VA: Juice shop closes after employees discover owner’s brother is registrant.
A popular juice shop in Richmond, Virginia closed after employees discovered that the owner’s brother had a Florida criminal record for sexual battery. According to reporting by WRIC, staff became aware of the brother’s history and raised concerns about his involvement in the business.
As the situation developed, it appears the brother had worked for the business without being disclosed as a registrant to the other employees. Employees reportedly quit en masse, causing the business to close.
What do you think? Should the employee’s history have been disclosed or do you think it was was nobody’s business?
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I really dont think the employer needs to share a employee’s past, but to maybe question him or her about there present situation….
Just to add to my comment : I don’t think an employer needs to let other employees know about there status as a sex offender. The employer should just talk to the person and ask how they are doing as far as being on the registry. And questions about their life now as far as being a reliable citizen in the community, I’m sure they can tell if he thinks there is any risk from him. If he works hard and shows commentment in his or hers ability to be a positive law abiding citizen..
I worked many different places while on probation I worked out of a temporary job business for the whole time from 1989 to 2006 some jobs were long term because the employer liked my job performance a few places hired me full time. I never had a problem with being confronted because I was a person forced to register. If the places of employment would have done a background check they would know of my criminal back ground. I never had that problem being employed. I even made employer of the month at two of my jobs. So up until 2006 I was doing great. Then the registry started. I knew Wright then I was facing a lifetime of hell having to put up with all of the sanctions from the registry. Now 20 years later I am retired, I am still angry because I thought after getting off probation I would be happy and possibly married and getting along with my life with no more stupid issues to get in any kind of trouble and especially a sex offense. I was absolutely positively sure I would not go through all of the issues I put myself through in the past 16 years of house arrest and probation. And now 36 years later from 1989 I’m very tired and old!! I didn’t want to die and still going through literal hell. I am tired, but still hanging on with hope to be happy again………
.
No, employers should not have to notify staff when they hire PFRs. The registry is already public for those who are inclined to look at it – notice requirement met. If people aren’t religiously checking the registry to see if their neighbors and coworkers are on it, they don’t have much standing to cry about living amongst a registrant later on. Especially if months or years have passed between initial association and discovery of registry status.
Regarding this particular place, I find it oxymoronic to complain of a coworker’s registry status and in the same complaint the installation of security cameras. If safety from the PFR were the actual concern, I would think the complainants wouldn’t be so opposed to having them.
I’d bet the person that set up the GoFundMe ($12k so far) is probably the same person that created this so-called scandal in the first place and likely won’t share a dime with the other former employees. Would also bet that this person was a terrible employee and probably the primary reason the owners installed the security cameras.
If employees feel the need to be notified of a persons past , it should include everyone who is employed. There are thieves, domestic violence perpetrators, drug dealers, sex offenders. Everyone wants privacy and deserves it . The problem is that sexual offenders do not any rights to privacy and in some instances that is harmful to the offenders and those around them including spouses and children. Laws are constantly being introduced to make life miserable for one particular group of individuals only because of political or monetary gain. Murderers and drug dealers get more leniency than someone who exposed themselves in public . Its just not correct. The system wants sex offenders to live a law biding live but its literally almost impossible to keep up with new laws and ordinances resulting in rearrests. There are NO SECOND CHANCES FOR SEX OFFENDERS regardless . Lifetime on the registry is Punishment. We should all wish that other Crimes have the same requirements…….. but it just does not happen. That is why murderers commit more murder and Drug dealers and still selling to everyone including minors. Nuff Said .
Michael
That is why for years after I got off probation, I had my own home improvement business with me as the only employee. As the years went by and things kept changing, I was no longer to be able to hide my secret. (The registry). Now I am 100% disabled.
Firstly, you place the SP label on the subject matter person incorrectly; the person at issue is a mear registrant who served his time and should be afforded the opportunity to be employed, as long as the job is no way connected to the incident of what led to the violation.
Secondly, I take issue with the employees. THERE IS MORE going on and using the owner’s brother and video surveillance as “justification” is dubious. As an owner of a business, it is not my employees’ business as to the background of any other employee. Likewise, in a one-party state for video surveillance, it is my right to place security cameras on egress and money exchange areas. This sounds like to me that there WAS some employee theft happening and the reason for the walkout was for the protection of the actual wrong doers.
I do feel that an establishment has the due diligence to let others know who’s working with other staff members, who might feel uncomfortable working around or with a Sexual Predator. My question would be to the owner would he hire a Sexual Predator if they applied? Im almost certain those persons he hired do not have a history of being a Sexual Predator. Hmmmm
The privacy of the other employees is paramount and the employer has no need to inform the other employees of one’s history as to it will create a hostile work environment which then leads to unproductive work environment. IF you share the legal or work history of one, you must share the history of all with everyone. It is not selective to who you share and don’t share.
This is an excellent opportunity to close for rebranding and possibly implement a cashless payment system, fire the entire staff, and hire those staff who need second chances with the surveillance in place the owner feels is needed. They can make this a win-win situation while holding those accountable who wronged the owner to begin with.
Yea because a PFR working at a juice shop is a liability lol.
There is no need to know, just like they don’t disclose DUI’s, Armed Robberies, and Murders that may have been committed by other staff members.