Employers Asking For Credit Checks

[AlexCrowley 0]

there's little point, with the new bankruptcy laws you can't actually clear your credit card debts now

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Why didn't you also object to being drug tested?

Isn't that treating you as though you have to prove your innocence where illegal drug use is concerned?

But the credit check, you object to? Even IF it doesn't keep you from getting the job?

I don't get it.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[EricTheRed 0]

Um...No

Personal finances are very much a sign of a persons ability to excercise good judgement.

There is a pretty decent correlation between a persons ability to manage money and a persons ability to manage other aspects of life.

Just like everything else, there are exceptions, and everyone shoud be given the ability to explain WHY they have bad credit.

(divorce, illness, loss of job, death in the family etc are good reasons. I bought a new 'vette and a big house and couldnt' afford the hookers and the coke are not)

I know not everyone with bad credit is irresponsible, but the odds are in general against it.

illegible usually

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Um...No

Personal finances are very much a sign of a persons ability to excercise good judgement.

So is what kind of car they drive, who they chose to marry, what their sexual practices have been, and what they do in their spare time for recreation.

Does that mean employers should dig that information up on a prospective employee?

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Um...No

Personal finances are very much a sign of a persons ability to excercise good judgement.

There is a pretty decent correlation between a persons ability to manage money and a persons ability to manage other aspects of life.

Just like everything else, there are exceptions, and everyone shoud be given the ability to explain WHY they have bad credit.

(divorce, illness, loss of job, death in the family etc are good reasons. I bought a new 'vette and a big house and couldnt' afford the hookers and the coke are not)

I know not everyone with bad credit is irresponsible, but the odds are in general against it.

Agreed. Employers look at the entire package an employee presents and make their choices based on who is the best candidate. A credit report is just one component of the package.

If an employer has 2 equally experienced and credentialed candidates and one has shown via their credit history a lifetime of financial responsibility and the other has a series of late payments, court judgements or IRS leins, it's pretty obvious who gets the job. It doesn't mean the person with the spotty credit history can't do the job or is dishonest. It just means the person with the good credit history has proven their ability to accept and handle responsibility.

[mailin 0]

Funny, I was just having this conversation with my husband yesterday.

He works for a major investment firm, as a computer programmer. He designs programs that 'advisors' use to sell this companies mutual funds to the general public. He has no access to the companies financial information or any real way to access critical information. That information is actually kept in a data warehouse somewhere else in the country (not even in our region). When he was hired for the job they ran a criminal background check and credit check. At the time we were fighting an error on our credit reports (actually we still are ) that had a charge-off on an old car loan, in error. It had very negatively affected our reports and we were very worried that it would somehow make him ineligible for employement.

It didn't, but when he was hired he got a letter from HR for 'credit counseling' Why would that information now be made available to HR?


Jen

Arianna Frances

[PLFXpert 0]

I would agree, except:

My first position out of college I worked as a mortgage broker for high priority clients (multi-millions in assets) and often their financial advisors would call me for their own mortgage as well. Routinely, they had horrible credit due to their own mismanagement (not any of the legitimate reasons you described). I'm biased, of course, as I would never allow someone else to manage my financials. But, I would completely support routine credit checks for persons in their posistions.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[AlexCrowley 0]

Oh I just remembered something else.

If your company deals with the credit card companies they have to adhere to CISP (visa security standard), which requires background checks of all employees with access to financial info, including credit checks - many companies decide to check everyone.

It is up to the business how they use that information.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[RhondaLea 3]

Y'know, no one has any privacy anymore. But I'm pretty sure there was only a very short period in our history when anyone did, i.e., before computers but after everyone stopped living in the town of their birth for their entire lives.

Back in the day--in small communities, and even NYC and the like had small communities within the larger community--everyone knew everyone else's business. Now, you still find this in tiny towns, but not in towns that are becoming bedroom communities for larger cities within about a fifty mile radius.

We have this idea that somehow no one can know or should know our personal business, but it has really never been that way. Not all that long ago, the local business owner with whom you applied for a job knew if you were an upright citizen or a deadbeat.

When we got mobile, we also got the idea that we could outrun our history, but the fact of the matter is that people want to know who they're dealing with, so they invented other ways to find out.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[SkyDekker 1,121]

So, just don't work for companies that require credit checks....

land of opportunities right. You work hard and have some luck you do well....if you don't, well too bad.

[GTAVercetti 0]

I love it when you talk privacy.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[Gravitymaster 0]

It's also very possible that the company's insurance underwriter requires a credit check in order to write an employee theft bond.

