Slashdot Mirror
Dealing with Employers Who Perform Credit Checks?
Rick asks: "I recently accepted a Director level position at a small, 40 person, technology company. On my first day, I was provided with all of the standard employment paperwork such as the W2, NDA, healthcare, etc., as well as a document that is to provide my permission for the Company to do a comprehensive background check on me, including a credit history check. I am now in a stalemate position with my employer in regards to this background check document. I have refused to sign on the grounds that my personal credit information is of no business to the company and that they have no basis of need. The company argument (COO level so far, CEO is next) is that the company instituted this policy over a year ago for all existing employees and new hires, and to maintain consistency, every employee must comply. The company also maintains that the information allows them to identify potential problems with candidates or employees, in that people who cannot manage their own finances may not be good employees, or that those with troublesome credit may be more likely to steal from the company. The COO used less direct terms, but ultimately that was the argument. Have Slashdot readers successfully negotiated out of a mandatory employee credit check in the past? What arguments did you use?"
.... seriously this should be a privacy issue. People with bad credit NEED jobs to get out of the hole they've dug. Give me a break.
I'm the big fish in the big pond bitch.
get a job somewhere else. Is this the kind of company you want to work for?
When exactly was your last first post?
What next ? DNA tests ?
If they're issuing you a joint credit card, it might have grounds to stand on, but the best piece of advice you can get here will most likely be: Consult a lawyer in your own jurisdiction.
Marriage is considered capital punishment for the theft of a goat in some third world countries...
I couldn't get out of it, but I negotiated who would see my credit report, why they would see it, for how long, and how it was to be destroyed after veiwing. I got everything in writing and made them sign it.
is there anything it *can't* do?
http://toolkit.cch.com/text/P05_1585.asp
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
If you're that opposed to it...quit. Their loss. By caving in you're just giving employers permission to walk over you.
Let your skills be your selling point...not your credit report.
They also read your email and monitor your surfing habits... them's the dregs. But it's their company, their rules, they're hiring you. If you don't like it, vote with your feet and walk away. Right?
Personally I'd be more worried if they told me they were going to do a check to make sure I didn't have Smurfs (replace with your race of choice) in my family lineage going back 100 years. Now that would be problematic.
It is required for any contractor on the campus.
They whacked this on us last year as "new and different".
They included, but were not limited to:
Drug testing (one time, so far, not random)
Drivers License History/driving record check. (they did that one)
Credit Check (they claim that it is due to the chance of getting a corporate credit card)
Criminal background check.
"other checks as necessary".
That one, "other" I specifically crossed out when I signed my "permission' to do those.
My Company (the contracting firm) basically said "Do it, or leave".. so no, I had no real choice. The fact that I live in an "employment at will" state doesnt help either.. means i can be fired any time for any thing.
(Course, my company also believes that I can be terminated for things on my personal computer at home if I connect to their VPN network and have as much as threatened to do so. Therefore I refuse to connect from my home PC, even if it is required by my job.. I tell em I will do it at 8:00 am the next morning when I get on-site.)
Its an ugly thing.. but I strongly suspect that you wont be able to do much about it..
I want to see mandatory drug testing for congress, with printed pass/fail results, personally.
Maeryk
Feminine Protection? What is that? A chartreuse flame thrower?
This is becoming increasingly common, from what I understand. Insurance companies are also using credit scores to help determine rates for auto coverage. Miss a credit-card payment, and your car insurance costs more!
And the shadowy credit-scoring companies, largely unregulated, are the ones wielding all this power.
In your situation, you can try your argument, but then it will come down to submit to the check or don't take the job. The company is perfectly within its rights to ask for this information, especially for a managerial position.
It is reasonable to assume that someone who isn't smart enough to manage his own money would mismanage company money. I never understood bad credit. Why would someone think he can spend more money he has and get away with it? If you can't afford something, don't buy it. Geeze.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Yes, the cleaning ladies really cashed out
on that Enron thing!
Considered harmful.
It strikes me that a company that cannot manage its finances responsibly would not make a good employer either...but would you be allowed to peek at their ledger when seeking a job? Even if it were a policy that you had set for yourself and you must apply it to all potential employers for the sake of consistent application?
The "cue the foo posts in 3, 2, 1..." posts will commence with no subsequent foo posts in 3, 2, 1...
Bend over, take it (principle aside, it's almost certainly meaningless anyway), work late one night, walk over to HR, pull all senior management's credit ratings, post them to f'dcompany or similar.
On a more genuinine note. The counter to the "everyone has had to do it for the last year" is "Why only the last year? If you retroactively went back and did everyone, I'd consent, but this is clearly a discriminatory policy put in place by people who knew they couldn't be affected by it."
**unless you're hiding something**
Let's apply this type of thinking to other areas. If they had said "We want to see your privates - after all, this can affect your medical claims, sick time off, etc..." you'd tell them to shove off, woudn't you?
It seems to me that a check for a criminal record would be more relevant, and more justifiable.
or, tell them, no problem, but you first want them to sign for permission for you to check their personal credit - after all, you want to know just who you're giving this information to, and you don't want it to be abused.
When they object, threaten to sue them for discrimination.
Yup. ..but if you've fucked up 4-5 years ago what do you do? I settled all my debts and they're marked as paid.
Another coworker was severly injured when he was 20 and had insurance, but the hospitial's accounting department ended up billing him. He handled it like a 20 year old and ignored it. Now he "owes" something like 20 grand, even though recent followups from the insurance company indicate that they paid. He's disputing it, but he looks like a dead beat right now.
The credit reporting system has problems and I'd hate to have my job hanging on the outcome of a credit report.
Yep - I've been in the same boat. A previous employer wanted to pull a credit report on me. Interestingly, I have very good credit, but I was planning on purchasing a new car soon and did not want to have unnecessary credit checks done, as some institutions like to use this as a perverse excuse to deny financing on a car.
My statement was very straightforward: "I will not sign this on the grounds that you do not have the right nor privelege to require this information for the sake of employment. If you care to push this issue further, I will schedule a court date at the County courthouse and we will deal with it there."
The employer backed off, and I worked there for nearly two years. You would have REALLY shit if you saw the sort of privacy-invading NDA employment contract they tried to require of the programmers who were hired after me... Thankfully the first programmer through the door fought that NDA until it was toned down to a sane level (at maybe 10% its original potency).
.... um, i lost you after "0110100001101001".
