Some States May Ban Credit Checks for Employment

[squeaks]

Flamingo, do you really believe it gets to the point where an HR manager is interested in why there was a bankruptcy? Your responses in the latter part of these posts have all the warmth of a snow pea and sound like the same contrived corporate rhetoric used by so many of those at the top who are willing to destroy lives to personally raise his or her income from 18 million to 22 million a year.

I think you need to take a step back and look at what we are doing to each other in this society because the big picture is horrid. With the credit check being used as a bazooka to clear out the number of candidates, it is definitely one strike and you're out. Whether you have a great reason or not, there are too many in positions to make decisions who do not have a clue because mom and dad paid for that degree with the all impressive C-average from some teacher factory that ensures that new managers are well schooled in post modern feminism so they can either be emasculated men or "angry for the sake of it" women who look upon male counterparts as the person who has been standing on her throat for generations.

I attended a Merril Lynch function recently and was appalled at how many of their lower and mid level managers acted. It was pretty damned close to a Girls Gone Wild commercial and I kept thinking to myself, "these are the people who make decisions?" The sense of right and wrong in our society has definitely shifted towards the bizarre. If someone loses their job, it can have consequences that keep the individual trapped in debtor's prison for years if not the rest of their lives and this credit check BS is and will be a huge reason behind this. The credit reporting system is extremely flawed and to rely on it for life altering decisions is ridiculous.

[Flamingo]

. (snip)....Somehow as an HR employee, you feel comfortable about turning down others based on credit, but how comfortable are you knowing that you could be let go as a result of your own history (yes - they fire for bad credit also), or that if you were looking for another job, you could end up broke again as a result of being unemployable, without a chance of filing? As a collective group of BKers or soon-to-be BKers, we are all faced with this reality; why such opposition then? (snip...)

Since you replied to one of my postings, I am assuming what I highlighted in red above was directed toward me. Realize I do not work in the HR Department but work in levels that control the HR Dept. and Corporate matters, of my Company and many others. I do not hire/fire but know the ropes and have personally seen things that are done in the hiring process where many are not hired for many reasons...in the end the hiring party will take the person they feel is the best fit for their company/business and your past resume and background/credit checks are part of that process to show the kind of person you are. If you have a BK sitting on your credit reports and are shaking in your boots hoping to get the job and you did not get to that spot by having 100 credit cards charged up to their limits just to buy stuff, then by all means don't be afraid to mention why you had to file and that your filing will have nothing to do with your performance on the job if you get it and your focus is on their company making money by you working there. If you are a good fit for the position, have the qualifications, the company can get around the credit issues if they want...I personally know of a matter where a prospective employee had a BK on her credit because her husband left her and they had a nasty divorce resulting in a lot of debt. Since the debt was joint, she had to file because she could not pay her share. She was not denied the job due to the BK on her records due to the circumstances. This was with a major financial company.

[dakota112]

Einstein was told by his teachers that he was a failure. You cannot judge a book by its cover. I can see someone who files BK as a way of life every 8 years but for most people fortunes come and go and no one really knows their future. With the vast numbers of people who have filed bk, I would think there would be no one left to work if they were discriminated on this basis. How about all the failed businesses in this country? I would bet that a 1st grader could do a better job managing a Fortune 500 company than the corrupt CEO's that rob them and the shareholders of millions for doing nothing more than delegating, eating well, flying around like some prince and playing golf.

[Pizza]

I've read employment ads that actually say 'if you're in school, don't bother applying'.

Everyone's got different standards.

[Flamingo]

Why do you think prospective employers want to do face-to-face interviews after previous screenings from submitted applications, resumes and/or phone interviews? If one doesn't have what an employer is looking for when asked various questions, what they would do in certain situations, etc., the employer realizes that person will not fit in with the company, may not perform well, and be a detriment to the company instead of an asset. Most people are asked a question as to how they would handle a specific job related performance issue/deadline issue/management/sales issue, etc. Your response is critical as to how you handle yourself in the presence of others and how you can stand on your feet and handle something. Someone who just sits there and has to think about the situation may not be a good fit for the position. It's all part of the screening process.

[Flamingo]

With all the recent "personality" and other talk above, go basic facts...to get a job, one must apply and submit a job application or resume. The HR person for the hiring business/company collects the incoming information/documents sent in for the position by prospective applicants. That pile is gleaned through as to those who would qualify for the job via the submitted resume; i.e., if the position is for an airline pilot, resumes submitted by those with no airline pilot experience are removed. The remaining passing group of resumes is reviewed by the main hiring person for the position along with HR. Those chosen get called for the interview that pass the initial screenings. If a signed application is submitted with the resume, the applicant gave permission via the signature for the prospective employer to run a credit/background check as the clause indicating the employer will do that upon signature is listed right in the application. If the prospective employee just submitted a resume and is called in for an interview, an application is always filled out at that time and the prospective employee advised after the interview that they will be contacted later.

After all the above, HR and the main hiring folks involved will glean through their notes from the interviews and determine who they think will best fill the position. Yes things like how one acts, personality, etc. and results of feedback from references is all discussed. Employers are looking for the best "package" in an prospective employee that will be loyal, show up for work each day, and basically make money for the business. If one has a bad past business/work ethic, i.e., missing a lot of days at former jobs, a history of leaving work early/coming in late, etc., etc., that can work against that employee.

