[kevkrom]

It's not much different in business. Once an individual is hired - they're IN - they have ACCESS. Wouldn't you rather know if they had a history of drunkenness, philandering, racism - or worse yet, that they voted for Barrack Obama?It's not much different in business. Once an individual is hired - they're IN - they have ACCESS. Wouldn't you rather know if they had a history of drunkenness, philandering, racism - or worse yet, that they voted for Barrack Obama?

That just bolsters my point -- if the individual would give up confidential information about themselves to get the job, why would I trust them not to give up confidential information about the job to someone else for some reason?

Thee are lots of ways to vet someone for a job. Asking them to violate proper safeguards of information is not -- because it sets exactly the wrong precedent.

[jonno]

My only (supportive) position on this thread:

Therefore when I hire I want to know A-B-S-O-L-U-T-E-L-Y EVERYTHING about that candidate I can POSSIBLY know.

I never suggested that an individual should give up confidential information about themselves to get the job. And in defense of Nervous, he only mentioned that he would - if he HAD to...

Is there a problem?