In reference to this article, my colleague asks:  “do believe that this telemarketer company is justified in hiring inmates?”

My response:

The ethics between hiring inmates for less than minimum wage is blurred; however, firing existing workers because of the cheap labor alternative is unacceptable.  I believe that hiring inmates is a good opportunity for inmates to learn and develop the skills needed for when they are released. I am a believer in second chances, and hiring inmates is a positive way for the inmates to become productive and learn to be responsible. In a complete business perspective, hiring the inmates at a cheaply cost is a smart way to cut down company costs, and I am impressed by the company’s ability to think of this approach. However, is it ethical to be paying 3$/hr? There is no difference between the prisoners and the sweatshop workers in China, but because these inmates are viewed as criminals, it makes it a bit more acceptable. On another note, as mentioned above, it is completely unethical and unacceptable to be firing existing law-abiding workers due to the new rush of cheap labor. These workers are capable individuals, “people [who] are coming in every day, and are generating a lot of revenue […] there’s no reason why these people should have been fired”.

Bottom line: It is unjustified for the telemarketer company to be hiring inmates if they are going to fire valuable staff.

On another curious note, will this become a trend? While it is certainly unethical for major companies such as Apple and Nike to manufacture their products in sweatshops with underage and underpaid workers, will it now become more acceptable if companies hire prisoners who owe dues to society instead?

References:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/aug/08/prisoners-call-centre-fired-staff

https://blogs.ubc.ca/larrycheong/2012/09/12/a-law-abiding-citizen-losing-their-job-to-a-criminal/