Job and Credit

[TheDude]

It shouldn't be illegal for anyone to base hiring on whatever reason they see fit. It's their business, their money, they should be able to hire, or not hire, whoever they want. If they miss out on good people because of it, then that's their problem.

I assume you would not include race, age, disability, or sexual preference in that statement?

there is never a blanket statement that should apply to every situation.

 

[TheKey]

Bank regulators not only regulate the bank, but also the personal accounts of the employees. Why would a financial institution subject themselves to more regulation?

 

[TheDude]

Bank regulators not only regulate the bank, but also the personal accounts of the employees. Why would a financial institution subject themselves to more regulation?

Que?

Bank regulators dont pull credit reports on employees. The biggest show stopper for banks is bounced checks...that is a big blacklist. Fraud is illegal, and has criminal ramifications. Checks are demand accounts that a person would/should no exactly what they have. Banks are not giving or expected to bear that risk.

Credit is altogether different. Somebody's situation a time A can drastically differ from time B.

 

[jobberone]

It shouldn't be illegal for anyone to base hiring on whatever reason they see fit. It's their business, their money, they should be able to hire, or not hire, whoever they want. If they miss out on good people because of it, then that's their problem.

I agree with this but I feel there should be a move to constrain the reporting problems and give the consumer more protection. I've had people put stuff on my credit report that absolutely did not deserve to be there. And there is little you can do to punish the culprit. Sure you can take them to court but there needs to be a method short of that.

This is another you're guilty until and unless you can prove you aren't which will be a lot of trouble for you. Too many rights have been eroded away from the citizens.

 

[Kevinicus]

It's already illegal to refuse to hire based on reasons outlined in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It's illegal to refuse to hire based on advanced age. We should add poverty to that list. Refusing to hire based on bad credit is just yet more oppression of the poor. It's an unjust assumption that someone has been irresponsible with money when the truth might be they have bad credit through no fault of their own. People who need money might be quality workers. Imagine that.

And I've never bought the argument that someone who owns his own business can do whatever the heck he wants because it's his business. That's not true. There are limits. He doesn't have the right to fondle his female coworkers. He doesn't have the right to break fire codes. He doesn't have the right to pay less than minimum wage.

Hiring based on credit scores is un-American. We're supposed to be a country that encourages working hard and climbing the economic ladder. Using credit scores is saying, "Poor people deserve to stay poor." We should be a country in which hiring and promotion is done based on abilities and performance ONLY.

I am aware it is already illegal to not hire based on some factors, that doesn't make it right. Those restrictions should be eliminated, not added to. If someone wants to refuse to hire anyone that likes the color blue or for ANY reason, it should be their right to do so.

 

[Kevinicus]

I assume you would not include race, age, disability, or sexual preference in that statement?

there is never a blanket statement that should apply to every situation.

I absolutely 100% would include those things.

 

[Kevinicus]

I agree with this but I feel there should be a move to constrain the reporting problems and give the consumer more protection. I've had people put stuff on my credit report that absolutely did not deserve to be there. And there is little you can do to punish the culprit. Sure you can take them to court but there needs to be a method short of that.

This is another you're guilty until and unless you can prove you aren't which will be a lot of trouble for you. Too many rights have been eroded away from the citizens.

The whole credit reporting system leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[CowboyStar88]

Qualifications speak for themselves and I was the only interviewer to put a plan together that would immediately increase loan volume and profit in the first year. I know what I'm doing and I know how to do it effectively. I'm very good at it. I was told by the interviewing manger " very impressive and these are the types of things in looking for and your qualifications are impressive" my financial situation does not impact my job. It's a sad situation I've gone thru that took me down financially and emotionally and it's taken every ounce of strength in my body to move forward. The emotional damage the accident caused and the heart break I suffered with my ex-wife as taken its toll and I'm only 33 years old. I sure hope they take my honesty into consideration and the explanation a long with being able to supply the letter showing I'm working with a company to get my credit back on track. I'm praying that my fortune will be turning.

I understand some of the guys views and I respect them. I just think there is a human element to this and obviously if there credit was good prior and I've worked with access to plenty of bank accounts of celebrities in the past and never once thought of doing anything wrong. Why would I change I'm integrity now? If you think I like where my life is today financially you are crazy. I am working hard to fix it now as I've been humbled by what's happened. It's in gods hands now and I pray he continues to guide me and give me strength to over come this. Thanks to all who have their opinions.

 

[RS12]

Sad part is you could be perfect for a job but if somebody goes in with a better credit score and talks a good game, it is going to end badly. This is almost as outrageous as insurance companies basing your rates on credit. One of the biggest scams of our lifetime.

 

[21Savage]

I am aware it is already illegal to not hire based on some factors, that doesn't make it right. Those restrictions should be eliminated, not added to. If someone wants to refuse to hire anyone that likes the color blue or for ANY reason, it should be their right to do so.

What?

You basically just said, in other words, that if someone wants to refuse to hire black people (or any other race) it should be their perogative. Ridiculous!

 

[Wheeltax]

What?

You basically just said, in other words, that if someone wants to refuse to hire black people (or any other race) it should be their perogative. Ridiculous!

I agree with it, too. Studies show that companies with diversity (racial and international) tend to do better overall due to different methods of thinking and ideas. My employer is a big believer in this and they've been around long enough and are large enough to see the difference.

If an employer wants to forego that, then let him - he gets to deal with the potential lack of growth and likely boycott that goes along with it.


Re: credit reports - I agree that they are overused at times for purposes of employment, but can totally see why anything in the financial/security sector would want to use such criteria.

Credit reports themselves are a sham built entirely for the benefit of the lenders, many times to the detriment of borrowers. Personally speaking, I'm having to stay with my parents right now at almost 30 years old because I'm trying to buy a house without starting a new apartment lease and one of the three credit reporting agencies (Equifax) has my student loans inexplicably doubled - and report the doubled loan as having never been paid. They have all the paperwork and proof that what they have is wrong, but it's been a full month now and they're simply dragging their feet on getting it corrected. When it's time to drop your score it happens instantly. Fixing it? Ehhhh, we'll get around to it probably.

 

[Kevinicus]

What?

You basically just said, in other words, that if someone wants to refuse to hire black people (or any other race) it should be their perogative. Ridiculous!

It's not ridiculous, it's common sense freedom. I guess you like the government dictating how you handle YOUR affairs. If someone is willing to miss out on a good employee because they have some bias against them, then it is their loss. But it absolutely should be their perogative as it is THEIR company and THEIR money to handle as they see fit.