A recent online poll conducted in LinkedIn indicates that 78% greatly disfavor the practice of checking job applicant credit history as a part of the screening and hiring process. Additionally, 15% felt it was a fair practice, and 5% had no opinion on the practice either way.
While some of the polled agreed that credit history checks should be allowed as a necessary requirement for those applying for work with fiduciary responsibilities, the remaining portion are greatly against the practice in general.
Comments Provided By Those Who Were Polled
Below are the comments from some of those who were polled:
* This one more reason why I am Not looking for a Job but looking for Work!
* I feel this is not only unfair, but idiotic. I once had a boss ask me what I did with my money when I asked for a raise. IMO, she was a way out of line, for that and other reasons, but later when I told her her management procedures weren’t good, she sat back about three weeks and then fired me. For which I thank her, though I do wish she’d not hired me in the first place, especially in view of the promises she and her boss made to me. Lesson: make sure you have a contract that makes the employer HURT to fire you unfairly.
* In regard to the results of those who responded to this poll, a large percentage of those who felt it was fair were women between the age of 18 and 54. I am curious if these people have been subjected to a credit check in their job search.
* It’s just another example of the orientation of global society towards those who have most of the money and the enslavement of those who don’t (like myself). I place it along the gradual and insidious movement towards plastic money (which requires credit checking) and the phasing out of cash. You can see this happening already, with self-service tills in supermarkets… anyone who is in doubt of the ultimate results of such developments need only look at places such as Bangkok at the moment. Hack the masses off too much and bullets will start to fly…
* I think this is part of a larger evil – the erosion of our right to privacy. I’m not talking being a fool with my Facebook page – I am talking about how companies make people desperate for work sign away basic rights (right to credit privacy (if I’m not handling your money, this is way out of line), right to bodily & health record privacy (drug & other testing which might necessitate an applicant revealing a diagnosis due to “banned” prescriptions showing up in the tests), right to their day in court (mediation requirements, where mediator is on the company payroll, etc.), intellectual property rights (have your read those clauses? if you took it to a lawyer, did they understand it?), yadda yadda. What happened to rights of the individual? Must be that “conservative constitutional interpretation of non-activist/fundamentalist jurists.”
* Oh, the politically correct, leftist whining! I’m not excusing assinine managers who abuse credit checks or who won’t give you a chance to explain, but there’s equal and even worse abuse on the employee’s side that they have to defend against. After half a year out of work, my credit rating has gone down the tubes, but I’m not going to begrudge my potential employer the right to protect itself. Bad credit can mean general irresponsibility. Moreover, it can mean you’re more likely to pilfer or embezzle. If you’re too tender to open up your financial health to someone who’s about to entrust you with their own financial security, then go live in a cave.
* Should be illegal – except for Security Clearance and NOT by the HR people!
* What does your credit history or score have to do with you as an employee? Let me tell you a story that gets to my point. I once held a position that require me to look at people’s credit history. Once a respected business man, who was wealthy from owning a chain of restaurants, came to buy something from my company that required a loan. When I looked at his credit it was terrible. I discussed this with him and he told me that his child had a rare disease. He said after years of normal treatment that nothing worked any longer. He then found an alternate treatment that was not covered by insurance, but worked. He told me he gladly sacrificed his credit to help his child. I told him I would have done the same, then gave him the loan. So, you see banks and others who look at you credit history and score don’t know you or your personal circumstances. Unless yo are handling money or are in a position where theft might be an issue, this practice is BS. I would like to see legislation created to curb this practice to specific “need to know” basis only. I also believe that if a hiring company makes a hiring decision based on this, they have to notify you so that you have a chance to explain. Also, this should be done only if they are going to offer you a position, just like a drug test. For this to be used as a screen is a discriminatory hiring practice.
* …to use credit scores to weed out applicants smacks of a violation of the 1974 Privacy Act. AND, I 100% agree that if you are ever denied a position due specifically to a credit check, the employer should have to make you aware – so you have the opportunity to explain.
(end of poll comments)
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: John Melendez is a freelance writer reporting on technology, the environment, sustainability, alternative energies and “green” issues. John Melendez is a writer for hire. To email him, go to http://www.emailmeform.com/fid.php?formid=19595
Subscribe to RSS and other feeds for this site: http://feeds2.feedburner.com/JohnsCoolreads
For RSS Feed: http://www.associatedcontent.com/rss/user_76423.xml
Legal Disclaimer & Safety Notice: Author does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, safety, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed or referred to. Information is provided for informational purposes only. Any actions or assumptions taken on the reader’s part as a result of any information disclosed by Author are taken entirely at the reader’s own risk. Author shall not be liable for any errors in the content, nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Furthermore, Author shall not be liable for any loss of profits, contracts, opportunities or any direct, indirect, consequential loss of any kind (including death and/or injury), business interruption or loss of property arising out of or in connection with the use of the information herein. News items, opinions, and/or statements posed by author may be unsubstantiated and should be considered also as such. Unless where expressly stated, Author claims no express or understood association with any person, entity, or third party mentioned. “Cibola International” is a service mark (SM) and trade mark (™ ®) belonging expressly to John Melendez with all rights reserved worldwide.
© 2010 John Melendez / Cibola International – All rights reserved worldwide. Duplication in part or in full is prohibited. Violators will be prosecuted.