The Surprising Truth About Incarceration and Employment

In the year following their release, only 55% of former prisoners have any wages, with the median worker earning a mere $5,900. This fact is sobering, but not necessarily surprising. After all, ex-prisoners naturally face many barriers to employment. However, an in-depth analysis by the Brookings Institution reveals a surprising truth: many of these problems finding and maintaining decent employment are worse in the years before they go to prison than after. 

It is well-established that ex-prisoners have a harder time finding work than non-offenders. A study from Arizona State University submitted pairs of nearly identical resumes online (except for noting prison time on one resume). The resumes with the prison time were less likely to receive a positive response from an employer. The employers later stated that among ex-prisoners, they were more concerned about absenteeism, addiction issues, mental health problems, and limited ability to maintain positive relationships with customers and fellow employees.  Employer surveys also show that 26% of employers of entry level positions either “probably” or “definitely” would not ever hire someone who had been in prison.  (20% would not hire someone who had been in jail.) 

While employers’ prejudices are not necessarily without any merit, they create a barrier that can block even very dedicated employees from ever getting a chance. This concern has sparked efforts to “ban the box” on job applications that requires submitters to denote if they have ever been convicted of a crime. Sometimes this question is removed voluntarily by employers, other times by local policy fiat. The effect of the practice has been shown to boost employment in high-crime neighborhoods by around 4%. 

But “banning the box” won’t address the underlying issues that make the ex-criminal population so difficult to employ in the first place. 

Employment rates of prisoners in the 8 years before they serve time hover around 50%, with median earnings averaging around $6,500.  While some income is likely concealed from the researchers by black market activity, the fact is that a life of crime does not pay well for the typical criminal. Sudhir Venkatesh, a sociologist who embedded himself in a violent Chicago crack gang for years, brought to light that the average drug selling “foot soldier” earned a mere $3.30 an hour.  They often asked him for help in getting a “good job”–working as a janitor for the nearby university. 

What underlying issues cause this complete lack of access to the labor market, even before a criminal record is established?

There’s not one malady to blame, but rather a cocktail of environmental, familial, and personal factors that can keep a young, able-bodied person out of the workforce. The context in which a person grows up is a major, though not an absolute, determinant of future success. After all, the home is the primary training ground for fundamental soft skills, such as basic social skills, proper time management, and emotional regulation, that are key to securing employment. With only 7% percent of children in poverty growing up in stable homes with married parents, the context for learning these vital skills is missing–and the consequences of that fact magnify as children move into adulthood.

Another key factor to securing employment is healthy social capital. Renowned sociologist Robert Putnam explored the extensive benefits of social capital in his groundbreaking book Bowling Alone, finding that healthy connections to family, friends, neighbors, and community members was a key indicator of a person’s success in the marketplace. Unfortunately, the very groups most in need of social capital–the socioeconomically disadvantaged–are the groups least likely to have it. Without pliable social connections necessary to learn about and land lucrative jobs, at-risk young people may find themselves propelled further down a negative path, including under-employment and subsequent criminal activity.

While there are many laudable programs, such as the Doe Fund and Jail to Jobs, that exist to tackle this problem of under-employment for ex-criminals, keen poverty fighters should also note the under-employment that occurs before incarceration–and attack its insidious underlying causes. At a minimum, compassionate people can support nimble private charity that’s better able to address root issues than welfare policies that penalize healthy family structures and isolate the poor from beneficial social connections.