• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Elizabeth Warren: Stop Employers From Conducting Credit Checks

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Spungo said:
That would actually make a good law. If one guy is taking a drug test, everybody takes a drug test. The last thing we need is more coked up CEO's running companies into the ground.
Click to expand...

Better yet, if drug testing of employees is legal, and elected representatives are employees of the government, and thereby the people, they should be held to the same standard of random drug testing that other people are subject to, yes? I think you'd see drug laws change a lot quicker if elected representatives realized it was their livelihood on the line.
 
zinfamous said:
I've heard that Facebook is a pretty convenient way for employers to figure out everything they need to know about prospective employees these days--and is perhaps far less ambiguous than what a credit check might tell them.

And there's also that whole interview part.

Credit check is simply giving you a score, and a few instances of bill x wasn't paid, is it not? At least, what an employer would have access to. There is no explanation behind any of those hits.
Click to expand...

You would not find much on my facebook page unless we are friends. It is amazing how many people put everything as public on facebook.
 
Atomic Playboy said:
Why would an employer need to conduct a credit check?
Click to expand...

For certain jobs where a employee would have to have some clearance for dealing with confidential or secret information a credit check is reasonable.

However, in most cases it's probably not necessary unless the employee is dealing with or keeping track of large sums of money or extremely valuable merchandise or equipment.
 
The government has no right to get involved with this though. These are private businesses and they want to make sure they get suitable candidates.
 
marincounty said:
I say credit checks of employees is fine, as long as it is a two way street. Let me examine your company books to see how the company is doing, are they going to around in a few years for me?
Want me to pee in a cup for a drug test, let's test all the executives to make sure they aren't using.
Click to expand...

Hmm, not a bad idea. Maybe throw STD testing too. That way if someone is going to sleep their way to the top they'll know who to avoid.
 
Spungo said:
...

So what you're saying is that you would trust Wall Street banksters with your money just because they have perfect credit? Fascinating.
Click to expand...

Umm, no. I dont believe anyone here for an instant thinks that anyone is hiring based solely upon credit reports. It is merely another source of information which enables employers to make the best choices.
 
Conservative morality says that if you are irresponsible, say with credit, you are a worthless person. This does two things. It makes them bigots and keeps them out of heaven. They will find no forgiveness because they don't practice it. The first person a brain defective hammers is him or her self.
 
BUnit1701 said:
Umm, no. I dont believe anyone here for an instant thinks that anyone is hiring based solely upon credit reports. It is merely another source of information which enables employers to make the best choices.
Click to expand...

Where do we draw the line between an employer's right to know whether someone will be a good employee and an expectation of privacy? The courts have ruled that employers cannot force job candidates to turn over Facebook login credentials despite the boon it might be for prospective employers to determine whether someone has a habit of staying out late and partying (for example). Is there a reasonable expectation of privacy for an individual's financial situation? Is there some benefit to having this information that a potential employer could not get in any other way, as with interview questions?
 
Atomic Playboy said:
Where do we draw the line between an employer's right to know whether someone will be a good employee and an expectation of privacy? The courts have ruled that employers cannot force job candidates to turn over Facebook login credentials despite the boon it might be for prospective employers to determine whether someone has a habit of staying out late and partying (for example). Is there a reasonable expectation of privacy for an individual's financial situation? Is there some benefit to having this information that a potential employer could not get in any other way, as with interview questions?
Click to expand...

Exactly. I suspect he opposes the NSA scanning everyones e-mail and other Private communications. I wonder if an Employer should have access to that level of Data, for the purpose of making an Informed choice in Employees?
 
I'd rather that she eliminated the process of interviewing for employment. I have excellent credit but my interviewing skills are horrible.

Maybe that can be part of her presidential platform.
 
I would definitely be behind that - save for perhaps some exceptions in which you handle money directly, your employer has no business inquiring about such things.

More controversially, I'd also add a ban on criminal history checks as well (again with some exceptions). If you serve your time, you serve your time. An enormous problem with re-integrating felons into society stems from the fact that if you are convicted of a crime, you'll essentially never find full-time employment again. It's a ridiculous form of cruel and unusual punishment.
 
yllus said:
I would definitely be behind that - save for perhaps some exceptions in which you handle money directly, your employer has no business inquiring about such things.

More controversially, I'd also add a ban on criminal history checks as well (again with some exceptions). If you serve your time, you serve your time. An enormous problem with re-integrating felons into society stems from the fact that if you are convicted of a crime, you'll essentially never find full-time employment again. It's a ridiculous form of cruel and unusual punishment.
Click to expand...

Both quite good ideas. We seem to love to permanently punish people for their mistakes in this country ... unless they're bankers or rich kids who drive drunk.

Oooh, addendum to this idea, all members of Wallstreet who practiced risky business and screwed over this country's financial system will have it reflected in their credit report.
 
momeNt said:
I'd rather that she eliminated the process of interviewing for employment. I have excellent credit but my interviewing skills are horrible.

Maybe that can be part of her presidential platform.
Click to expand...

I like this idea. It wouldn't surprise me if that moron comes up with even more BS.
 
If you want to work for me, I'm checking your credit before you handle my $$. If you are a deadbeat that has stolen from finance companies, you're not working for mine. If your credit is bad due to health, medical, unemployment, destitution, etc then I'll ignore it. Simple. Just like I do when considering credit now.

If the government says I can't check your credit, you might want to supply a copy of your own or I may ask you to get bonded before I hire you in case you do steal from me.

Protecting my business is my business.
 
highland145 said:
If you want to work for me, I'm checking your credit before you handle my $$. If you are a deadbeat that has stolen from finance companies, you're not working for mine. If your credit is bad due to health, medical, unemployment, destitution, etc then I'll ignore it. Simple. Just like I do when considering credit now.

If the government says I can't check your credit, you might want to supply a copy of your own or I may ask you to get bonded before I hire you in case you do steal from me.

Protecting my business is my business.
Click to expand...

You don't need a Credit Check to see if someone Stole from a Business before. Would that even show on a Credit Report?
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Those who use a company credit card for personal purchases and then do not pay the bill. I know of 7 people who have been terminated for doing such and 2 that were not hired for the same being on their credit report.
Click to expand...

Would that show up on a Credit Report?
 
Londo_Jowo said:
Those who use a company credit card for personal purchases and then do not pay the bill. I know of 7 people who have been terminated for doing such and 2 that were not hired for the same being on their credit report.
Click to expand...

That same information can be assessed during interviews and screening of past employers though. Granted, most people aren't going to include the employer who fired them for theft on their resume, but if they have a habit of it, they'll have large gaps in their resume and if they can't explain those away, that's quite damning.

I find it extremely hard to believe that there's a rash of devilishly charming individuals waltzing through job interviews when a credit report would show that they're actually frequent perpetrators of fraud and theft from employers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top