No Ride, No Jobs?
We are in crisis mode in Indiana. We have 11,000 reentrants coming out of incarceration every year, and although 2nd Chance Indiana has succeeded in connecting many of them with good jobs, reentrants depend upon the vans that take them to and from work to keep the jobs as most have no dependable or affordable vehicle to get them to work.
Like it or not, employers can’t waste time and money employing and training people who don’t show up for work. Many reentrants lose their jobs in the first week because of absenteeism. Meanwhile, recidivism is in the 70% rate—why? Here’s why: Because 89% of people who are rearrested are not employed.
Sounds pretty basic, doesn’t it, but it shouldn’t surprise anyone that most of those leaving incarceration don’t have a dependable car at their disposal. The van program fills that important gap between the jobless reentrant, and the successful employee. The vans are like the hitch between a car and a trailer. Without that important link, too many people will never be connected to a long term job that can keep them from returning to prison and jail.
Considering that Indiana spends more than $1 billion each year incarcerating people, doesn’t it make sense to try to help them get and keep a job that can restore their lives and families? When a person can bring home a living wage, his or her children’s lives change too, with better food, health care, and educational opportunities, as they witness mom or dad going to work, making an income, and supporting the family. Just that could change future generations, as many reentrants we train had never had a parent who went to work everyday. They grew up with no ‘map’ for employment. Would the effort be worth it to help reentrants get and keep their jobs? I think so.
With the van program, for the past two years, 2nd Chance Indiana has staffed many an employer with good reentrant employees. With a ride, they show up everyday, earning a living wage in the range of $17 - $23 an hour. With a ride, they are able to bridge the final gap between release and successful reentry. If only decision makers here could understand the long term savings of developing tax-paying working people instead of housing them behind bars, as their families survive on public assistance. This is a no-brainer.
The crisis now is that although we’ve been able to get more than 40 employer-partners, willing to hire formerly incarcerated people, the jobs won’t last long without the van program, and without support, the van program will go away. Most the money to run these vans came from the federal government through the American Rescue Plan Act. Those dollars are gone at the end of this year, so the question is: Do we dump these promising reentrants back on the street to figure things out for themselves?
Not if we can help it.
Nancy
