Hiring practices; creating the Fair Chance Hiring Practices by Public Employers Act; prohibiting certain employment practices. Effective date.
SB767 creates the “Fair Chance Hiring Practices by Public Employers Act” and applies it to state and local government employers in Oklahoma. The bill would generally prohibit public employers from asking about or obtaining an applicant’s criminal history before making a conditional offer of employment. It also bars those employers from requiring disclosure of criminal record information at the initial application stage, while still allowing them to notify applicants that certain convictions are disqualifying under law and to ask limited conviction questions on the initial application when a specific legal disqualification applies.
The bill defines “public employer” broadly to include the state, political subdivisions, and many public entities such as departments, agencies, boards, commissions, municipalities, counties, districts, and public trusts. It defines criminal record history information to include convictions, arrests, deferred adjudications, and juvenile adjudications. The measure excludes sensitive positions, private contractors and vendors, and jobs where federal, state, or local law already requires criminal history review. It would take effect November 1, 2025, and would apply only to employment applications submitted on or after that date.
SB767 would add a new chapter of law in Title 40 of the Oklahoma Statutes governing hiring practices by public employers. In practice, it would limit when criminal background information can be collected and considered in public-sector hiring, shifting review of criminal history to after a conditional offer in most cases. The bill would not change hiring rules for sensitive positions, contractor/vendor relationships, or jobs subject to mandatory background-check laws, but it would establish a statewide fair-chance hiring framework for many other public jobs.
The available record shows little direct debate or recorded voting history, so overall sentiment cannot be measured from committee testimony or floor votes. Based on the bill’s structure and caption, the measure appears intended to support fair-chance hiring and reduce early-stage barriers for applicants with criminal records, while preserving employer screening authority later in the process and for sensitive or legally restricted positions. The referral to the Economic Development, Workforce and Tourism Committee suggests the bill was treated as a workforce and hiring-policy measure rather than a criminal justice bill.
The main points of contention are likely to be the balance between second-chance employment opportunities and employer screening needs. Supporters would likely favor delaying criminal-history inquiries to reduce automatic exclusion of applicants with past records, while opponents may argue that public employers need earlier access to background information to protect vulnerable populations, maintain trust, and comply with existing legal disqualifications. The bill itself addresses some of those concerns by carving out sensitive positions, but the scope of the public-employer restriction and the definition of covered criminal history could still be debated.