That aside, I worked as a contractor many years ago for a very large software company (whose name ends in "soft") on a project dealing with a large financial institution. The process of checks was nearly as involved as those to get top security clearance. I understand the reason behind that, of course: by working on the project I became privy to information about how the large financial institution did business.
I am going to assume that the poster has bad credit. That in itself is not a reason to *not* get the job, especially if you are honest with your employer and state something like "I have had some bad luck in recent years, but, hey, who hasn't with the economy the way it is?"
All of that being said, I would sign the release. Companies need to cover their asses, and this is just one more way of them doing so.
National Public Radio had a story about this a couple days ago.
One compromise may be to give them a notarized letter stating your FICO score. Check out MyFico.com or other sources to get this cheaply. This will satisfy their question of good vs bad credit WITHOUT giving them the details of your credit history. For those not familiar with FICO scoring, it's a single number representing your credit risk ranging from 200 to 850 or something like that. Seems to be a good way to satisfy their intentions (if they have communicated them truthfully) and your privacy.
Barring that, I agree with another poster who suggests meeting in a room for a limited period of time with a printout of your credit report that you bring and take away from the meeting.
They have the right, but, by law (in the USA) if they make a negative decision because of the credit report, they have to inform you of that. This is often overlooked. There was a report on this on NPR recently (Jan 31st, All Things Considered).
At the very least, you should check your credit report to make sure it is accurate.
Unless this is a job that you Really Want (or Really Need, for that matter), tell 'em to stick it. Times are tough for job-finding, but at the end of the day, it's just a job, and not worth sacrificing your principles over.
Whether or not such a credit check is deemed "necessary" for a Director-level job is not really relevant, in my opinion: if it's personal information that you don't want to give, don't give it, and if they don't like it, tough.
I wouldn't work for a company that wanted to a credit check, drug test, etc. on me, simply on principle.
This wouldn't be so bad if getting a house didn't routinely follow getting a job...
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
People like you scare the hell out of me.
You let other people dictate to you the terms upon which you're allowed to do things. Even work. I agree that a criminal background check is probably worthwhile and a legitimate business concern - but a credit check? No. The only people to whom that should matter are those who can LEND me money.
I don't see this being any different than an employer asking to see what kind of food you have in your fridge, in order to determine if you're a healthy eater. If you're a conciously unhealthy dieter, it's probably reflective on your work habits, your personal life, etc.
No thanks. Take your job and shove it up your ass. I'd rather work blue-collar than submit to that type of fascist regime.
I love my country but jesus christ...people need to stop putting the almighty dollar above personal privacy and freedoms. It's like the executives who make these ridiculous decisions are so insulated from reality that they don't even realize that they're chipping away at the foundations of American life. I wonder how freedom-less life will be in 50 years.
I'm scared.
sedawkgrep
Is that a salami in my pants or am I just happy to be me?
It's not unusual to see credit checks as part of a security clearance check... as people with great debt are often more likely to sell information or be otherwise comprimised by the offer of money.
However, I don't know what the law says about it with respect to general employment. Check with a lawyer before you do anything to rash (either way) if it really concerns you.
BlackNova Traders
Performing a credit check is a fairly standard practice among many employers for both managers and for employees who have to deal with cash, and it is very much legal. In your case, you're applying for a fairly high-level management position (director-level). You'll just have to deal with it. You're lucky they don't do a psychological eval.
Insert offensive troll-style sig here. Please mod or respond appropriately.
I know I will be in the minority here, but if you don't like the credit check, why are you still fighting for the job? Is it the kind of place you still want to work? Admittedly, a credit check is a pretty random thing, but there's nothing that says it cannot be a condition of employment. Should they have it? I think not. Can they demand it? Absolutely.
The decision is simple: how badly do you want this job? Let that answer guide your decision. And if you take they job, and despise the policy, work to change it from within...
The cynic in me says "Poster has bad credit." Apparently you've already accepted the position, though, so the check doesn't stop you from getting the job. Be pleased you have one.
I remember when I had to apply for a security
clearence back in 1978, I had to provide a lot
of information including bank and credit
information.
They explained to me that one of the things they
look at is the potential vulurability of the
person to being given financial help in return
for some favors (secrets) and then blackmailed
with exposure.
I also think they look carefully at all of
the information; credit history included; to
try to make certain that the person is not a
plant; that he or she did live a legitimate life
here in the United States.
Mark
Cleara
I'd rather whip out my dick than submit to a credit check. I have a very poor credit, but a rather impressive cock.
I hate to say it, man, but the higher up you are in the food chain, the more important it is for them that they check you out. If I were them, I would already have told you to take a hike.
I know of too many cases of executive malfeasance to agree with your assertion that your financial history is none of their business. Particularly given that people are generally afraid these days to say anything honest in a reference because they might get sued.
Ask for permission to see the corporate tax returns for the past five years, their credit report, their Dunn & Bradstreet report, their BBB report, testimonials from clients and creditors. You probably also need to have access to credit reports for your immediate supervisor, as well as all executives and shareholders. Just in case there's anyone shady there who might hurt the company - and your job.
After all, you're "trusting" these people with your livelihood.
There are many ways to respond to requests like this one.
;-)
1) whine: not really a good solution, but a Slashdot favorite
2) ask why: much better, and the avenue which you took
3) refuse to comply: and live with the consequences. Of course, if they really want YOU, there is always the possibility of negociating your way out of doing it.
4) "forget" to fill it: they may never notice! (You know: "oh, sorry boss. I just didn't have time to do that. I'll just stop working on [insert important stuff with tight schedule here] and do it right away" or simply "Sorry, I forgot. I'll fill it this afternoon")
5) Check the privacy laws which apply. In my part of sunny Canada, even making such a request is ILLEGAL, which makes it a breeze to refuse.
IANAL, but I can advise you to get a boss which respects you enough to leave your credit alone.
You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
How far would you let them go with their checks? What happens if they'd wanted to do a DNA test and genetic screening? The test is easy, but is it a small price to pay?
What happens if you've had some bad luck in your life (e.g. your last business went bust in the recession, or you had some ridiculously expensive medical bills) and you're working your way out of bad credit? Does that mean you're going to be a bad employee?
This kind of information should remain irrelevant to an employer. It's none of their business, and they run the risk of convicting you of "pre-crime" (to use a Minority Report expression). If they get away with this, it will encourage them to get away with more in the future. Just because you're okay with it now doesn't mean that you won't be in the future, but for now you've supported the scheme. Just because somebody wants to hide something (or as I prefer, keep it private), doesn't mean that that something is bad. If you're lucky, the worst that will come of it will be somebody creating an invalid character profile that you will have to work hard to rememdy.
