U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Job Search
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-20-2013, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
27,284 posts, read 15,762,848 times
Reputation: 9858

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollie1946 View Post
It puzzles me at how quickly the employer becomes the enemy. Does an employer not have an interest in determining the character, the life history in hiring someone? How does he discriminate in hiring if various doors are shut off? Why is it up to the employer to take all the risks? What next? Interviews conducted behind screens so that the interviewer cannot actually see the applicant? Should the applicant's voice be muffled so that their speech cannot be used in case their voice won't be pleasing enough on the phone with customers? What about tattoos? Already employers have to accommodate disabled people. They cannot discriminate (ha ha) based on age, sex, sexuality, religion. Jobs will continue to migrate off our shores with more onerous rules piled on in the name of fairness, justice, kindness, gentleness...
The bad apples spoil the bunch on both. There are some who steal when in debt to get ahead, the same as there are evil employers. Both spoil everyone else.

As for your claims, I think it should provide that nothing is a BFQ. IE a model would need to look a certain way the same as a pro-wrestler while police officers, fire fighters and the military need specific fitness components because of the type of work they do. As I'bee said with credit checks earlier, unless it is a job with Edward Jones or some bank, it doesn't make sense and even still there are questions of how and why you are in debt. Not all are over-attending on frivolous purchases.

Edit:
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts View Post
Agreed. It may not be fair or right or just, but it's the brutal way of the world.

And if the Chinese decide to upgrade the workplace and institute more fairness and social justice, it will force labor to move somewhere else, perhaps India or Vietnam.

Some people are complaining that their credit problems were not their fault, therefore should not be allowed to be a consideration when applying for a job. I totally sympathize with them and agree it's unfair.

A friend of mine is in this boat, in fact; he's a contractor for a giant technology company, about to go perm (not by choice), and he's worried about a credit check--while unemployed during the recession, he fell behind on his condo payments and ultimately sold the condo but not before ruining his credit. Hopefully they'll just disregard it since they already know him and he's doing good work, but you never know with big companies.

But for each unfortunate case of this type, how many others are deadbeats who maxed out too many credit cards or skipped out on a mortgage or car loan? How many slackers are going to get jobs they don't deserve because employers were unable to do the proper vetting? I agree with Ollie and others who warn that this law will backfire and end up hurting companies, hurting the economy, and causing more unemployment. As for mortgages, we all know what happened when too many mortgages were given out to people without so much as a down payment.

In my opinion, this kind of "shoot the messenger" legislation is fundamentally misguided because it does nothing to address the real problem of bad credit as well as flawed credit reporting, a separate problem in fact.

It shouldn't be so easy for people to load up on credit cards -- why did this happen in the first place? It used to be kind of a big deal to get a credit card -- teenagers couldn't get one, and you had to really prove you were credit worthy; I remember having to provide my employer's name, my salary, how long in this job, etc. Now all sorts of people get these pre-approved offers, and they end up in big trouble; I know lots of them, and I feel their pain; in my twenties I had a problem with credit card debt as well.

I would like to see legislation that addresses this sort of problem, and stop trying to put the onus on employers -- it's like admitting that we can't fix people's credit problems, so let's just pass the buck and force employers to fix it for us.
I agree we need to see to make credit cards harder to get. This is something we can fix and I am glad you actually have a good idea.

Though another part of this problem is the hit your credit takes if you got your identity stolen. This has happened with many retailers and colleges. That is another part of the credit score issue. Should we blame the person who is in debt due to illness or death in the family or had their identity stolen? IMO those are a LOT different than traditional over-spending and maxing out cards.

Last edited by mkpunk; 12-20-2013 at 03:05 PM..

