U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
View Poll Results: Should employers be allowed to check potential employees credit?
Yes. 71 42.01%
No. 90 53.25%
Indifferent/No Answer. 8 4.73%
Voters: 169. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-26-2017, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
25,426 posts, read 14,518,695 times
Reputation: 9222

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by I love boots. View Post
Why not tell the truth about these things in a job interview? The employer is trying to protect their business and it isn't just being nosy.

Why not then just do away with job interviews? It's just first come first serve and employers have no rights then? It makes no sense to me that an employer isn't allowed to know things about someone that may in some way negatively impact a business they own or are trying to run.
It Isn't always given asst the interview though. Some ask for credit reports on applications. Where can I say I was a victim of identity theft on an application? Also how do you know which employer will ask. That is why I say unless it is a bona fide qualifier for the job, it shouldn't be a metric.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-26-2017, 11:25 AM
Status: "DON'T VOTE" (set 4 days ago)
 
26,744 posts, read 14,981,996 times
Reputation: 12561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks View Post
It isn't. Not a single person arguing in favor of these credit checks has been able to prove that employees with bad credit are more likely to steal than employees with good credit. Why is that? Because they aren't.
Its irrelevant. Prospective employers and prospective employees should be able to use whatever tools they feel necessary to negotiate terms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2017, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Camberville
11,403 posts, read 16,012,641 times
Reputation: 18060
Quote:
Originally Posted by I love boots. View Post
Why not tell the truth about these things in a job interview? The employer is trying to protect their business and it isn't just being nosy.

Why not then just do away with job interviews? It's just first come first serve and employers have no rights then? It makes no sense to me that an employer isn't allowed to know things about someone that may in some way negatively impact a business they own or are trying to run.
I have made a conscious decision to be very open about my cancer history, and as a result I wouldn't have a problem talking about it in practice in an interview. In principle, however, it is absolutely inappropriate. I know many employers won't even consider hiring me because I had cancer - even though I have been in remission for 6 years and am now considered cured. Luckily, I was able to pivot my career in a way that I can use my history as an asset rather than a risk. Even if employers know that cancer can and even more frequently is cured today, many would balk at the risk of hiring someone with a history of significant health issues. Significant health issues + credit issues = difficulty getting hired through no real fault of their own.

It would take this thread way off course, but just think about all of the people relying on disability payments who *can* work but can't find employment due to their health histories? It's more common than you think, and I know quite a few people in their 20s and 30s who have had cancer and as a result have a very difficult time getting their careers back on track regardless of how well they have done in recovery.

Why would someone willingly disclose this in a job interview if they don't have to or it is not advantageous due to the type of role?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2017, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Clown School
9,999 posts, read 4,230,913 times
Reputation: 11553
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Its irrelevant. Prospective employers and prospective employees should be able to use whatever tools they feel necessary to negotiate terms.
Negotiate? The employer almost always has the upper hand in negotiations, as there are many more people who need to keep a roof over their heads than there are people hiring.

Unless you're in a super specialized highly in-demand role du jour (which is difficult to predict in the number of years prior that it'd take to be qualified for that role), you're pretty much professionally begging the employer to pick you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2017, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
25,426 posts, read 14,518,695 times
Reputation: 9222
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
I have made a conscious decision to be very open about my cancer history, and as a result I wouldn't have a problem talking about it in practice in an interview. In principle, however, it is absolutely inappropriate. I know many employers won't even consider hiring me because I had cancer - even though I have been in remission for 6 years and am now considered cured. Luckily, I was able to pivot my career in a way that I can use my history as an asset rather than a risk. Even if employers know that cancer can and even more frequently is cured today, many would balk at the risk of hiring someone with a history of significant health issues. Significant health issues + credit issues = difficulty getting hired through no real fault of their own.

It would take this thread way off course, but just think about all of the people relying on disability payments who *can* work but can't find employment due to their health histories? It's more common than you think, and I know quite a few people in their 20s and 30s who have had cancer and as a result have a very difficult time getting their careers back on track regardless of how well they have done in recovery.

Why would someone willingly disclose this in a job interview if they don't have to or it is not advantageous due to the type of role?
There is also the fact of admitting this and companies knowing your medical history too and thinking you may go in remission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2017, 11:51 AM
 
Location: Athol, Idaho
2,182 posts, read 1,057,742 times
Reputation: 3184
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
I have made a conscious decision to be very open about my cancer history, and as a result I wouldn't have a problem talking about it in practice in an interview. In principle, however, it is absolutely inappropriate. I know many employers won't even consider hiring me because I had cancer - even though I have been in remission for 6 years and am now considered cured. Luckily, I was able to pivot my career in a way that I can use my history as an asset rather than a risk. Even if employers know that cancer can and even more frequently is cured today, many would balk at the risk of hiring someone with a history of significant health issues. Significant health issues + credit issues = difficulty getting hired through no real fault of their own.