What is worse for this guy is that it is his first day on the job. That means he's already quit his previous job. His new employer has him in a bind because refusal could lead to unemployment, which is rather undesirable at any time, let alone in today's market. His new employer has been deceitful in someways as they should have been up front about the background checks and carried them out before offering him the job.
I know this is common practice these days, but it bothers me because it has such potential for abuse. Employees are barred from asking your age, marital status, sexual orientation, etc. in an interview, but if they have your credit report, they can deduce a lot of this information. (What year were your college loans taken out? Do you have a co-signer on a home or car loan? What gender is the co-signer?)
How will you really know why you were declined?
When violence rules the world outside / And the headlines make me want to cry / It's not the time to just keep quiet
"everytime someone looks up your credit who isn't you, it negatively impacts your credit rating"
Every time anyone including you makes a credit inquiry, it is marked on your record. This is called a 'footprint'. Lots of footprints on your credit history in a short space of time = you are a bad credit risk. This can be offset to a large extent, if you make damn sure that the footprint is marked as "Inquiry Only" rather than a full-blown "Application" (for credit).
If you decide to shop around for a cheap loan from lots of lenders ensure that their searches will be flagged "Inquirey Only"...
T&K.
Political language
http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs16-bck.htm
They own the company and should be able to run it anyway they want.
In that case, they should be able to hire only big breasted, white women and make fellatio
part of the job description. If there are laws to prevent discrimination based on other factors then why not on credit worthiness?
If they are asking for your credit history then it is safe to assume that they will not hire you if you have bad credit. Unless they can prove a specific correlation between bad credit and bad work habits then I think they have no right to do so.
Personally, I don't have bad credit (never miss a payment) but I am pretty far into debt. This doesn't mean I am a bad employee. On the contrary I like to think that I am pretty highly regarded (and I have the bonuses and reviews to back it up).
Here's an article on Nolo. Here's the relevant portion:
Credit reports. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act or FCRA (15 U.S.C. 1681), employers must get an employee's written consent before seeking that employee's credit report. Many employers routinely include a request for such consent in their employment applications. If you decide not to hire or promote someone based on information in the credit report, you must give the person a copy of the report and tell them of their right to challenge the report under the FCRA. Some states have more stringent rules limiting the use of credit reports.
Whatever you do... don't read this.
(Note: I work in the US. Other countries may differ).
For some occupations (e.g. top-secret department of defense stuff), they do credit checks on you to determine if there's a risk you'll be bribed to disclose things.
In similar occupations, declaring bankruptcy is a reason for losing your clearance. Lose your clearance, you lose your job.
In other occupations, such as the Financial Industry (I work for a mutual fund company), I was told that they would need to run background checks, credit checks, FBI checks, state checks, local checks, and every other check they could think of as a condition of my working there. I don't know if there is an SEC requirement to do this, or if it's just the company covering their ass, but it's a blanket policy, with no exceptions.
This was discussed with me during the final interview, so I knew what I was getting into. Every employee who works for this company has to be bonded, fingerprinted, researched, yaddah-yaddah-yaddah. Every contractor goes through similar stuff, plus NDA's, etc.
Unless you work in an industry where these types of checks are common (and it doesn't sound like it), I would tell them to stuff it since they didn't talk to you about it in the interview. If they want to push, call the ACLU, get a lawyer, and go kick some corporate ass for wrongful termination, discrimination, and stupidity.
Think about it. What would you do if they asked you to sign a paper stating that you were no longer a member of the communist party? That you were no longer homosexual? That you let your membership in the KKK expire?
Karma: Food Fight (Mostly affected by Date Plate).
Actually, there was a short story in Analog (I think) about 7 years ago about a woman that was facing that problem. Except it was not for her, but the baby she was carrying. She hadn't read the fine print on her employment contract and it stated that she had to have all children tested for defects when they were conceived. The company's owner had a daughter that some genetic disease that mentally damaged her and physically harmed her, hence hte clause.
At the time, I thought...'Wow, that'll never happen...'.
Now insert evil chuckle: heh heh heh....
Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
Cheers,
-- RLJ
I heard on the web that this works:
1. Go for as long as you can without using your credit card before the interview.
2. Drink lots of water(1 gal) on the day of the credit check.
3. Never give them the first credit report of the morning.
4. Take B vitamins. An overly-clear credit report may set off some red flags at the lab.
** Golden Seal and Visine are said to improve your chances of passing.
I'm not sure how they expect these to work. I would think the guy that runs the reporting terminal is gonna notice you putting the drops in his eyes, but you might be able to spike his coffee cup with the golden seal
Your theory about personal money management versus corporate, while on the surface makes sense, in actual application you would be surprised. Something about micro versus macro I'm sure. As well, where did the author insinuate he/she was managaing company money? If I'm a programmer or sysadmin, what company money do I get to manage? Usually none, other than casting my vote for a certain product.
Lastly, on "I never understood bad credit" well congratulations. I've never understood people who claim not to understand that sometimes people make mistakes, get laid off, or have problems with personal finances.
You might as well say that you've never understood speeding, over-eating, alcoholism, drug addiction, clinical depression, e.t.c.
I pulled a jack move to cop this sig
I was turned down for an American Express Blue Card. In the letter of explanation, one of three points was "frequent credit checks in recent history."
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Perhaps you should ask for the credit history of the COO and CEO. After all, you are putting your financial future into their hands, and it should be within your rights to monitor their financial abilities.
On second thought, you should post them here, so we can all offer our expert opinions on them.
I got this "bad information" here among other places. Here's a link to a shorter explanation from the Fair&Isaac website, the people who make the credit score and provide them to Transunion, Equifax, etc.
Sorry, but 10% of your credit score is how many credit checks you've had in the last year. It's not at ALL neutral, unless you're the one checking. If someone told you that, they were misinformed. Here's an excerpt from the site I linked to...
# 35% of the score is based on your payment history. This makes sense since one of the primary reasons a lender wants to see the score is to find out if (and how timely) you pay your bills. The score is affected by how many bills have been paid late, how many were sent out for collection, any bankruptcies, etc. When these things happened also comes into play. The more recent, the worse it will be for your overall score.
# 30% of the score is based on outstanding debt. How much do you owe on car or home loans? How many credit cards do you have that are at their credit limits? The more cards you have at their limits, the lower your score will be. The rule of thumb is to keep your card balances at 30% or less of their limits.
