Posted on 12/18/2013 12:06:42 PM PST by ConservativeStatement
Well, they run credit checks on everyone now for anything above the burger-flipper level.
_________________________________________________________
And has it improved the nation’s workforce?
Not hardly.
Agreed that credit score is a legitimate inquiry from a bank to a party seeking a loan. But in the case of the guy seeking a job as a transporter of patients for a medical practice (as in the posted WaPo article), his credit score is irrelevant to his prospective employer and the job applicant should have specifically said so and denied them consent to research it. Two entirely different situations.
And, furthermore, there's no need whatsoever for the Senate 'rat legislation!
Yet someone else got the job, right? Why does the guy who got the job have less of a right to it than this guy? It's the employer's choice.
You're supposed to have an emergency fund set up so that if you face a hardship, it won't affect your credit. If someone did that and you didn't, they deserve a better score and they deserve to be recognized for it. It's a good sign they're better at planning ahead and showing discipline, good qualities for any job.
I don’t agree. People with bad credit are usually irresponsible IMO.
I wouldn’t hire an irresponsible person.
Another thing you may not have thought of. People who don’t pay their bills often have their salaries Garnisheed, meaning that the bookkeeper of your firm has more work to do. I might add that many who come to work and have their salary garnisheed often times just quit.
Not meconservatives who oppose it are really saying its better if such people stay on welfare than get a job and show they’re responsible.
No, we're saying employers get to decide who they do and do not hire, not meddling, know-nothing bureaucrats and politicians.
It's the entitlement society on display. The mindset has infected many so-called conservatives too. If it benefits ME, then it's a good law. Doesn't matter if it's fair, just, right, moral, constitutional, etc. I just wants the big ol' gubmint to gimme what's comin' to ME.
I see no one here saying any such thing.
If “everyone” has a credit bump that would disqualify them from employment, then the credit check is worthless.
Logic, people!
Also, if the credit check reduces the pool of hirable people to nearly nothing, businesses will loosen their requirements. Simple supply and demand.
No, you don’t get it. You don’t nix people who get behind on bills or who incur health care bills. You nix people who file bankruptcy repeatedly, those who are completely irresponsible, those who run up thousands upon thousands of dollars of credit card bills, those who cannot and will not exercise good judgment. Those people are a threat to your business, primarily because they are a higher risk of defalcation, not to mention the fact that they probably will damage the business by excercising that poor judgment at work.
There is a very big difference in a guy who gets a couple of payments behind on his mortgage and car loan from a wage earner that goes out and runs up credit card and other debt. Not every lender reports to a credit bureau. Some people are just poor stupid slubs. Being in the banking business, I see more people than you might think who are just looking for the next guy to beat out of money. The morals of this country are not what they used to be, especially for younger generations. I’ve got some charge-offs to prove it.
Most small business people right now are just getting by and are under heavy pressure from unbelieveably onerous regulation, taxes and other hurdles placed in their way. Now folks like you who have no real understanding of the situation want to take one of the last, low cost ways, imperfect as it is, of protecting themselves from lowlifes. Sorry, but you and the Rats are big-time wrong on this one. How you can equate a small business person to a “big brother” government type is beyond me.
Your "supposed" to???????? Did you really state that? It is a very good idea and most folks do, but there is no requirement to do such as you imply.
When my husband lost his IT job, we did have the suggested 6 month fund, and stretched it for nearly 12. However, as has been stated time and time again, the economy has sucked for quite a while. Not a day went by we weren't looking and applying, while doing odd jobs and construction and whatever we could. Over 2 years of that and the credit rating is going to show dings and some major hits. We're still trying to get back to where we were.
I don't want to see Congress prohibiting employers from doing this. If they are going to meddle somewhere, I would rather have them put better controls on the credit reporting companies , most especially in this day and age of identity fraud/theft.
There's some truth in that, but there are better and alternative ways to do background checks on people, depending on the job you are hiring for and the extent to which you want to go.
24 years ago I had a job where I had access to gold and diamonds. Did not learn until years later when I went to buy my house that my employer was helping themselves to a random check of my credit every couple of months.
I was conflicted. Angry they were going behind my back, but found it hard to blame them when I was responsible for millions of dollars worth of their property.
I don’t disagree with this. If you lose your job chances are you’re going to get behind in your bills. Then you can’t get a job because of that? I always thought it was stupid.
I hired a woman back in the 80s. She was a good salesperson and made some sales her first week. Then my boss called me and told me to let her go because she had bad credit. I asked him if he was going to let me go because my credit sucked, too. He admitted that so did his. I let the woman go.
I beg to differ. Credit scores only reflect that someone is a stupid slave to the banking class and they reliably place themselves in debt and then they reliably service their debt.
My credit score is probably terrible because I've never had a credit card, I've never had a student loan, we've never had a mortgage (we paid cash for the ranch), and we pay cash for our cars.
100 years ago I would've been considered an upstanding Christian and a good member of the community for avoiding debt. These days I'm looked down on because I refuse to be in bondage to a bank.
IMHO a 'good credit rating' is just an indicator of how much someone will submit and conform to societal pressure. Maybe that means you'll get a good employee, but it doesn't mean they have good character.
Don’t forget the rest of the Post.
In an era of high unemployment, I have no sympathy with businesses not wanting to ‘loosen’ up a bit...at least with otherwise honest persons who’ve had their credit dinged because of the “naked king” in the white house.
Besides the whole nation and its people suffers from huge multigenerational debts we’ll never pay off. We’re all bad credit risks!
In an era of high unemployment a business can be more selective with whom they hire.
You are confusing a business with a charity.
The purpose of a business is to make money, not solve the country’s unemployment problem.
Want to solve unemployment, get the government off the back of businesses (in the form of laws and regulation).
Pervasive ignorance runs rampant in D.C.
I like your very sensible replies.
No not charity, but people will remember and not buy from businesses who act in cruddy ways! If curbs are put on the use of credit checks in the hiring process, I won’t shed a tear!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.