[Airman1270 0]

...I got mad and decided to fire off a nastygram to the Pennsylvania state legislature and to Congress. Feel free to use this letter (modify it for your state and sen/rep) if you feel the same way...
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Not a bad stragtegy, but it's way too long. Try to make your point in a brief paragraph or two. I'd also approach it from the position of the employer trying to protect himself from lawsuits. The issue here is the current legal climate and public mind set that believes it's okay to sue someone for somebody else's actions. This is why we have detailed background checks, drug tests, etc.

If we can persuade more people, especially legislators, that it is wrong to blame an employer for the actions of his employees we might see fewer of these intrusions.

Example: The UPS truck runs a red light and hits somebody. Obviously, the driver is responsible. No one else. But as long as there are people who will sue UPS, and other people who will sit on a jury and find the company "responsible," UPS has to walk on eggshells. This is wrong.

If a skydiver has an accident, few of us here would claim it's okay to sue the guy who provided the airplane ride. But we are outnumbered. Additionally, there are already more than enough lawyers to handle the workload, and every year thousands more graduate from law school with bills to pay and families to feed. The only way they can earn a living is by expanding the parameters in which they can file lawsuits. Few of these suits are directed at people actually responsible for doing a bad thing; Many are directed at others who, well, maybe could have done something to prevent the bad thing from happening (such as refusing to fly skydivers.)

This is how the religion of secular humanism is being imposed on all of us.

The political climate is warming to some sort of overhaul of the legal system, but opponents will claim that, in the above example, it is perfectly okay to punish the company even though it had NO control over the circumstances leading to the incident. (What they're really fighting for is protection of an unfair system that benefits them personally.)

Cheers,
Jon S.

[RhondaLea 3]

Quote

I love it when you talk privacy.

It's not just talk, baby.

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[lummy 4]

Quote

Bullshit. Personal finances are exactly that - personal.

Okay, drug use is a personal matter, why should drug testing be ok? How about a criminal record, that's personal too.. You beat your wife, so? why should that have any effect on getting a job?

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Quote

Bullshit. Personal finances are exactly that - personal.

Okay, drug use is a personal matter, why should drug testing be ok? How about a criminal record, that's personal too.. You beat your wife, so? why should that have any effect on getting a job?

Drug use... Illegal.
Criminal Record.... Proof that a crime was committed.
Domestic Abuse.... Illegal.

Bad credit: Not illegal, and not an indication that someone is likely to do something illegal, and in many cases it isn't even accurate.

See the difference?

[AlexCrowley 0]

Hmm I think it depends on the employer you're working for. If you dont like their practices dont work for them.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Bad credit: Not illegal, and not an indication that someone is likely to do something illegal, and in many cases it isn't even accurate.

See the difference?

Bad credit most certainly is an indication someone is likely to do something illegal. One of the biggest costs to businesses is employee theft and I don't mean just stealing merchandise from a retail store. Every year busunesses lose $billions to dishonest employees who sell company secrets to competitors, illegally headhunt on company time and property, and embezzellment. Approximately 30% of all employees steal and another 60% would if the right opportunity presented itself.

Here are just a few of the scams that go on within almost any meduim to large company.

* Forging Receipts. Salespersons can charge a customer one sum, ring up a
receipt for less, and pocket the difference.
* Hiding Receipts. When bookkeeping is sloppy and little supervision
exists, employees can keep cash and receipts without raising an eyebrow.
* Pocketing Loose Change. Small sums of money, such as fees or petty cash,
may not be missed at all.
* Pilfering Merchandise. Goods your firm purchases may never even make it
to the shelves.
* Fictitious Payroll. Occasionally personnel managers will authorize
salary for fictitious workers, then keep it for themselves.
* Overbilling Expenses. Managers with expense accounts may submit receipts
twice and be reimbursed twice, or inflate actual expenses incurred.
* Purchasing Fraud. Employees sometimes declare themselves suppliers of
nonexistent goods, and subsequently reimburse themselves handsomely.

Someone who is unable to handle their own finanaces is more likely to steal from a company than ssomeone who is responsible.

[AlexCrowley 0]

Thats very true, I can only speak for the CC companies because I deal with business security processes.

I really dont have issues with background checks etc (mostly because it's usually my job to deal with that end of the business).

I actually find drug testing far more an invasion of my privacy - and I dont even drink, so it's not that I'm worried about them finding anything.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Quote

Bad credit: Not illegal, and not an indication that someone is likely to do something illegal, and in many cases it isn't even accurate.

See the difference?

Bad credit most certainly is an indication someone is likely to do something illegal. One of the biggest costs to businesses is employee theft and I don't mean just stealing merchandise from a retail store. Every year busunesses lose $billions to dishonest employees who sell company secrets to competitors, illegally headhunt on company time and property, and embezzellment. Approximately 30% of all employees steal and another 60% would if the right opportunity presented itself.