# 15% of the score is based on the length of time you've had credit. The longer you've had established credit, the better it is for your overall credit score. Why? Because more information about your past payment history gives a more accurate prediction of your future actions.
#10% of the score is based on the number of inquiries on your report. If you've applied for a lot of credit cards or loans, you will have a lot of inquiries on your credit report. These are bad for your score because they indicate that you may be in some kind of financial trouble or may be taking on a lot of debt (even if you haven't used the cards or gotten the loans). The more recent these inquiries are, the worse for your credit score. FICO scores only count inquiries from the past year.
# 10% of the score is based on the types of credit you currently have. The number of loans and available credit from credit cards you have makes a difference. There is no magic number or combination of types of accounts that you shouldn't have. These actually come more into play if there isn't as much other information on your credit report on which to base the score.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
It always pays to know your rights. You don't have to let them do the credit check. Of course, they have the right to turn you down for not submitting.
If you handle money, purchases, anything financial in the course of this director level position (the term "director" is subjective at a company with only 40 people, by the way), a credit check is a sound thing to do from their perspective. "Director" at the company where I work means you deal with finances, customer negotiation, resource issues (people and stuff), so I'd hope some sort of personal investigation was done. Think of it from their perspective: if you're looking at two otherwise equally qualified candidates for a position that deals with finances, purchasing, hiring, negotiation, etc., would you hire the one with a clean credit check, or the one who refuses to submit? Watch out for number one, buddy, you'd hire the clean, visible history. You no doubt gave them your address, social security number, phone number, educational and professional history and next of kin, what's one more piece of the puzzle?
Of course, if you're not dealing with finances, what business is it of theirs? If it's a position that may one day deal with finances, I am sure that a determined superior could get to know you well enough to understand your level of responsibility in a friendly, non-confrontational manner. Friends sometimes talk about stuff like this. And if they're this worked up about a piece of paper that you don't feel comfortable sharing, move along.
You have the right to say, "no," but so do they. Weigh the personal cost. If you have something to hide, you have little to lose by saying, "no." If you have nothing to hide, it's the cost of your pride and privacy. How much is this job worth to you?
A credit check should be mandatory for every CxO level officer in every public company in the US.
An executive at that high up in the corporate chain of command has a very heavy responsibility to the company as a whole. The company in turn has an obligation to make sure any new hires for such a position has not already placed himself or has a habit of placing himself in a compromising position that could easily be exploited by an unscrupulous third party.
To put it simply, if a guy has extremly bad credit and is responsible for corporate accounts he may be tempted to steal from the company to cover his debt OR framed into doing so by one of his creditors. These type of executives are also the most likley to be "functional" drug users (and I'm not talking about weed) of hardcore stuff like crack, cocain, heroine....etc. At first their regular salary is enough to cover their habits but as their habits grow they need more and more money.....etc.
Why is it so important? These are the people who run companies that employ at times tens, hundreds or thousands of people. These are hardworking folks who deserve to have people in charge who are capable of managing their personal lives to the extent that it leaves their professional lives unaffected. Otherwise you end up with more Adelphia Cable companies, Enron's, Global Crossings, WorldCom's...etc.
Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
If they're arguing that "your credit history indicates your responsibility as an employee" you should be able to argue that the credit history of your direct supervisor's credit history, and the credit history of every manager up to the CEO will have an impact on the stability of the company you're joining.
Basically, I'll show you mine if you show me yours.
A similar argument would hold for drug testing, I would think.
I wish I'd have thought of this when I was recently required to do this. Unfortunately, I wasn't in a position to say no. Sadder still, I actually like the company with very few reservations.
-Zipwow
I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
http://www.itslegal.com/infonet/employ/hired.asp
Do you handle large sums of money for the company? Are you in a position of trust for binding the company to contracts?
Then I'd say you must submit.
-A
I hadn't considered the idea of using a credit check to test a new hire, but it does make a lot of sense. I heard somewhere else that an auto insurance company, Progressive, uses their clients' credit as a good indicator of future risk. They claimed that it was a better predictor of future accident claims than someone's previous driving record.
If that is true, then I can certainly understand how a credit rating may be a decent indicator of a potential employee's reliability. I doubt it would be the only factor in deciding to hire someone, but if you had two otherwise equal candidates, where one has an excellent credit rating, but the other consistently misses bill payments, racks up huge credit card bills, etc., wouldn't that be a relevant point of discrimination? What if you were hiring someone to be a project manager? Wouldn't personal finance habits be a good indicator of how well they can manage a $200,000 account? Not always, but... put yourself in the employer's shoes.
As for privacy, remember, this is your employer - they will already have your SSN on file, they know your salary, how many medical claims you make against your medical plan, probably even what prescription medications you're taking. They know how much tax you pay, they can see what type of car you drive; they have your address, home phone number, spouse's name, dependents' names, how much you're contributing to your retirement savings, and a whole lot more if they put any effort into looking. Why is it that you're afraid of a credit check?
I always thought I was paranoid, but I wouldn't hesitate to give my employer permission to do a credit check, probably because I expect it would be spotless, and it might give me an edge over another candidate.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
Your right, the company has no need to look at the credit history for someone taking a director level position, a position that could require the managing of funds for the department. The company really has no need to look at how someone who could be determing how to spend thousands of dollars does with money.
Xaotik Designs
I never understood bad credit. Why would someone think he can spend more money he has and get away with it? If you can't afford something, don't buy it. Geeze.
Let me help you understand. When you move out of your mom's house you have to live somewhere and you have to be able to get from where you live to work. These are all long term obligations that might last longer than your current job. Rent that looked trivial with a normal pay check is hard to meet on unemployment. Housenotes plus utilities are worse. If you don't have decent public transportation where you live, you also bought a car. You will go "upside down" on the car as what you can sell it for won't cover the costs of the loan you made to buy it unless you got a really good deal on a used car. Obviously you don't have a wife or children.
Now for something that sucks. A company can look at your credit record and tell the difference between someone who's been honestly screwed as above and someone who blew loads of money on trivial bullshit like a home entertainment system, a sports car, and all the other joys of life worker bees like you and me are not supposed to enjoy. Most companies like for their employees to be good little self sacrificing suckers. Sailing, fishing, sking, that's for the boss. Sadly, companies are in a position to make these kinds of demands.
I'd comply, because I've been a good little self sacrificing fool and I've had family money to fall back on everytime I've been screwed. At age 36, with a 14 month old baby girl and wife to support, my decisions impact more than myself now and I can no longer stand entirely by my principles.
