such things. I have been quick to jump on corporate America and all the proposed job plans the politicians espoused about during the recent elections. I am still waiting to see where all these jobs are going to come from to put people back to work, so I have not let corporate America off the hook. I just want to say that the management company for OCB seems to be more open minded than some. There is a huge valuable resource of work experience in ex-offenders and at some point somebody is going to have to recognize that and tap into it.
May the best person get the job is all I ask.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)