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.
great advise. I think there are other things you can do to make your credit report look better.
No I did not know that and Mr. CSD will be thrilled to learn this, he loves anything air....
digg9779: You really need to run a report from all 3 bureaus to see exactly what is on each of them then go through each one line by line and see if there is anything that is old enough to be removed and if there is anything you can legally dispute or any corrections that need to be made.
When you're ^^^ doing the hiring, you can complain about HR and "bigotries." Financial problems are a HUGE liability, and there is more to it as a qualifier than just the financial part of it. People who have financial problems as serious as a bankruptcy tend to be very distracted at work, and they often have drama follow them.
It also speaks to common sense and judgement. If I tell an employee to manage the company's money like they would manage their own, why would I want someone who's been bankrupt?
Like it or not, it is a huge liability.
OP, if you are applying at a place you KNOW does background checks, tell them on the front end of the interview process.
Here we go again. I challenge you to prove to us that people with FORMER financial problems make worse employees than people without. There are many reasons a person files bankruptcy. If a person has bad credit, it stands to reason they would be even MORE motivated to want to keep a job since they have no financial resources to float them during periods of unemployment. Denying a person a job based on poor credit scores is discrimination, IMO. Don't even get me started on running credit reports for car insurance rates. The purpose of that still bewilders me completely.
Sure, lack of financial responsibility can be a cause, but there are many others that many not be the person's fault at all. Medical bills the person can't pay is a biggie. Identity theft is another possibility. Divorce can be another.
When I was 11 years old, my mother set up utility bills under my SS# because she never paid her own, then failed to pay the ones under my SS#, of course. This was before identity theft was recognized as a crime. Several years later, when I moved out of the house, my credit was already ruined, and I hadn't even used it yet! When I proved to the utility companies my age at the time of the debt, they put a lien on her house so that when she passed away, the debt would be satisfied.
With a leap like that you should be in a Nike commercial. Financial problems can be the result of poor judgement or in many cases a major medical problem, or a divorce etc. It is a form of bigotry and should be illegal to have an employer poking arround in an employee or potential employee's private financial issues. If they are distracted at work or bringing drama then by all means fire them.
I think some of the jerks doing the hiring ought to be wearing white sheets they are such awful bigots and stereotypers.
Agree.
And I would add you can have "distracted" employees who are going through a divorce, have a teenager with a drug problem, an elderly parent who has become dependent on them etc.
Besides hasn't someone who declared BK unburdened themselves from most of their debt? So why would they be so "distracted"? They should feel like a weight has been taken off their shoulders.
The only issue for them know that would cause stress would be the background check.
Here we go again. I challenge you to prove to us that people with FORMER financial problems make worse employees than people without. There are many reasons a person files bankruptcy. If a person has bad credit, it stands to reason they would be even MORE motivated to want to keep a job since they have no financial resources to float them during periods of unemployment. Denying a person a job based on poor credit scores is discrimination, IMO. Don't even get me started on running credit reports for car insurance rates. The purpose of that still bewilders me completely.
Sure, lack of financial responsibility can be a cause, but there are many others that many not be the person's fault at all. Medical bills the person can't pay is a biggie. Identity theft is another possibility. Divorce can be another.
Employees with financial issues always bring extra baggage to the work place. I had a sales person that can't buy tix or book hotels because they have no credit cards due to BR. I had another person that i had to garnish wages due to tax issues. Those are issues I don't want to deal with.
In the current environment, why do I need this when I can get just as qualified employees without the baggage?
I know you to be a compassionate, knowledgable and rational poster on this board, so this question is much out of character for you. Have you never worked in a company where someone embezzled? My first job out of college, a beloved accounts-receivable employee embezzled $100,000. It is a blow to the entire workforce and costs companies more than you can imagine. So what am I afraid of? Hmmm ... losing my livelihood, the business my husband and I sank everything into, the jobs of 248 people, my retirement fund, my own family's security.
My response was to a person who is in academia, has no responsibility for making multimillion-dollar decisions or employing people, yet constantly rails on this forum about the evils of employers.