Still, I understand this man's pricipled stand and hope the best. He's right, it's none of the company's business and they can only use it pick out people they think they can abuse. We're not talking about possitions spying for the government where dishonesty is a given, we are talking about normal jobs at normal companies.
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
Privacy issues aside, the danger is too great that interviewers reviewing my credit history would make the wrong assumption that I incurred all that debt and that I would lose the job offer without being given any chance to explain the report. I would simply tell the employer that my credit history has suffered severe damage from my spouse and that I have no choice but to vigorously protect that information. If they protest further I will simply state that I am not open to negotiations on that topic.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
Um, actually, I don't even think it's that unusual. If you're interviewing at a company in a high-risk sector, you're perfectly entitled to ask for a look at the company's balance sheets for some reassurance that they'll actually be around in a few years to keep you employed. That's one of those "question" things that people are always saying you should ask during interviews, and an important one at that. Most employers would probably be impressed that you thought about it at all, actually. It shows a concern for the health of the overall company, not just your personal bank account; they like to see that sort of thing
On a related note: These days, with the telecom industry in such disarray, I routinely ask for financial verification from contractors or local exchange providers when we're evaluating services. Usually, they just respond with some favorable clippings from the trade press, but it's better than nothing, and I'm sure if I wanted to, I could see their balance sheets, though I might have to agree to an NDA of some sort.
Some food for thought.
While I was outraged when first reading the story, my mind was changed by a comment that a /. user made.
/., go ahead and let them dig through your closets for those unpaid utility bills!
While it is true that any kind of backgound check, whether it is a criminal record check, a credit check or your routine drug test, does impose on your privacy, there is a simple question you should ask yourself:
How would I like someone, wacked out on crank, in desperation for more money in order to purchase crank with, perforate me in my own, lowly cubicle with an Armalite AR-10 Carbine-gas powered semiautomatic?
I think the answer to this question is obvious.
This is why companies do background checks. While the criminal record check can be advocated using arguments such as, "We are protecting the rest of our staff from the criminal-likes of you," a credit check basically protects the company (theft wise), which in turn also protects its employees, meaning you. So, unless you have something to hide, as previously mentioned on
pocketdemon.
Are you kidding? The only reason I've got good credit / finances is because I steal from the company.
I thought that any conditions upon which employment was contingent had to be disclosed prior to hiring. Every time I've taken a job, the various invasions of privacy to which I'd be subject were known before I got there.
It might be worth checking with a lawyer -- not to see whether the requirement is illegal, it's not, but to see whether the requirement can be enforced when it was not disclosed prior to hiring.
http://drteknikal.blogspot.com/
I can understand the privacy issues on this, but there are some cases where it is a necessity.
I work for a bank and prior to starting they did one on me. My credit is good and I take strides to keep it that way so I didn't mind so much.
HR departments often do Employment credit reports that do not show up, from what little I understand, as a normal credit check.
Some businesses have to go to great lengths to protect themselves. Working at a bank, I am exposed to critical details we use to verify identity of customers - that can be easily abused. If you have an employee who's deep in the hole - there is a higher chance they may abuse some of that information to magically "fix" that debt problem. It also is a way for them to check to see whether a given employee's debt load isn't so high that the salary they are planning to pay them can't cover it.
Would you hire a full time employee knowing that whatever you plan to pay them is in no way possible going to cover what their expenses are? They would either not last, be totally wiped out from working multiple jobs thus ineffective, or at worst screw you out of as much money as they can.
A credit report is no guarantee that a given employee won't screw you/your customers over. I for one would feel perhaps a bit more comfortable knowing X employee didn't have motivations to use me/my identity.
Yes, the check is perhaps a little intrusive. As long as my information isn't leaked/abused I personally have no problems with it. I can understand how it would make things all the more frustrating if I were out of money with bad credit on top of that. It has a very nasty potential for becoming a vicious cycle. As far as I know, there are no laws on the books to protect potential employees from being discriminated against on the basis of credit rating. (is there?)
If I were in your shoes, I would say no, politely and firmly:
If they didn't let the issue drop, I would talk to a qualified attorney. Pursuing the matter would probably irreparably damage your relationship with your new employer. But, then again, if they really pulled something this weaselly, maybe they aren't the good employers you thought they were when you signed on.
Easy, automatic testing for Perl.
"I hope you know that this will go down on your permanent record." - Violent Femmes.
Hmmm, a Director position you say? I say stand your ground and fight the good fight!
By the way, could you please give me the phone number of the human resources office?
Okay, here's the deal. You're up the creek with out a paddle for the most part. Most states allow the employer to screw with the employee all they want. That's bad. MANY states make it so you can ONLY screw with people you've offered a job in writing too. So in MN, my home state, no pee spree, no credit check with out a written offer.
1) Find out if you state allows the screening of applicants.
2) If declined the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires (Federal Law) requires that:
a) You are provided with a written letter indicating why you are being declined. They MUST be specific. They can't just say your FICO score was too low.
b) They are required to tell you where they got the information from
c) They are required to allow you to dispute anything on the report.
Complaints can be filed with the Federal Trade Commision. Macy settled out of court with the FTC over Credit reports a few years ago. They weren't telling people why they didn't get the job.
In one case a CRA had added several extra zero's to a disputed debt. Making the person seem unfit for a management position.
IANAL.
What noone has mentioned is that he says he is a director of the company. Now, in reality, people get all kinds of titles and it may not mean what it implies, but a director has legal standing to act as part of management. This includes incurring financial liabilities for the company. Of course you should check out the credit of someone in that capacity.
There are two types of credit checks. The first type doesn't affect your credit. Credit Card companies use these for pre-approval offers. They will make an inquiry and it will appear on your credit report.
A credit check for the purpose of borrowing does affect your credit. Lawrence Lindsey, the President's former chief economic advisor got into a huge public brouhaha with Toys 'R Us over its credit rating practices. He was a Governer of the Federal Reserve Board at the time he was denied a Toys 'R Us credit card because he was shopping for a home loan at the time - he had too many checks on his credit report.
Now, I don't know which kind an employer does. I suspect the first (non-harmful) one because it doesn't involve an actual credit app.
Our credit reporting system is crap. Creditors have too much power. They can make you pay things you don't owe simply because it's cheaper than fighting them. My wife and I are this close (holding finger and thumb close together) to countersuing a doctor that has mistreated us, doesn't return calls, and won't even prosecute the lawsuit he filed against us. The $8,000 bill he says we owe was taken off of our report, but he can put it back on whenever he wants. Ack.