If an interviewer/employer does not like what he is seeing/feeling from the person being interviewed, that can have a negative effect on the result inasmuch as that employer could feel that that person just will not fit in, may not do well, and could be a detriment instead of an asset for the company.

Lots involved in most businesses/companies as to picking the right employee. Why do you think they want to interview you in person? :-)

[TooMuchCredit]

I would much rather be subjected to a personality test that a credit check. You may have the knowledge to do a job, but you may have the personality that will cause issues in getting the job done. I.E. Sales people have to be outgoing and not introverted.

whether you filed bankruptcy or not should have no bearing on hiring. And if the company you are applying to or it predecessor has filed bankruptcy even more so. That's kind of hypocritical for a company that at some point in it's history to have a bankruptcy, yet not hire people because they have a bankruptcy on record or bad credit.

[Pizza]

Depends ... did they get the job? If they did not get the job then they failed to pass the personality test in a manner that the end result would be a job. If he would have gotten the job he would have passed it.. basically sematics is picking at scabs..... the end result is failing to get the job because of the test so it is a failure..

Which leads to.. GUESS WHAT.. LYING!! The big no-no in the job search.

Sure, I love staying overtime
I love it when the boss control me
I *REALLY* enjoy low pay and no chance at promotion
I would never file a lawsuit if the chemicals gave me cancer
I never go to lunch at an awkward time
I would leave my child unattended to do this job
blah blah blah blah blah



Don't stand facing the wind....

[momisery]

Depends ... did they get the job? If they did not get the job then they failed to pass the personality test in a manner that the end result would be a job. If he would have gotten the job he would have passed it.. basically sematics is picking at scabs..... the end result is failing to get the job because of the test so it is a failure..

[momisery]

It is happening, as I have mentioned.. in fact petsmart use to give them and the person I know that applied had help passing it so she could get the job.. totally dumb tests. People who are doing the jobs can not pass them in many cases, and people who have done like jobs are also failing them.. and yes, by failling I mean failing to qualify for the job. When they really like you, and then have to pass you over because corporate says you must pass the test, or match the qualities they are looking for, something is wrong. His background was great, held his gross, improve performance and has years under his belt.. at the time our credit was great too.. but poof the job offer was gone due to the test... The GM really wanted him too... and he would still be there, and I would not be posting on this board because we would have paid our bills ...

[momisery]

I am not sure...lol... The tests all differ, and we looked them up on line. They ask a lot of question to determine if you are a good "fit" for the job you have been doing for 20 years when you apply for one just like the one you are doing.. or maybe to see if you fit their corporate culture. Our best friend who was a GM for dealerships for years could not pass them either, but he is still at his job knocking em dead as dealerships go. And my old boss here at this job flunked his, so they had to "tutor" him to help him pass so he could keep his job.. lol... You can find a lot about them on the internet... many companies use them and many in the past say they don't work, while a few others like the Hunt family says they do... hunt as in dealerships.. not catsup... lol

[Pizza]

It's a fairly common practice, often disguised as a survey, generally to show how you feel about staying overtime, how much initiative you have, what your sense of entitlement is, and other 'quirks' that employers take into consideration before hiring.

No, it's not a pass/fail as far as a 'test' is concerned, but you may 'fail' to get the job as a result (as backtoschool mentioned).

More collectively, these background/credit/physical/personality, etc etc.. checks are used as a large body of evidence against hiring 90 of the 100 candidates. Some information is relevant, some not so much. Now if the position you are applying for only has 2 or 3 appicants, your bad credit may be compared against 1 felony and 1 verified lie about a degree. Generally, however, there are many applicants these days, and checks are a cheap way to shred a pile of applications without reading further into the applicants. YMMV.

[backtoschool]

I'm not sure why you are quibbling about those semantics either.

There is no way to fail a personality test. One is only classified by such a test.

Let us say the test determines one is a sociopath and the employer hires that individual. Did the test taker pass or fail the test?

In my interpretation, the test taker passed the test. The test results aided the test taker in achieving the goal of employment in a certain position, and the test taker's sociopath profile was the perfect fit for that position. An epic win!

[OhioFiler]

Personality profiling is a very common occurrence on Wall Street. I, and everyone I worked with had some sort of profiling done at some point in our careers.

I am not sure why you are quibbling about the semantics of what it means to "fail" a personality test. If you want a job, and your psychological profile deems you unsuitable for that job, then you have "failed" at your goal of getting that job. Where is the confusion?

I'm not sure why you are quibbling about those semantics either.

There is no way to fail a personality test. One is only classified by such a test.

Let us say the test determines one is a sociopath and the employer hires that individual. Did the test taker pass or fail the test?

[backtoschool]

So one can fail to get a job based on one's personality as determined by a standardized test. This does not qualify as passing or failing the test.

How typical is it for an employer to use standardized personality tests to determine one's ability to perform a job? I've never taken one as a condition for employment.

Personality profiling is a very common occurrence on Wall Street. I, and everyone I worked with had some sort of profiling done at some point in our careers.

I am not sure why you are quibbling about the semantics of what it means to "fail" a personality test. If you want a job, and your psychological profile deems you unsuitable for that job, then you have "failed" at your goal of getting that job. Where is the confusion?