I did not say I wouldn't hire anyone who filed bankruptcy. Many of the 250 people in my manufacturing company have had financial problems and arrests. They work on "the floor," in assembly. No one in the office has filed bankruptcy.
Things have changed since 2008. Competition for jobs is insane. Recovery is so much harder now. A bad hire costs me much more than a few weeks' time.
Thank you for the kind words, and I want to assure you my question was sincere. Not all your employees work in accounting and until you spelled it out above, it was unclear to me that you would be willing to hire someone who had filed for bankruptcy if they were seeking a job outside of accounting.
I understand the fear of tempting someone with money problems, but hiring an accountant for the company isn't the same as hiring a controller or CFO who has filed bankruptcy. Having worked in both small and large companies, if you are bottom heavy, meaning most of your staff is in production and you have few people in the office, what you're doing to protect your company makes sense.
It does not make sense for larger companies where there are so many checks and balances at different levels and safety measures are more stringent. I wouldn't expect large companies to hire those who have filed as Controller or CFO, but there are other positions in these departments where risk would be low. You could even be the Manager of Credit & Collections and never see a check, since those are submitted to the bank which then sends the company the check stub and invoice submitted with it.
I posted it in a thread several months ago and don't want to go back and look for it, but most bankruptcies have been filed due to medical bills, and not, as most who would like to believe, irresponsible personal spending. It could happen to any of us. Still, there are a number of people who saw those numbers in that thread and continued to ignore them, blaming people for buying homes they couldn't afford and running up credit card debt.
We live in a society where the masses want to punish people for whatever infraction the masses deem the person committed. A successful university dean must leave his position because he jokingly refers to a university that is a football rival as "those damn Catholics" in a private party where someone recorded his off-handed, meant to be funny, comment. We make sure people lose their jobs for saying something we twist and then feign offense over. We want to punish everyone who filed bankruptcy no matter what their circumstances were. I don't understand how we can live in a culture where we've relaxed so many of the norms, but still maintain a crucify them attitude with regard to some things. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Employees with financial issues always bring extra baggage to the work place. I had a sales person that can't buy tix or book hotels because they have no credit cards due to BR. I had another person that i had to garnish wages due to tax issues. Those are issues I don't want to deal with.
In the current environment, why do I need this when I can get just as qualified employees without the baggage?
If this person is a company sales person why isn't the company booking the flights, rental cars and hotels?
Employees with financial issues always bring extra baggage to the work place. I had a sales person that can't buy tix or book hotels because they have no credit cards due to BR.
And? He/she shouldn't have to do that for company business anyway. The company should be paying for those items to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ipuck
I had another person that i had to garnish wages due to tax issues. In the current environment, why do I need this when I can get just as qualified employees without the baggage?
An employee can bring all sorts of drama to the workplace, whether he/she has credit problems or not. That's because employees are human, just like bosses are. Employees (and bosses) get divorced, have child custody/support battles, have deaths in the family, and all sorts of problems that have nothing to do with credit issues. Employees are not robots. The boss cannot predict what a person will go through in his/her personal life, not the boss him/herself. Qualified candidates who are not criminals should be allowed a fair chance, especially when there is a good possibility cerdit problems were not the fault of these candidates in the first place.
Employees with financial issues always bring extra baggage to the work place. I had a sales person that can't buy tix or book hotels because they have no credit cards due to BR. I had another person that i had to garnish wages due to tax issues. Those are issues I don't want to deal with.
In the current environment, why do I need this when I can get just as qualified employees without the baggage?
If you look at some of the threads and posts here from people who feel their managers and the companies they work for are supposed to make them happy, that they should be able to use their cell phones at work whenever they want, that state corporations and managers are evil, etc., you'll find a group that brings far more baggage to the workplace, I believe.
Here we go again. I challenge you to prove to us that people with FORMER financial problems make worse employees than people without.
I don't have to prove it to you to satisfy YOUR opinion. The harsh reality is that business is risk, and if there are qualified candidates who DON'T have that baggage, I will reduce my risk by hiring them.
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.