End Rant.
Want some more? Check out my blog
Yes, it's a blog. Sorry if that offends you.
Under NO circumstances should you accept joint liability for a corporate card. NEVER DO IT. Do not put personal expenses on a corporate card either. It's just a bad idea to let your personal credit report be at any risk based on, for example, late payment by your accounting department (would have happened to me had I mixed my expenses).
sulli
RTFJ.
You (or howstuffworks.com) really need to qualify this one. Take a look at your credit report sometime. Holy Crap! Look at all of those credit checks! OMG, WTF is going on? Thus is the penalty of having good credit (not a "penalty" that applies to your credit score, but a "penalty" of annoyance). I bet you get pantloads of credit card offers in the mail. I bet many of them say "pre-approved" or similar. And you know what? Every time you get one of those, there's an accompanying credit check. None of those checks hurt you (and really, shopping around a loan doesn't hurt you as much as you'd think, either -- of course, if you do it right, it won't matter; get yourself a pre-approval from an underwriter, and then no other broker will need to run a credit check until you commit to the loan). I don't know for sure, but I'd hazard a guess that the type of check an employer would do would fall into this same category of lookups. Yes, you get penalized for getting many credit cards, for example, but the problem is not simply one of the credit companies checking your credit. You get hurt because you're decreasing your potential credit ($1000 credit in a credit card is $1000 less credit you can get for that auto loan or mortgage, roughly), you're penalized for age (creditors like seeing long histories of credit, so get 2-3 cards and stick with them; swapping out cards every year or so is bad, because you can't establish age), you're penalized for an increase in your debt/income ratio (why get a credit card if you're not going to use it?), and finally you're possibly penalized a tiny amount (1-2 points, rarely more) for having that extra check on your credit.
Consider it this way -- what looks better on your credit report? A steady (if new job) and an extra credit check by your employer, or no job but a clean record of credit checks in the past year? I'd choose the former, and anybody with a brain would as well.
(I'm not addressing the legal, ethical, or moral issues surrounding an employer requiring a credit check. I'm simply making the point that one extra credit check to get a job is not going to hurt you in any way, unless you're going through many jobs in a year -- and then you're going to be hurt more by insufficient length at each job than you are by the credit checks required to get those jobs.)
Damn the venture capitalists for catching clue! Damn them!
.COMs tanked. There was very little real value there that got lost.
I'm no VC lover, in fact I've never dealt with them. But let's face it, they were only part of the problem.
Every time some jackass decided they were going to remarket distressed merchandise or "upsurp Microsoft" or some other hair-brained idea, 50 jackass programmers who just wanted an excuse to write a {14 tier Java application | 10000 line monolithic Perl or C state machine | your stupid architecture choice here} application would pop out of the woodwork to develop the stupid idea.
No one seemed to stop and say "this is stupid", "why are we doing this?", or even "WTF am I going to do when the scam is up?".
I am SO glad that the #$%^!
BTW - I'm not trolling. I mean it.
Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!
If the salary for the job in question is over $150k, there are even greater ramifications of this. They can do a financial background check in addition to what appears on your credit report, and anything they find can be reported to the credit agencies, and appear on your report *forever.* That's right, not 7 years, or 10 years as with bankruptcy, but forever.
The moral of the story is that in this age of high profile corportate corruption, etc., companies, ehareholders, and government agencies are doing whatever they can to protect themselves. In the wake of the Rafael Perez and Rodney King scandals, the LAPD even insists on a completely clean credit record for its recruits. A bankruptcy or other credit faux pas means no job.
To make a short story short, I told the interviewer to get bent, and I would be taking a position with someone else.... A credit check counts against you and your credit score. Not to mention it is none of their business....
Got Code?
That being said, inquiries (or checks) on your credit fall into two distinct categories: hard and soft.
Hard inquiries are inquiries that are initiated per your attempt to aquire credit, usually applying for new credit, sometimes by requesting credit limit increases. These stay on your reports for two years and do indeed knock a few points off of your FICO score per inquiry. The FICO formula only pays attention to hard inquiries in the past six months...anything older is not factored into your FICO score, but a creditor may still use it for approval decisions. Multiple inquiries in a one month period while shopping for auto or mortgagee loans are treated by FICO as a single inquiry.
Soft inquiries are inquiries that can be created by viewing your own credit report, a current creditor doing an account review, employer checks and those nice unsolicited preapproval letters you get from credit card companies. These inquiries also stay on your report for two years, but they are ONLY viewed by you and have NO effect whatsoever on your credit score.
I'm having a problem right now with a tenant who is a complete alcoholic. She refuses to get help (I know a few people who could help her), has assaulted me, makes noise all night, and threatens us on a daily basis, at every opportunity (once we called the cops to report domestic violence because we thought her boyfriend was beating her, it turns out they were both just drunk and talking trash, and she's been mad at me ever since). The police don't care about us. They told us if we're afraid we should move out, and don't want to hear it.
She seemed like a nice person at first...
We live in New York City. It will take approximately 6+ months to evict her. I imagine she's not going to pay rent anymore.
From now on, I am background checking EVERYONE and requiring 5 personal recommendations. Credit history, driving records, convictions, if their name appears in a database I want to see what it says. I hate going through it myself, but after this god damned nightmare I can understand why people insist on it.
If you're a fuckup, that's your damned fault. The rest of us are trying to be decent.
Now if only the credit reporting agencies had correct data once in awhile.
I suspect it is commonplace in the financial industry.
My wife works for a building society in the UK. She has a purely technical role - no contact with money and certainly no means of misappropriating any. Despite this, it is standard practice to perform a credit-check on all employees.
So in answer to this post, and the one below - it most certainly does happen in Europe. Well in the UK at lest!
first of all, here is where you can get a free credit report (by law). You don't have to pay someone to give it to you online:
:) And if you don't want to give your credit report out, would you have the guts to take on the federal government? If the federal govt. starts doing this regularly, you'd better take a second look...
Experian
Call Experian at 888 397 3742 to order your free credit report
Equifax
Call Equifax at 800 997 2493 to order your free credit report
TransUnion
Call TransUnion at 800 888 4213 to order your free credit report
Second point, I recently received my reports from them, and interestingly found one institution that had checked my credit: the US dept. of State (from when I had applied for a job there).
Is this a reasonable use of credit checking? For a national security position? What does your credit report have to do with that?
