Let go for not admitting I had a juvenile record (which is sealed)

[Ty0604]

WASHINGTON

I was arrested when I was 11 for vandalism and am now 26. I had my juvenile record sealed when I turned 21. I've been working at a grocery store since 2010 while finishing up grad school. On my application I answered "no" when it asked if I had ever been convicted of a crime. It was my understanding that since my juvenile record was sealed, I wasn't under any obligation to admit it. Earlier today I was let go because of it. My boss did a search of my name on Google and the story of my arrest comes up in an old newspaper from the incident, which occurred in 1997. I was let go because I "provided false information" to my employer.

Am I SOL here or do I have a case for wrongful termination?

 

[sandyclaus]

WASHINGTON

I was arrested when I was 11 for vandalism and am now 26. I had my juvenile record sealed when I turned 21. I've been working at a grocery store since 2010 while finishing up grad school. On my application I answered "no" when it asked if I had ever been convicted of a crime. It was my understanding that since my juvenile record was sealed, I wasn't under any obligation to admit it. Earlier today I was let go because of it. My boss did a search of my name on Google and the story of my arrest comes up in an old newspaper from the incident, which occurred in 1997. I was let go because I "provided false information" to my employer.

Am I SOL here or do I have a case for wrongful termination?

Criminals are not considered a protected class. It's only wrongful termination if the grounds were based upon you being part of a legally protected class. And lying on a job application is certainly something they might consider in hiring or firing decisions. I know I wouldn't want someone working for me that had provided false information on a job application.

While the employer didn't find any history of arrest or prosecution under your criminal background, that didn't necessarily mean the record wasn't searchable somewhere else. Before answering that question in the negative, you probably should have checked to make sure your arrest wasn't publicized somewhere.

 

[swalsh411]

File for unemployment while you look for a new job.

 

[ESteele]

OP, you should check to determine what “sealed” actually meant in this context. In other jurisdictions (e.g., Maryland), an employer cannot lawfully rely on an “expunged” criminal record as the basis to take adverse action (e.g., termination) against an employee or an applicant. Moreover, in these jurisdictions, an individual can “truthfully” deny the existence of his or her criminal record in light of the expungement order.

If you had your record sealed in Washington and sealed essentially means expunged in Washington, then a possibility exists your employer may have violated state law in terminating you due to your sealed record. You may want to undertake to do some research on the sealing-expungement law in Washington and/or confer with local counsel to explore your options.

 

[Zigner]

To the OP:
Had you been honest on your job application, they could not have legally refused to hire you based on this. However, you were let go for lying on the application, not for the conviction.

 

[Zigner]

OP, you should check to determine what “sealed” actually meant in this context. In other jurisdictions (e.g., Maryland), an employer cannot lawfully rely on an “expunged” criminal record as the basis to take adverse action (e.g., termination) against an employee or an applicant. Moreover, in these jurisdictions, an individual can “truthfully” deny the existence of his or her criminal record in light of the expungement order.

If you had your record sealed in Washington and sealed essentially means expunged in Washington, then a possibility exists your employer may have violated state law in terminating you due to your sealed record. You may want to undertake to do some research on the sealing-expungement law in Washington and/or confer with local counsel to explore your options.

ESteele -
OP wasn't terminated because of the conviction...OP was terminated based on the lie on the application.

 

[commentator]

This young man should certainly file for unemployment benefits. If the records are "sealed" then he didn't lie on his job application. It would be silly for someone in these circumstances to keep putting "yes, I was convicted of a felony" on applications if the felony happened when he was a juvenile and those records were officially sealed. The reason this is done is so that the person can start off at 18 with a clear record, and will not be denied employment or clearances for things that happened while he was not an adult.

 

[Zigner]

This young man should certainly file for unemployment benefits.

I agree

If the records are "sealed" then he didn't lie on his job application. It would be silly for someone in these circumstances to keep putting "yes, I was convicted of a felony" on applications if the felony happened when he was a juvenile and those records were officially sealed. The reason this is done is so that the person can start off at 18 with a clear record, and will not be denied employment or clearances for things that happened while he was not an adult.

I disagree. The law provides that this conviction would not be held against her if it were acknowledged (based both on the length of time elapsed and the nature of the crime.) The OP lied on her employment application and was terminated because of that lie.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Regardless, OP was terminated as an at will employee. They are free to seek UI.

 

[ESteele]

I quickly looked at a few articles describing the expungement process and the sealing process in Washington this afternoon. It appears that if a conviction was expunged then the state statute allows the affected individual to “truthfully” tell prospective employers that the underlying criminal record did not exist. If this interpretation of the law is correct (and it appears consistent with how other states handle this issue), then the OP did not “lie” when he denied the existence of his juvenile conviction or his criminal record.

What I do not know at this point is whether Washington law prohibits employers from taking adverse action against employees or applicants based on their expunged or sealed criminal record information. The answer to this question may determine whether the OP has a cognizable cause of action against his former employer. If the law does include such a prohibition, then the OP’s employer apparently contravened the statute by terminating him for “denying” the existence of his expunged and/or sealed criminal record.

In light of the of the foregoing, I would urge the OP to research the law and to consult with experienced local counsel.

 

[Cali408nia]

Had you been honest on your job application, they could not have legally refused to hire you based on this. However, you were let go for lying on the application, not for the conviction.

And yet there's a fair chance they wouldn't have hired him at all "for other reasons". You can't sugar coat it and say that it wouldn't be sore thumb sticking out to see that on someone's application. His "lie" to get him 2 years of employment might be better than no employment at all. Who knows.

I like how the majority jump to the conclusion that he lied, when if what he's describing is accurate, it was not a lie at all.

 

[Zigner]

And yet there's a fair chance they wouldn't have hired him at all "for other reasons". You can't sugar coat it and say that it wouldn't be sore thumb sticking out to see that on someone's application. His "lie" to get him 2 years of employment might be better than no employment at all. Who knows.

Won't argue with you there.

I like how the majority jump to the conclusion that he lied, when if what he's describing is accurate, it was not a lie at all.

It was an intentional misstatement. Better?

 

[Zigner]

In light of the of the foregoing, I would urge the OP to research the law and to consult with experienced local counsel.

Never a bad idea.

 

[CdwJava]

If the record truly was sealed, then he can answer "no" to the question of whether or not he had ever been convicted of a criminal offense. No lie on the application.

http://www.washingtonlawhelp.org/documents/4603414902EN.pdf?stateabbrev=/wa/

Check out form JU.0320 at http://www.courts.wa.gov/forms/?fa=forms.contribute&formID=38

The OP does not appear to have lied, exaggerated, or made an impermissible intentional misstatement under WA law. As such, I suspect the employer made an 'oops.'

 

[Zigner]

If the record truly was sealed, then he can answer "no" to the question of whether or not he had ever been convicted of a criminal offense. No lie on the application.

http://www.washingtonlawhelp.org/documents/4603414902EN.pdf?stateabbrev=/wa/

Check out form JU.0320 at http://www.courts.wa.gov/forms/?fa=forms.contribute&formID=38

The OP does not appear to have lied, exaggerated, or made an impermissible intentional misstatement under WA law. As such, I suspect the employer made an 'oops.'

Thanks for the research Carl.