Some States May Ban Credit Checks for Employment

[momisery]

Great point.. or perhaps you give to a certain organization and they disapprove of that hobby or event or club... no job...

[Faust]

WE, actually there is a law against that. If I fire someone because they were fencing my jewelry and selling it off to put the white poweder up their nose, as long as there are no crimminal charges I can not tell a hiring employer that was ever an issue.. All I can say really is yes they worked here and for how long if why they left or you could get sued. So, you can break the law and work, but abide by the law flunk a credit check and not get a job.. interesting

If they broke the law then there would be criminal charges which would be revealed on a background check.

[momisery]

WE, actually there is a law against that. If I fire someone because they were fencing my jewelry and selling it off to put the white poweder up their nose, as long as there are no crimminal charges I can not tell a hiring employer that was ever an issue.. All I can say really is yes they worked here and for how long if why they left or you could get sued. So, you can break the law and work, but abide by the law flunk a credit check and not get a job.. interesting

[momisery]

Yes, of course you may ask.. I smoked for 3 years and stopped back at age 25 after the warnings started coming out. Hubby smoked off and on for a long time, but he also started before the warnings and was hooked. For me once I quit it took about a year to not even like the smell, but for him he was hooked and has never been able to not want one. We both smoked doped too for the record and gave that up early with no problem.. perhaps they would be better off to sell it since you don't get hooked on it?

[momisery]

When I run a chexsystem it could turn you down based on your credit..

[OhioFiler]

Depends on who you ask, I suppose. If you get to reading about all the systems in place to weed out employees, especially during a job shortage of this magnitude, the anxiety alone can put more people willing and able to work on welfare because the general concensus is that employers are out to thwart the 'little guy' through automated 'weeders'. This may not be the case, but there is certainly a lot of fear because of it.

I haven't been turned down for a job personally, but if a potential employer sent me one of those form letters resembling being turned down for a credit card, I would really be in the dumps about it, especially if it happened continuously. The more widely used credit checks are becoming, the more they are becoming a fence rather than a tool.

These are emotional arguments that can't be considered in the equation. Our freedoms (and those afforded hiring employers) can not be modified so as to make one feel good.

[Pizza]

But at what point do we draw the line between where a business person has the right to make his own business decisions and where the government gets to make his business decisions for him?

Depends on who you ask, I suppose. If you get to reading about all the systems in place to weed out employees, especially during a job shortage of this magnitude, the anxiety alone can put more people willing and able to work on welfare because the general concensus is that employers are out to thwart the 'little guy' through automated 'weeders'. This may not be the case, but there is certainly a lot of fear because of it.

I haven't been turned down for a job personally, but if a potential employer sent me one of those form letters resembling being turned down for a credit card, I would really be in the dumps about it, especially if it happened continuously. The more widely used credit checks are becoming, the more they are becoming a fence rather than a tool.

[MSbklawyer]

I have to admit, I'm surprised that some of you think that it's okay for a potential employer to sabatoge your 'fresh start' by shutting you out of good job opportunities.

It's just a matter of personal liberty, Pizza. No one has a right to work for someone else who doesn't want that person working for them because they have bad credit history -- or because they are fat, or because they are skinny, or because they are bald, or because they are short -- what have you. It is surely a dang fool decision for a potential employer to turn away good, otherwise qualified potential employees based solely on their credit history -- or their weight, or their baldness or their height. But at what point do we draw the line between where a business person has the right to make his own business decisions and where the government gets to make his business decisions for him?

I believe we'll all be better off the more we let the business people make the business decisions and keep the government out of it.

[flyinbroke]

I have educated myself and am not referring to stolen SSNs, which are not necessarily discernable by a credit check. What if the person who stole the number does not take out any credit. There was one such incident (I believe in the NW, since I was living there at the time and it got heavy rotation) where the woman's SSN was stolen. The person who stole it was illegal, but only used it to get work and pay taxes. He did not open credit or bank accounts. He never used this number for any other purpose. (Yes he was caught.)

Yes it was a PITA for her (especially come tax time) but it is proof that a credit check would do absolutely nothing to prove that an illegal has your SSN. This sounds more like a bureaucratic smokescreen combined with a FICO sales pitch.

[Pizza]

I have to admit, I'm surprised that some of you think that it's okay for a potential employer to sabatoge your 'fresh start' by shutting you out of good job opportunities. If it's all about keeping out illegals or proving identity, that's flawed in that many new legal hires have NO credit when entering the workforce .. does that prove anything about their eligibility to work?