 
Old 12-20-2013, 03:16 PM
 
Location: Places you dream of
20,195 posts, read 12,105,285 times
Reputation: 8766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollie1946 View Post
It puzzles me at how quickly the employer becomes the enemy. Does an employer not have an interest in determining the character, the life history in hiring someone? How does he discriminate in hiring if various doors are shut off? Why is it up to the employer to take all the risks? What next? Interviews conducted behind screens so that the interviewer cannot actually see the applicant? Should the applicant's voice be muffled so that their speech cannot be used in case their voice won't be pleasing enough on the phone with customers? What about tattoos? Already employers have to accommodate disabled people. They cannot discriminate (ha ha) based on age, sex, sexuality, religion. Jobs will continue to migrate off our shores with more onerous rules piled on in the name of fairness, justice, kindness, gentleness...
what ??my last interview was on the phone in INDIA and I am to trust them? Now my name social etc etc is all over the world! You think employers are so upright? please...
1- I-9 Inspections? ever hear of those, how many you think hire illegals? -- don't make me laugh.
2- I quit a job because somehting just didn't feel right to me... I was a manager... 3 mo later- old coworkers tells me CEO shot his face off because was caught sleeping and embezzling w the miserable president.
3-You bring references, employment history and education- that is enough. You know why? because I have been around long enough to see a lot and the "perfect people" sometimes are the dirty bas***s cooking the books.
4-Ms. Barbie,,, blondy beautiful... looked real good on paper,,,looked good period.... behind closed doors... lots of white powder up her nose. they found out later when some $$ went missing.
I don't know about you, but my debts have nothing to do with how well I work or carry myself... you don't need to know my whole life story. Just like ins co, only thing you need to know is how well I drive!!
 
Old 12-20-2013, 03:36 PM
 
1,474 posts, read 3,083,267 times
Reputation: 2053
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinytrump View Post
what ??my last interview was on the phone in INDIA and I am to trust them? Now my name social etc etc is all over the world! You think employers are so upright? please...
1- I-9 Inspections? ever hear of those, how many you think hire illegals? -- don't make me laugh.
2- I quit a job because somehting just didn't feel right to me... I was a manager... 3 mo later- old coworkers tells me CEO shot his face off because was caught sleeping and embezzling w the miserable president.
3-You bring references, employment history and education- that is enough. You know why? because I have been around long enough to see a lot and the "perfect people" sometimes are the dirty bas***s cooking the books.
4-Ms. Barbie,,, blondy beautiful... looked real good on paper,,,looked good period.... behind closed doors... lots of white powder up her nose. they found out later when some $$ went missing.
I don't know about you, but my debts have nothing to do with how well I work or carry myself... you don't need to know my whole life story. Just like ins co, only thing you need to know is how well I drive!!
References are useless. No HR department is going to give out any information except dates of employment. No employer in their right mind will say a word regarding someone they "let go". References mean nothing regardless of who they are from. Education history is faked all the time. People lie about degrees and achievements. The credit report might have errors which are bad enough but you can fight the fight for corrections and for putting your story in there. Otherwise, the credit report shows how you have handled a key part of your business in life---finances. It is harsh to be sure, but it is part of a process where the onus is on the applicant, not the employer.

It becomes evident that many who are for Senator Warren's proposal have themselves had credit issues with some tragic stories. Their position is understandable, but to make a law that applies across the nation makes no sense. I doubt it will make it through the congress with the various corporate lobbyists beating it back. Even if it does make it, employers will find ways around it.

The "law of unintended consequences" always shows up in these things. If I as a landlord am prevented from running a credit check on you and perhaps a criminal background check, then I am going to charge a higher deposit, a higher first and last month's rent and the monthly rent will reflect the risk I am taking leasing to someone. A tenant can easily do a lot of damage to a place, they can stop paying their rent and generally wind up costing a landlord far more. Somehow, employers and landlords are going to protect themselves.
 
Old 12-20-2013, 04:39 PM
 
20,708 posts, read 13,727,285 times
Reputation: 14383
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtab4994 View Post
How many people does this effect, and for what types of jobs are credit checks actually done?
Historically IIRC credit checks were done as routine hiring for certain positions and or those that paid above a certain wage. It rarely affected many persons but it does seem as if some employers have broadened the use of such reports to basically include anyone applying for any position.

Have held various sorts of employment including retail, office, and nursing and never had a credit check. Background criminal history and or polygraph, but never a credit report pulled.

It is interesting that Mrs. Warren's bill exempts the federal government and or it's contractors dealing with national security. So a business worried about protecting it's interests cannot do a credit check but the feds can?

http://communities.washingtontimes.c...-credit-check/
 
Old 12-22-2013, 02:44 PM
 
Location: Naples & Sarasota Florida
597 posts, read 960,553 times
Reputation: 894
I remember hearing a past presidential candidate say they never had a background check run on them the entire time they were running for office. Nothing at all. So if presidential candidates don't have any background checks run then I do not see why employers should be snooping into everyone's credit reports,etc.


