Insurance Journal Forums

Can an employer fire an employee because their pre-convicted mugshot appears online on mugshots.com?

Lying on a job application could be. Was the employee asked about past problems with the law? If the employer knew about troubles in the employees past and still hired them, then I'd say that simply seeing a photo posted on line would not be grounds for firing.

I picture on mugshots.com only means that the employee was arrested, it means nothing in relation to conviction of a crime. Firing an employee purely based on that would open the employer up for a lawsuit. As mentioned by superdash if they lied during the interview/application process then the employer may be protected. Typically "Have you been convicted of a Felony?" is the questions on the app. I would advise than an employer know a whole lot more about the whole picture before just giving the employee the axe

I am no attorney, but I would suggest that depending on what the employee was arrested for, could give the employer cause? For instance, was it a DUI arrest, and is the employee an outside salesperson? Was it for endangering a child, and the employee works in a day care?

I find it interesting that the term used was 'pre-convicted"....was the employee in fact, actually convicted, and the employer found out by using this website?

You know, with the social media explosion, everyone is going to have to get used to the fact that we will have much less privacy.

Just my 2 cents...

This can also be happen if the false information were given on the employment contract regarding the previous records and employer finds out later, than it would be fairly legitimate for employer to fire the culprit.

In my opinion, firing an employee based on a mugshot isn't right. The employer should get the facts first and find out if the employee was really convicted of something. I think it's just right to give the employee to explain his or her side first. But if say for example the employee was asked if he or she has done something in the past and was convicted but opted to lie about it then this is enough to fire the employee. It's a different story if the employee lied during the job application. This is without a doubt grounds for firing.

I agree with Jazz's posting. Most employment applications have a statement that if any false information has been given on thye application it is grounds for dismissal. I think that lying is a falshood on an application for employement and you can bet your boots if a new hire wants to start out with a lie then any chance of future trust is gone and so is the job in my company. I have owned my own business for 47 years and that has proven itself out several times until I learned better. In fact one employee that cried on my sholder and got the job within a few weeks claimed a slip and fall and filed a fraudlent Work Comp claim. She was caught and punished by the comp people who then asked why I hired her in thye first place. Worse than that she had not been doing her job properly and it took two employees days to straighten out the messes. People who start out lying have the past records for a reason and most will not change, simply because they have been getting away with the behavior in the first place.

Technically convicted means until the person (employee) has exhausted the appeals process too. There have been instances where a person is wrongly convicted and exonerated in the appeals process.

Those mugshots are only for arrest. A person can be arrested for anything: even being a "material witness," and not having committed a crime.

The norm in our legal system is to charge the highest, (depending on their history) negotiate to the lowest. You can only ask about felonies, and may times someone is charged with a felony and pleads to a misdemeanor.

You also have to take into account sentencing. If the person enters a "1st-time" program, then their record is expunged after successful completion. People receiving pardons (Gubernatorial or Presidential) are also considered to have their record expunged.

Same goes for PFAs (protection from abuse), law suits, etc. I can (technically) file a PFA or lawsuit against anyone (in these situations our courts err on the side of caution), but once they have a hearing, the court decides if there is merit.

This is all part of that slippery slope that includes background checks and social media.