Confirming SSN, criminal records, running a drug test, and other WORK-related checks should be important to hiring. Bad credit shouldn't block you from refurbishing cell phones or processing paperwork. Sure, you *may* have a good explanation for getting behind on your bills, but the reports are cheap enough that employers would generally just look at the papers, find a credit problem, and shred everything, moving on to the next candidate, no questions asked.

[MSbklawyer]

Who's going to blow my leaves off the sidewalk if all the illegals are sent home? Those gas powered leaf blowers are heavy...

You. You need the exercise.

Short of that, the eager but unemployed LEGAL teenager down the street could use an extra 10 bucks.

[Flamingo]

I've never seen more obsession on any board about the illegals than this one. Who's going to blow my leaves off the sidewalk if all the illegals are sent home? Those gas powered leaf blowers are heavy...

Now THAT is a bad statement...not the reference of credit checks and job problems as to hiring of illegals...

[Flamingo]

Sorry you feel it is a horrible statement - it is not a statement from me but big talk around the water coolers at work, not only at my office but according to my office grapevine at water coolers all over the US. I am only giving a reason why credit checks and, of course, background checks should be done (some folks don't even want those done as they don't think a criminal background shouldn't keep one from getting a job either). It is the discriminatory factor that arouses frustration/anger among those with bad credit and that is the issue creating all the problems. If checks are eliminated, it may/can create problems for many employers. I was only bringing to light one scenario....

Using illegals as a reason to base employment on credit reports is a horrible argument Flamingo. Employers are already required to check any suspect SSN's with the SSA. They call it verification. If the name or address of the SSN is not verified by the SSA data - the employee should not be hired without further investigation.

If an illegal is posing as another person living at another address, then the SSA should take note of the numerous 1099 forms being reported by various employers from the same person. I did hear the story (urban legend) about a Target store employing 12 Jose Garcia's, all at the same store, with the same SSN once - but I don't believe it.

The fact is, most illegal immigrants have neither the education or language skills to occupy any well paying American jobs. I really doubt there are any PhD level physicists employed at our National Labs, that are really illegals using someone else's social security number. But there may be PhD physicists than can't get a job because of a poor credit history - even if it was a pure business related failure.

Many qualified American citizens are being denied employment because of their credit record - and nothing else. When there are 50 qualified applicants for a single job - who do you think the employee is going to pick when qualifications are identical? The person with the 760 FICO, or the 640 FICO "deadbeat".

I've never seen more obsession on any board about the illegals than this one. Who's going to blow my leaves off the sidewalk if all the illegals are sent home? Those gas powered leaf blowers are heavy...

[WhatMoney]

Employers are already required to check any suspect SSN's with the SSA. They call it verification. If the name or address of the SSN is not verified by the SSA data - the employee should not be hired without further investigation.

Correction on my above post. Employers should check with Homeland Security to verify potential new hires SSN and citizenship status. The program is called E-Verify and the link is here:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/usc...004718190aRCRD

[TooMuchCredit]

Using illegals as a reason to base employment on credit reports is a horrible argument Flamingo. Employers are already required to check any suspect SSN's with the SSA. They call it verification. If the name or address of the SSN is not verified by the SSA data - the employee should not be hired without further investigation.

If an illegal is posing as another person living at another address, then the SSA should take note of the numerous 1099 forms being reported by various employers from the same person. I did hear the story (urban legend) about a Target store employing 12 Jose Garcia's, all at the same store, with the same SSN once - but I don't believe it.

The fact is, most illegal immigrants have neither the education or language skills to occupy any well paying American jobs. I really doubt there are any PhD level physicists employed at our National Labs, that are really illegals using someone else's social security number. But there may be PhD physicists than can't get a job because of a poor credit history - even if it was a pure business related failure.

Many qualified American citizens are being denied employment because of their credit record - and nothing else. When there are 50 qualified applicants for a single job - who do you think the employee is going to pick when qualifications are identical? The person with the 760 FICO, or the 640 FICO "deadbeat".

I've never seen more obsession on any board about the illegals than this one. Who's going to blow my leaves off the sidewalk if all the illegals are sent home? Those gas powered leaf blowers are heavy...

Well said. illegals have become the scapegoat for all that is wrong in the country.