Here are just a few of the scams that go on within almost any meduim to large company.

* Forging Receipts. Salespersons can charge a customer one sum, ring up a
receipt for less, and pocket the difference.
* Hiding Receipts. When bookkeeping is sloppy and little supervision
exists, employees can keep cash and receipts without raising an eyebrow.
* Pocketing Loose Change. Small sums of money, such as fees or petty cash,
may not be missed at all.
* Pilfering Merchandise. Goods your firm purchases may never even make it
to the shelves.
* Fictitious Payroll. Occasionally personnel managers will authorize
salary for fictitious workers, then keep it for themselves.
* Overbilling Expenses. Managers with expense accounts may submit receipts
twice and be reimbursed twice, or inflate actual expenses incurred.
* Purchasing Fraud. Employees sometimes declare themselves suppliers of
nonexistent goods, and subsequently reimburse themselves handsomely.

Someone who is unable to handle their own finanaces is more likely to steal from a company than ssomeone who is responsible.

I'm not saying that losses due to employee theft aren't a major problem, I'm just saying I haven't seen any data that proves people with good credit are less likely to do it than people with bad credit.

I'd bet that all of the Enron and Tyco execs had excellent credit.

[juanesky 0]

So how would you hide the medications you take?

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[christoofar 0]

Quote

Um...No

Personal finances are very much a sign of a persons ability to excercise good judgement.

There is a pretty decent correlation between a persons ability to manage money and a persons ability to manage other aspects of life.

Just like everything else, there are exceptions, and everyone shoud be given the ability to explain WHY they have bad credit.

(divorce, illness, loss of job, death in the family etc are good reasons. I bought a new 'vette and a big house and couldnt' afford the hookers and the coke are not)

I know not everyone with bad credit is irresponsible, but the odds are in general against it.

If you really subscribe do all this data-gathering nonsense... perhaps we should just start tatooing people's problems on their foreheads that way we all know what's up.

I don't like the drug tests either, but now it's so commonplace everyone is used to it. The credit check thing is new, and your credit reports usually differ greatly between which firm is being used to do the query, and it's also a mountain of work to clear off crap on your reports that is wrong. Not only that, this employer didn't even ASK me what my circumstances were, they just said "we're sorry."

Unless you got a rich daddy or your parents slaved for 20 years to build up a warchest for you, as a student you can really be fucked by this, because your scores go down by over 100 points once you get these massive student loans. Refi them, and your score goes down again.

If taken to its full conclusion, this will eventually stretch into your love life. You wouldn't DARE marry someone who has problems on their report, because this will eventually impact YOU and could prevent you from getting a job or a promotion, or at least make it more difficult.

____________________________________________________________
I'm RICK JAMES! Fo shizzle.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Unless you got a rich daddy or your parents slaved for 20 years to build up a warchest for you, as a student you can really be fucked by this, because your scores go down by over 100 points once you get these massive student loans. Refi them, and your score goes down again.

So you are saying everyone who graduates from college has bad credit unless they have rich parents? I don't think so.

Quote

If taken to its full conclusion, this will eventually stretch into your love life. You wouldn't DARE marry someone who has problems on their report, because this will eventually impact YOU and could prevent you from getting a job or a promotion, or at least make it more difficult.

Did you know the nunber one reason people divorce is because of money? As cold as I'm sure this may sound...I wouldn't marry anyone who I didn't think could handle finances and getting a credit report isn't out of the question either.

[wmw999 2,121]

It's probably overused.
That said, I'm sure it was part of the drill when I got a clearance a number of years ago; I know that financial problem are one of the signs of someone whose clearance might be revoked for cause.

And that's non-financial data. Financial pressure can make people do funny things. Not all of them, but the more people we have in the country, the more will apply for each job. That means we need a differentiator.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[NWFlyer 2]

Quote

Unless you got a rich daddy or your parents slaved for 20 years to build up a warchest for you, as a student you can really be fucked by this, because your scores go down by over 100 points once you get these massive student loans. Refi them, and your score goes down again.

I am the first to admit I don't know an awful lot about credit scores. But I took out over $50,000 in loans for graduate school, and I have refinanced them (or at least put them into consolidation programs). Yet my credit score is rock-solid, good enough to get very favorable terms when I took out a mortgage three years ago.

Why is it rock solid? Because I have managed my finances and credit responsibly and I have kept an eye on my credit reports to ensure that no erroneous information ends up on there.

I don't necessarily *like* that employers want to do credit checks on me, but I understand the need to do it. As others have said, privacy in this day and age is really an illusion, anyway.

Every employer I've worked with that wants to do a credit check has waited to do it until *after* an offer of employment was made.