Some States May Ban Credit Checks for Employment

[WhatMoney]

With no credit checks, more jobs will open up to illegals despite background checks...along with fake/stolen SS's numbers, bogus birth certificates are a dime a dozen to use with the I-9 for employment. If an illegal has no record, nothing will show up on a background check. A credit check with a stolen/fake SS would reveal more or raise a red flag or show someone else's name/accounts. While the focus is on protecting qualified workers with bad credit from being discriminated against for bad credit/filing BK, the trade off for removing credit checks will open the door further for illegals to get the jobs also. Someone will need to figure out a way to prevent all that but by the time they do, the workforce will be infiltrated.

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...

[Flamingo]

Background checks should be far more relevant to risk than credit checks. For employment, using bad credit is the equivalent of labeling a person "too poor to work."

With no credit checks, more jobs will open up to illegals despite background checks...along with fake/stolen SS's numbers, bogus birth certificates are a dime a dozen to use with the I-9 for employment. If an illegal has no record, nothing will show up on a background check. A credit check with a stolen/fake SS would reveal more or raise a red flag or show someone else's name/accounts. While the focus is on protecting qualified workers with bad credit from being discriminated against for bad credit/filing BK, the trade off for removing credit checks will open the door further for illegals to get the jobs also. Someone will need to figure out a way to prevent all that but by the time they do, the workforce will be infiltrated.

[Pizza]

See my highlight in red above of your wording...educate yourself as to how SS numbers are stolen and given to illegals...to be employed, a SS number is needed so one is provided by groups who work with settling illegals throughout the US. Those SS numbers belong to other people who may not realize for quite a while their SS is being used. Not having credit checks done and/or background checks opens up a whole can of worms that is being ignored because everyone is focusing so much on the discrimination factor, wait until if and when it goes into effect....

Background checks should be far more relevant to risk than credit checks. For employment, using bad credit is the equivalent of labeling a person "too poor to work."

[Pizza]

It was the decision at the time of usage of the BofA credit card you need to compare to the purchasing of food.

Or, someone could be unemployed for so long that they have to purchase food WITH the BofA card. Either way, credit checks do not tell an employer anything about someone's work ethic, history, education, experience, nor any other job-related characteristic that is vital to a position. It only tells an employer if someone has or has not paid the bills, not why.

EDIT: A credit report DOES show past employers and addresses that you have used on credit applications, but even those points are employee-provided (to a creditor) and should not be issues that IMO support a full credit check.

[Flamingo]

A credit check won't work for illegals; they have no SSNs and therefore it is highly likely that they have no records. Background checks, I am all for. You don't want a convicted child molester landing a job as a teacher, or a bank robber to work accounts receivable. You don't want any felon to work in sensitive positions (ironic that they all work in collections). However, a few late payments or a BK does not mean someone is likely to steal. If I thought that way, I wouldn't be late now, would I? I would have embezzled my way out of debt.

Now if only they would eliminate this for insurance. I paid cash for my last repair and have crummy credit thanks to the CLDs and other factors. BK should make insurance completely unaffordable.

See my highlight in red above of your wording...educate yourself as to how SS numbers are stolen and given to illegals...to be employed, a SS number is needed so one is provided by groups who work with settling illegals throughout the US. Those SS numbers belong to other people who may not realize for quite a while their SS is being used. Not having credit checks done and/or background checks opens up a whole can of worms that is being ignored because everyone is focusing so much on the discrimination factor, wait until if and when it goes into effect....

[Pizza]

The elimination of credit and background checks will open the doors further for more of those in this country illegally to obtain more positions. I don't think any checks should be eliminated, I believe the discriminatory factor should be lessened for those that had to file BK for medical or job loss reasons and are not serial filers

There is already a verification for that - the I-9 form (Eligibility for Employment). My former company had everyone bring in their birth certificate and other supporting documentation to continue employment with the company. The next week, our janitorial staff was replaced..

[Mi Bankruptcy]

I have clarify, I don't like government telling business what they can do. However, if an employer has the right to look at my credit report don't you think it is not only fair they have to provide details of what they are going to looking at. Think about all the small details a credit report says about you. Maybe I have a Walmart credit card and the employer is all about Unions.. So, they disqualify me?

[OhioFiler]

I'll agree that employers are pushed into a corner in regards to discussing work history. Where my wife works it's a terminable offense to even verify that someone was or is employed with the company, they must redirect the call to the automated system. While I think a employer should be allowed to at least "Grade" your performance (good, bad, acceptable, etc) or say "would or would not rehire", I don't think they should have a blank-check to bad mouth former workers.