Moderator cut: snip

Last edited by 7G9C4J2; 12-23-2013 at 09:22 AM.. Reason: Removed political comment
 
Old 12-22-2013, 03:58 PM
 
Location: Arizona
5,509 posts, read 6,125,854 times
Reputation: 7287
A number of states already ban or limit this practice. They are in the minority, for certain, but the number has been slowly increasing the past few years. There were at least 10 states earlier this year, and a number of others had bills pending. I think it is a matter of time before it becomes widely restricted, if not at the federal level then at the state level.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 04:30 PM
 
4,232 posts, read 6,055,987 times
Reputation: 10095
This country I swear is in a race to the bottom to lower the standards. It’s already happening in K-12 and higher education. When are we going to realize that we’re not really doing anyone a favor by lowering the standards for hiring? Soon they’ll be screaming to avoid background checks all together. Maybe after that we can eliminate pre employment skills tests. If we want to take it a little further maybe drug tests. Maybe we can start giving out loans to people again who don't meet any underwriting certria to finance a gumball.

The world needs ditch diggers and fry cooks too. The only problem is that now they want $15 an hour.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Arizona
5,509 posts, read 6,125,854 times
Reputation: 7287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fargobound View Post
This country I swear is in a race to the bottom to lower the standards. It’s already happening in K-12 and higher education. When are we going to realize that we’re not really doing anyone a favor by lowering the standards for hiring? Soon they’ll be screaming to avoid background checks all together. Maybe after that we can eliminate pre employment skills tests. If we want to take it a little further maybe drug tests. Maybe we can start giving out loans to people again who don't meet any underwriting certria to finance a gumball.

The world needs ditch diggers and fry cooks too. The only problem is that now they want $15 an hour.
Nice rant. Eliminating an unnecessarily intrusive step in the hiring process isn't lowering any standards. How asinine is it that an unemployed person who's having trouble paying their bills could be denied a job because....they are an unemployed person who's having trouble paying their bills.....

Credit checks for most preemployment screenings are useless. We don't use them, FWIW, and it hasn't been a problem.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 06:13 PM
 
4,232 posts, read 6,055,987 times
Reputation: 10095
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnp292 View Post
Nice rant. Eliminating an unnecessarily intrusive step in the hiring process isn't lowering any standards. How asinine is it that an unemployed person who's having trouble paying their bills could be denied a job because....they are an unemployed person who's having trouble paying their bills.....

Credit checks for most preemployment screenings are useless. We don't use them, FWIW, and it hasn't been a problem.
I was unemployed for a year and half and never missed a payment on anything.

It sounds cold, but if you can't pay your bills tough crap, you should have planned better.
 
Old 12-22-2013, 06:35 PM
 
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
453 posts, read 519,354 times
Reputation: 666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ollie1946 View Post
References are useless. No HR department is going to give out any information except dates of employment.
That isn't the same as a reference.

Quote:
References mean nothing regardless of who they are from.
Right, so that's why potential employers ask for them from candidates...

Quote:
Education history is faked all the time. People lie about degrees and achievements.
And employers can easily check a candidate's educational records. Joe Schmoe claims he got an MBA from Harvard? Fine; check with Harvard and make sure.

Quote:
The credit report might have errors which are bad enough but you can fight the fight for corrections and for putting your story in there. Otherwise, the credit report shows how you have handled a key part of your business in life---finances. It is harsh to be sure, but it is part of a process where the onus is on the applicant, not the employer.
Nope; it's a deeply flawed tool that tells an employer virtually nothing of value about the candidate, and the onus belongs squarely on the employer. Given how many different reasons there are for poor credit, to pretend that one's credit rating says anything about one's value as an employee is simply stupid.

Quote:
The "law of unintended consequences" always shows up in these things. If I as a landlord am prevented from running a credit check on you and perhaps a criminal background check, then I am going to charge a higher deposit, a higher first and last month's rent and the monthly rent will reflect the risk I am taking leasing to someone. A tenant can easily do a lot of damage to a place, they can stop paying their rent and generally wind up costing a landlord far more. Somehow, employers and landlords are going to protect themselves.
What the hell does the landlord situation have to do with any of this? The law is about preventing EMPLOYERS from checking a job candidate's credit rating. It has no effect on whether or not a landlord can conduct such a check. You keep bringing in this unrelated element; please stop it and stick to the actual topic.
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment > Job Search
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top