It would take this thread way off course, but just think about all of the people relying on disability payments who *can* work but can't find employment due to their health histories? It's more common than you think, and I know quite a few people in their 20s and 30s who have had cancer and as a result have a very difficult time getting their careers back on track regardless of how well they have done in recovery.

Why would someone willingly disclose this in a job interview if they don't have to or it is not advantageous due to the type of role?
I meant if asked about credit why not explain the circumstances if it is tied to something like medical expenses? Iit may be hard for you to do, but try to see this from the other side. You've worked very hard to build a business and want to protect it from theft for example. If there are judgements against someone don't you want to know why? An employer wants to know that you can be relied on and other things in your life won't get in the way. More than one person here has said that medical expenses don't come up in the type of credit checks employers look at. Is this not the case?

In my case I have a disabled son that requires personal care. A care provider will at times be in my house with all our stuff not to mention I'm entrusting my sons welfare to them. I don't hire people with judgements against them and it would be a redflag if they were offended about me asking to check their background. Yes, that sucks for them, but again they are not the only one that matters.

As hard as it is for someone like this trying to find work, Why shouldn't employers have the right to protect their business?

I guess I want to ask why so many here think the employee matters more than the employer?

Last edited by I love boots.; 11-26-2017 at 12:06 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2017, 12:29 PM
 
1,750 posts, read 498,025 times
Reputation: 1458
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks View Post

It isn't. Not a single person arguing in favor of these credit checks has been able to prove that employees with bad credit are more likely to steal than employees with good credit. Why is that? Because they aren't.
Rest assured that the personnel files in our companies are replete with such evidence. In the interest of decorum, not to mention protecting what little dignity the severed former employees may yet have, I see no obligation on my part to share that information here simply because you lack the rudimentary level of discernment needed to understand why an employee under financial pressure might feel the need to help him/herself to cash and/or goods belonging to his/her employer.

That’s why we had to start doing background checks in the first place, of course. Our previous policy of giving applicants the benefit of the initial doubt resulted in theft/shrink losses that were unacceptable. Since commencing pre-employment background checks, our theft losses have been dramatically reduced, primarily because we are getting a higher overall caliber of personnel than before.

We’ll continue to go with what our experiences have taught us with regard to background checks, because they have worked to reduce losses in our case. And we’ll continue to ask applicants in writing, in every case, if we can perform a pre-employment background and credit check. If they say “no,” then we’ll deem the application process to be ended at that point insofar as that applicant is concerned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2017, 12:31 PM
 
19,237 posts, read 11,156,405 times
Reputation: 8386
Quote:
Originally Posted by I love boots. View Post
I meant if asked about credit why not explain the circumstances if it is tied to something like medical expenses? Iit may be hard for you to do, but try to see this from the other side. You've worked very hard to build a business and want to protect it from theft for example. If there are judgements against someone don't you want to know why? An employer wants to know that you can be relied on and other things in your life won't get in the way. More than one person here has said that medical expenses don't come up in the type of credit checks employers look at. Is this not the case?

In my case I have a disabled son that requires personal care. A care provider will at times be in my house with all our stuff not to mention I'm entrusting my sons welfare to them. I don't hire people with judgements against them and it would be a redflag if they were offended about me asking to check their background. Yes, that sucks for them, but again they are not the only one that matters.

As hard as it is for someone like this trying to find work, Why shouldn't employers have the right to protect their business?

I guess I want to ask why so many here think the employee matters more than the employer?
The employer hands are on the wheel - you don't like the work ethics- fire them. How many single parents in the US? Really, bad Credit does NOT mean you are not a great employee. 1/2 of grads have bad debt.
Right now I work where your whole life style is scrutinized- yet some of my co workers are HUGE worthless slackers... as its mostly a male - they just pat themselves on the back. I think they way we think is OFF--- yet at the same time we high five companies who file BK lay off employees and rename themselves - and restart whoot whoot -- or even political figures... yea you can vote for people with bad credit....hmm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2017, 12:36 PM
 
Location: Athol, Idaho
2,182 posts, read 1,057,742 times
Reputation: 3184
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinytrump View Post
The employer hands are on the wheel - you don't like the work ethics- fire them. How many single parents in the US? Really, bad Credit does NOT mean you are not a great employee. 1/2 of grads have bad debt.
Right now I work where your whole life style is scrutinized- yet some of my co workers are HUGE worthless slackers... as its mostly a male - they just pat themselves on the back. I think they way we think is OFF--- yet at the same time we high five companies who file BK lay off employees and rename themselves - and restart whoot whoot -- or even political figures... yea you can vote for people with bad credit....hmm
So, do you feel an employer has the right to do what they feel necessary to protect their business or not? Your post is just a rambling bunch of stuff.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2017, 12:43 PM
 
13,840 posts, read 4,103,124 times
Reputation: 5068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Its irrelevant. Prospective employers and prospective employees should be able to use whatever tools they feel necessary to negotiate terms.
No they should not and thank God that in some states they can't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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