However, credit-reports lack any context to be worth the money spent on them. All they do is prop up a market that tells employers that the poor or people going through hard-times are somehow less trustworthy.

Where do you recommend employers gather the appropriate context to make a qualified hiring decision?

I am confident I can explain my bankruptcy to a hiring manager should I need to do so. And frankly, if they are not interested in me solely because of my credit history I'd rather not work for them anyway.

I understand your position on using credit as a hiring criteria and agree it is unreliable. That doesn't overcome the argument that the employer should have a right to use it for deciding who to hire. How is using such information somehow discriminatory or a violation of anyone's rights?

[MSbklawyer]

I'm with OF on this one. What an employer considers to be important in his potential employees is his business. While I might think that credit history should not be used to screen potential employees, someone else may think it vitally important that his employees have a good, clean credit history. What interest does the state have in dictating to a private business how it should screen its employees?

[BrokeIn2010]

It has become impossible to get information related to a candidate's previous work history over the last 20 years. Companies will mostly do nothing but verify dates of employment. A direct result of the tort industry AND a reason why employers have had to turn to other forms of background analysis such as credit reports.

I'll agree that employers are pushed into a corner in regards to discussing work history. Where my wife works it's a terminable offense to even verify that someone was or is employed with the company, they must redirect the call to the automated system. While I think a employer should be allowed to at least "Grade" your performance (good, bad, acceptable, etc) or say "would or would not rehire", I don't think they should have a blank-check to bad mouth former workers.

However, credit-reports lack any context to be worth the money spent on them. All they do is prop up a market that tells employers that the poor or people going through hard-times are somehow less trustworthy.

[Mi Bankruptcy]

I trust you are outraged by this socialist society and the attendant loss of freedom.

I don't believe it is too late to take back our country.

Thank you for your sacrifice.

Thank You, If we could get reasonable term limits for both the house and the senate & balance budget legislation that would be a great start. I would like to even see that ability for a line item veto. Can you imagine a president sitting down and crossing out all the pork out of a bill? Then if it's abused the congress passes and additional amendment for anything that is veto'd

[OhioFiler]

A credit check isn't going to tell you the mindset at the time of the use of the card. And it's going to give you no relevant information about the person's education, training, and work ethic. Nothing will except sitting down and talking to the person, not some piece of fax paper.

As for employment background checks: that does tell you-- up to a point-- the type of employee the person is. And some companies already don't verify info past when you started, when you left, and if it was a quit or a termination.

It has become impossible to get information related to a candidate's previous work history over the last 20 years. Companies will mostly do nothing but verify dates of employment. A direct result of the tort industry AND a reason why employers have had to turn to other forms of background analysis such as credit reports.

[OhioFiler]

Freedom.. Are you kidding me. We don't have freedom. We are almost an entirely socialist society. We have tax paid, fire, police, and social services, next it will be healthcare. Therefore, we do the best we can with what we have. Try to pass laws that give people the best chance to survive. If I am applying for a job I want to know all the qualifying criteria and that includes what will be required of credit.

If you want to talk about freedom.. I served out country during war. So.. I don't take it lightly when it comes to discussions of freedom.

I trust you are outraged by this socialist society and the attendant loss of freedom.

I don't believe it is too late to take back our country.

Thank you for your sacrifice.

[BrokeIn2010]

It was the decision at the time of usage of the BofA credit card you need to compare to the purchasing of food.

Obviously, we need to hold employers to certain hiring standards which are all covered by existing laws. Why do we need to add one more? After we take away the right of the employer to evaluate a potential employee based on credit behavior then what? Do we disallow looking at his work history as well because in those tough economical times he felt forced to tell his supervisor to "F off"?

If we continue to neuter employers ability to decide who they want to hire eventually the employers will simply stop hiring. I would. I'd farm it out to some offshore labor supply.

A credit check isn't going to tell you the mindset at the time of the use of the card. And it's going to give you no relevant information about the person's education, training, and work ethic. Nothing will except sitting down and talking to the person, not some piece of fax paper.

As for employment background checks: that does tell you-- up to a point-- the type of employee the person is. And some companies already don't verify info past when you started, when you left, and if it was a quit or a termination.

[Mi Bankruptcy]

Why? Why do we need to dictate to employers how they decide which person to hire? Whatever happened to freedom in this country?

Freedom.. Are you kidding me. We don't have freedom. We are almost an entirely socialist society. We have tax paid, fire, police, and social services, next it will be healthcare. Therefore, we do the best we can with what we have. Try to pass laws that give people the best chance to survive. If I am applying for a job I want to know all the qualifying criteria and that includes what will be required of credit.

If you want to talk about freedom.. I served out country during war. So.. I don't take it lightly when it comes to discussions of freedom.