Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't have a dog in this fight.
For my job, I do financial reporting every year. If my employer wants to, it can look at everything I do financially. Oops, it has.
I'm 3-4 years from retirement.
This doesn't affect me.
You and those who feel as you do need to take action or quit whining.
If you spend all of your energy whining, and not taking action, it's only going to get worse (by your definition) and you're in collusion with these "rights" being removed from you.
People are posting more than thoughts, they're angry about it. Use that anger to change the rules.
Otherwise you're part of the problem and you're fighting ever getting a solution.
I see there is a tug o' war action going on. I can see both sides of the issue. I will say that to those that are unfortunate to have bad credit reporting must understand that it is current policy for many employers whether we agree or not. Those that do have such negative remarks will be handicapped until 1- you can improve the markings or 2- prove that you have learned and are doing things to improve them.
For those that are "3-4 years from retirement. This doesn't affect me". Or I improved my credit on $7.54- all that I can ask is really? really? Is this what you have to offer? What aids have you in your bucket to render? I really hope you are not staff leaders... Supervisors or co-workers like you get taking out back....
But, my bigger words are for the so called hiring managers or the "business owners". As background investigators or hiring managers, we should be more sensitive to the current economic situation and play it out as such. Posting remarks such as "if I can't trust you to watch my children, then I can't trust you to run my business" or that you will not hire someone if they can't handle their personal finances is ridiculous to post- even if that is your policy and is the way you run your business. If I am your business partner or GM and I find out that you are posting these comments on forums then we will have a talk about your tact and insensitivity. Then, that will now bring me to question your relations to treatment of lower staff members- how quick are you to go beyond your call of duty to assist them in time of need? Since it doesn't affect you and you are close to your retirement or because it's "your business, your rules", I’m sure you no longer have a dog in the fight as well..
Rather than being so insensitive to the likes of those suffering from economic struggles, make the hiring process more challenging to you. Do some work and go beyond your scope for a change. At the time of you conducting a credit check, there is a temporary offer in order anyway which means you are down to the final referred 3-5 candidates. From there, ask them to provide sound letters of recommendations from supervisors and character references. Have them submit a letter explaining what occurred that lead to their current economic state, what have they learned, and what are they doing or will do to improve themselves. If then they do not show any bit of character, fortitude, and willingness to prove themselves, then so be it. But at least you know you can sleep at night knowing you gave everyone an honest opportunity cause you yourself knows what its like to be in their shoes.
But no, that is not the way we do business. We have no dogs in fight, we managed to pick ourselves up making 7.50 an hour, and it doesn't affect us, and so on...
These, ladies and gents, are our leaders of today and tomorrow...... It’s not only your actions, but merely how you PROPERLY communicate your actions to the employees that make them understand your ways and respect you...
and to you chielgirl- Everything you post is that of someone on their way out with the typical retiree attitude- I'm 3-4 years from retirement. This doesn't affect me.... I just hope for other's sake that you can use your experience and while observing that people are angry, you can put some programs in place to help improve the hiring conditions.
Last edited by halfamazing; 01-04-2013 at 01:52 PM..
How do you know? I don't see how you can meaningfully contest independent and academic research without referencing empirical research that supports your view. How come you don't believe in universities, higher education and academia?
Its not that I don't believe in higher education I just believe that most jobs you can learn on the job and don't need to put yourself in debt. Yes a degree is useful for engineering, medicine, etc but do I need a degree for art, philosophy, etc? If you have seen most of my posts, more then anything, I am simply trying to state that student loans should not be treated so differently then other forms of unsecured debt and tuition should not be so high.
To stay on topic, why do employers need a credit check? I understand there is a personal responsibility element but there is so many variables with credit. I know in IL its illegal to run a credit check unless its for a specific job(IE. Banking) and its now illegal to ask for facebook, twitter, or whatever passwords. Its not like backgrounds were its black n white.
I notice a lot of you keep saying something about "not dealing with money" etc. I would assume you think that an employer should assume someone with low credit would steel money. so why would that not indicate they would also steel office supplies, tools, talk on the cell phone or text while on the clock, take longer breaks then allowed, clock someone else in or out. The character trait that would lead to someone taking money also leads to them steeling in other ways.
While I may not want to check someones credit if I were hiring them to do some jobs, so far all of mine have access to funds and merchandise.
There are people who have paid their bills on time and otherwise kept a pristine credit history with no financial irresponsibility whatsoever. Then one day, they are out of work or suffer some other life altering setback that sends their credit history down the toilet. Should these people automatically be labeled as undesirable candidates? Absolutely not.
Likewise, the person considered so perfect or "ideal" as a candidate because he or she has a perfect credit rating may end up stealing and robbing your company blind.
If credit scores are going to be the pivitol factor in a hiring decision, then the employer should ask WHY and at least examine each on a case by case basis before jumping to unfair conclusions about an individual.
Its not that I don't believe in higher education I just believe that most jobs you can learn on the job and don't need to put yourself in debt. Yes a degree is useful for engineering, medicine, etc but do I need a degree for art, philosophy, etc? If you have seen most of my posts, more then anything, I am simply trying to state that student loans should not be treated so differently then other forms of unsecured debt and tuition should not be so high.
To stay on topic, why do employers need a credit check? I understand there is a personal responsibility element but there is so many variables with credit. I know in IL its illegal to run a credit check unless its for a specific job(IE. Banking) and its now illegal to ask for facebook, twitter, or whatever passwords. Its not like backgrounds were its black n white.
The reason why I brought it back to academics was because independent and academic research consistently shows the correlation between credit and quality of employee; yet you completely dismiss it.
The reason why I brought it back to academics was because independent and academic research consistently shows the correlation between credit and quality of employee; yet you completely dismiss it.
It seems everyone has missed it. I have yet to see a logical argument from someone who thinks the checks should be banned.
Sorry folks, the "it invades my privacy" routine is not a logical argument. There is no invasion when you consent. Employers have the right to know the background of someone who represents them, it is that simple.
If you do not like it, then enjoy your job search.
It seems everyone has missed it. I have yet to see a logical argument from someone who thinks the checks should be banned.
Sorry folks, the "it invades my privacy" routine is not a logical argument. There is no invasion when you consent. Employers have the right to know the background of someone who represents them, it is that simple.
If you do not like it, then enjoy your job search.
It has already been banned in several states.
If you have any loans, mortgages and credit cards you've already consented to the information being used for consideration of opportunities. The consent given to the employer should be nothing more than a formality.
It seems everyone has missed it. I have yet to see a logical argument from someone who thinks the checks should be banned.
Sorry folks, the "it invades my privacy" routine is not a logical argument. There is no invasion when you consent. Employers have the right to know the background of someone who represents them, it is that simple.
If you do not like it, then enjoy your job search.
You really need to stop with this.
If the applicant refuses to "consent", they won't get the job, so it's also an intimidation tactic.
If states ban you from asking for it, then I guess the employer will have to deal with "old fashioned" background checks and "interviewing" techniques. OMG!!
These methods were working just fine pre-recession, so I don't see why it can't go back to that.
When they can't deny you employment because you are in fact educationally qualified they resort of malignant HR practices. I too will not apply anywhere that requires a credit check. It is truly insulting. White House should definitely get involved and DO something about these employment practices.
If the applicant refuses to "consent", they won't get the job, so it's also an intimidation tactic.
If states ban you from asking for it, then I guess the employer will have to deal with "old fashioned" background checks and "interviewing" techniques. OMG!!
These methods were working just fine pre-recession, so I don't see why it can't go back to that.
Please research what intimidation tactics are and get back with me please.
As stated before, credit checks are part of the process, not the only process.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