I was a victim of identity theft a several years ago and had my credit rating basically destroyed as a result (you would be astonished at how hard it is to get that stuff off your record, even when everyone agrees that you were ripped off). I found myself interviewing for a VP position at a rather large company and, after several meetings, the company extended me a pretty sweet offer. Among the conditions, they wanted to obtain a credit history. I knew that if I refused, they would simply move on to another candidate, figuring that I had something to hide. In the end, I went into the HR VP, explained my situation and asked for an opportunity to respond to anything they might find that would rule me out. I was astonished when the company agreed.
A few weeks later, I met with three reps of the company and brought all of the documentation I had. We spent two hours going over their concerns and at the end of the meeting, the HR VP said that she would get back to me. I figured I was history.
As I got into my car, my cell phone rang. It was the HR VP, calling to tell me that their original offer was still good. I must have sounded surprised, because she went on to explain that the other VPs in the meeting were very impressed with the way I handled this. She said most people just make a huge fuss and walk away.
I left that company after 6 good years to start my own firm. That same company is my biggest client!
When the company I currently work for wanted both a Credit Check and a Criminal check I agreed.. on three terms:
1. That they give me a copy of the companie's Dunn & Bradstreet credit check- if they needed to know my history, I would get theirs.
They ended up deciding that my credit score was sufficient, and so I got the companies!
2. That they would give me a copy of their workmans comp/ OSHA review in exchange for my Criminal Background history.
We did do this and everything worked out just fine there.
3. That we would review these items together, they would destroy their paperwork and I would destroy mine. Then we both signed a statement attesting to the review and distruction. The only thing kept in my files is the fact that it was done and I passed.
Just a suggestion as they get what they want but it cost them equally. If they need to know, then you do too and it gives you the chance to review things with them so that they do not get the wrong idea. Also, with the companies info wide open they better understand the privacy issues at stake.
Huh?
From the report, they mentioned that it is illegal for your employer to fire you based on your credit report
However, as with any discrimination lawsuit, it is sometimes difficult to prove that this was the reason your employer let you go (or refused to hire you in the first place). They can easily site another reason.
My current company wants me to sign an IP agreement - fine I say, I'll be happy to sign an agreement not to disclose any proprietary information as long as you take out the portion that says any "works" created by myself, at any time during employment, belong to the company - I only want works created on company time and/or using company equipment to be owned by my employer. Very reasonable, I think...
Every time they ask me to sign the document, I send the same questions back to them, they say "we'll ask the lawyers", and I don't hear from them for a year.
http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs16-bck.htm
Why is it that people don't feel they should make a link when they post a URL?
You have a case in turning down the credit check.
1. It is NOT industry practice! If it were, you wouldn't have brought it up for discussion. You honestly did not expect this.
2. They didn't inform you before hiring you! Again, if they did, this would not have been such a shocker.
3. It's too late! They already told you, that you can have the job! If the IDIOTS were to wisen up, they would figure out that they should have had you sign, and have done the check, and have made their hiring decision based on the check, or the check is TOO LATE.
IMNASHO, if your employer were REALLY interested in this, they should have had you sign it BEFORE the hiring. Now, having accepted the position, requiring this check is tantamount to extortion. It'd be like Motorola waiting until AFTER you are hired to tell you about their drug check policy, and waiting till AFTER you are hired to pee in the collection jar. If I remember right, they tell you about this as you are interviewed, and you have to provide your specimen (and pass the lab test) before they'll hire you. If you have privacy qualms, that's the best time to step out of the situation. This is the way it was 10 years ago when I left Motorola, hopefully they have dropped the entire policy by now.
I'm one of the poor devils that got a job with Motorola before they instituted the drug policy. I don't/won't/never will do drugs, but when they instituted the policy, and presented all us employees with the ultimatum: be tested or get out, I started looking for a new job. My determination was, I've got a family to feed, so I'll provide the sample if requested, but I don't agree with the approach, and I was out of there in less than a year. My ultimate feedback of my opinion about their policy. A co-worker refused the test, on principle, and was immediately escorted out the building.
I guess those looking for a job had best ask what agreements they'll be expected to sign, if the employers aren't smart enough to tell people up front. Not informing is downright dishonest! It has the feel of "playing dirty tricks" on people. It's despicable because a job is no laughing matter to the guys getting hired.
Dogs look up to men; cats look down on men; But Pigs! Pigs can look men square in the eye. -Churchill
It's called employment at will, if you want to work there, you follow their rules... even if that means they are logging all of your IMs, emails, and web views... Doing a credit check is nothing new, if you don't want the position due ot this feel free to turn it down, they will have another director within a week or two. In fact, if you do turn this down, feel free to send me information on the job ;-)
At any publically traded US corporation, you can go to the SEC EDGAR database of all Federal filings with respect to the financial condition of a company.
The suits for the most part tell the truth in these reports, because lying can get corporate officers a quick trip to Club Fed.
As an exercise, go to the EDGAR database and look up the report (either 8K annual or 10Q quarterly, I'm not sure which) in which MS discusses its potential trouble from Open Source.
If you're thinking of working for a company, it's your responsibility to get this kind of info before signing on. If they're in the kind of financial trouble that will interfere with the promises they made you before hitting you up for a credit report, be assured they won't tell you themselves.
Tech Public Policy stuff
In some states, it is illegal to do this.
,in Oregon, consists of a title change, increase of pay, and a increase in resposabilty.
In some states you can not be held to a change in polisy unless you get a promotion. A promotion
It is likley that your state employment agency has these guidlines on line. such as boli for oregon.
Talk to a lawyer. Find out what your rights are.
If I ever found out I lost a job opportunity because of a credit report, I would sue.
Credit is not a indcator of a good employee. My credit rating suck, why? I was out of work for 3 months. almost everyday my boss thanks me for working here because I am pulling there product back from the brink of disaster.
I know men whose ex-wife screwed them over, should they not be able to work?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
An employer doesn't want to know if you were late on your visa bill.
Say you ran up a bill of $20k and a company had to write that off. This and other forms of fraud are notated on your credit report. That's what they're looking for: history of fraud, dishonest or intentionally irresponsible dealings. They have a right to that information, as long as they get your permission to obtain it. If you don't trust them with your credit report then why do you even want to work there?
I have personally had to review these credit reports, and it's not a big deal. Lots of folks have credit problems--that's not the point. W few have a real pattern of dishonesty that only comes out in a credit report. Do you want them having access to your personal financial information at a bank? Or how about medical records?
The arguments have been made, and rightfully so, that your credit does not nessisarily reflect you as a person or how you will perform in their job environent. Bad times happen and people are forced to make choices to survive those times, credit be damned.
However, there's another point I haven't seen addressed. Credit companies are sloppy. I know of more than a few cases where it took somebody moving Heaven and Earth to get some error on the companies part rectified.
Creditor: "You owe $500!! Says so here!"
You: "Um, no. That was paid. Infact, I have the reciept here."
Creditor: "Oh! Just fax us a copy and we'll take care of it!"
You: "ok..."
~a month later~
Creditor: "You owe $500!!"
These people aren't exactly the pillars of timeliness and accuracy and certainly not a benchmark to be used in employment. Get a criminal record. Urinanalysis. Something. But not credit...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
While in the US it's probably next to impossible to get out of the situation like this when the words "our policy" have been pronounced (I mean, other than trying to do it through a lawyer which is probably not a good idea if one wants to continue his career at the place), I believe that it's still possible to find a place that does value the specialists just for their professional background.
Personally, I find the idea of credit check as a condition for building employer/employee relationship very insulting. Even setting aside the issues of people with zero credit history because they're new or because they prefer living with a positive balance on their account, I can imagine descent people have nasty spots in their credit history. I know very good professionals who are amazing (friendly & dependable) people, who had severe credit problems because they had gotten into very nasty family health issues in the U.S. In this country (IMHO, of course), noone (aside from very rich people) can be protected from this or racket-like legal action shaking money out of normal people by just forcing them to defend their case when they hurt noone. (This is one of the reasons why I wouldn't like my kids to grow up here and why I have never attempted to achieve permanent residency here.) I'm not saying the U.S. is bad in general, I'm just saying that for me the cons outweigh the pros.
I would have refused that job unless the guys were sane enough to take my argument and take back their stupid "policy" issues at least in my case. If they don't respect my privacy concerns in this matter, they can go hire someone else. My current employer didn't ask me these questions, and this is actually the 1st time (this article) that I've learnt this happens. I mean, I could have imagined something like this in the banking industry, or accounting (maybe...), but not IT.
VKh
I do not have a problem with a company performing any kind of check they wish on a prospective employee - especially for a director level position as the poster said they had accepted. It should, however, be known in advance at an early time in the interview process that these checks will occur.
"We are a drug free company - Stoners need not apply" Ok - abstain for a couple weeks before the UA test.
As an employer if I had two equally qualified and experienced prospects with great personalities - one of which had a great credit history - one owing thousands of dollars to creditors with outstanding legal judgements and such - I would most certainly pick the one without problems.
Being able to make payments on time is a general indication of an individuals level of responsibility. Not exceeding your limits, etc.
People fall upon hard times from time to time. An employer who does not accept or understand a loss of job, divorce, etc. for temporary credit issues is not one I would choose to work for. Persons with longstanding persistant credit issues I would be wary of.
Now for the legal note:
If the employer has already offered you a job and you accepted - showing up for work and THEN informed of this credit check requirement you will likely be ok declining in most states UNLESS the job offer was contingent upon submitting to the credit check.
This is common with criminal and drug checks. In many states the employer MUST offer the position BEFORE any drug or crim check and when they do so they are bound to the job offer as long as the check comes back clean.
They must offer you a job based on the information they have prior to the check and let you know that a check will take place. Only then they can retract the offer if they find out you're a felon or whatever.
If they offered you a job and it was not stated that the offer was contingent on the credit check - tell them to f*** off. Read any documents you had signed prior to the offer being made and see if it was mentioned. Check with your state laws as they do vary.
RLC
For six years I worked for an insurance company who based their entire pricing structure on the fact that credit scores are great indicators of future behavior. In a large (200K+) population of customers, the ones with higher credit scores made fewer claims. Period. They went so far as to separate people into 12 different levels of risk based on credit alone! Clear patterns only emerge in LARGE groups of people, not in individual isolated cases. Consumers and legislators hate it, but insurance companies LOVE credit scores because they are dead accurate in classifying large populations.
The key here is that credit scores only become a useful indicator as the population grows. If this employer is small then they are wasting their time. But, if they hire hundreds of people a year then it makes perfect sense to screen with credit. In this particular case the credit check had the unexpected benefit of clearly identifying the poster as self-important "director-level" whiner. Who would want to hire someone who pulls a stunt like this right out of the gate?
I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full frontal lobotomy.
Of late, it seems to be something that I ask about in the interview when HR appears. I am willing to accept a criminal background check, as it seems appropriate if I'm working in a job where I have the opportunity to abscond with tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment. Two jobs I had required the criminal check because of either Federal law or a seperate legal obligation of the company who owned us. For example, if you work for a Federally insursed bank, your employer has to fingerprint you and send the card off to the Federal Reserve. Certain states require employees in specific positions in state institutions to have the same done. If you go work for the Federal, State, County or City government, you almost certainly will have a criminal background check performed.
I don't object to that, largely because, again if I have shown that I abuse trust to the extent that I end up convicted, it seems reasonable for my employer to not want to give me the keys to the equipment storeroom.
I've had two potential employers who wanted to do tests that I was unwilling to do. One was a drug-test, and the other a credit check. Why did I think this was unreasonable?
Well, they had my resume, and they made it clear that they would check it and my references for accuracy. If they're going to go to that much trouble to verify my background, what does the credit or the drug test tell them? It doesn't tell them anything useful. If I have a bad credit rating, but I've held all these positions, accomplished all of these tasks and my former employers think I'm great, does that mean they should hire only people with bad credit ratings? If my drug-test comes back clean, how do they know I will keep up good performance? Perhaps it was only my meth habit that let me get all those machines installed in a timely manner.
The point is that the additional information tells them nothing. And worse, it might open up liability for the company. In most states, even at will ones, disciplinary actions and such that are based on things that cannot be directly connected to requirements of the job itself are considered torts.
Last but not least, if the criminal background and credit check were not disclosed in their offer letter, I think you might have some leverage. In California, at least, I have yet to see an offer letter that doesn't list all the things the offer is contingent upon.
FYI: I'm not a lawyer, and am not offering legal advice. Consult a labor attorney or the local office of your relevent state agency for more information.
Here's how:
1. My father not only set up 3 companies on his own but helped a number of other out of money trouble by restructuring their accounting departments. He didn't have any will-power when it came to his own money though. (That's why he married my mother. She did)
2. Told 'them' I had no problem with taking it to court & making it as public as humanly possible because:
3. Descrimination based on personal, non-job related shortcommings is against the labor code.
The GEEK shall inherit the earth...