How Far Should a Job Screening Go?

SlashSquatch asks: "My sister is getting screened for a programming position with a financial firm. I was alarmed to hear she'll be getting fingerprinted at the Sheriff's Office as part of the screening process. Instantly I conjure up scenes of frame-ups and corporate scandals. I want to know, should this raise a flag? Would you submit to fingerprinting, blood tests and who knows what else (financial, genetic code, and so forth) for a programming position?"

Comments

It's a financial institution

[Anonymous Coward]

Happy sunshine trusting in the inate good in all people is how we got Active X controls that could format your hard drive from the web. Sometimes, people are douchebags. And while you know your sister, most people in the world don't. With what's at stake, they'd prefer to avoid the scenerio in which they have to explain their lack of due care with respect to retroactively obvious red flags in her background. You could always, out of the kindness of your heart and fraternal love, pay her to sit at home and play Wii.

Re:It's a financial institution

[Deekin_Scalesinger]

I tend to agree with my anonymous colleague. I am sorry to hear that the submitter of this story is alarmed (OK, in truth I am only sorry that the submitter doesn't see the good sense in this practice), but if your sister is going for a position where she has the potential to alter bank records, install backdoors into financial systems, divert funds, etc, then I think that a fingerprint check is totally justified. Good old fashion horse sense and prudence has to be maintained in with some types of jobs, and this is one of them.

Re:It's a financial institution

[Shakrai]

then I think that a fingerprint check is totally justified.

And what happens to them after the 'check' is over? They doubtless sit on file somewhere.

The Gov't can't force you to turn over fingerprints or DNA without probable cause but your employer can force you to do it to get a job and then let it sit in a Gov't database for the rest of your life? And people meekly surrender to this!

Freedom is dead.

Re:It's a financial institution

[Score Whore]

...but your employer can force you to do it to get a job...

First, if you don't have the job yet, they're not your employer. Second, I don't think you have a very clear idea of what force is. Third, if you don't like the requirements of the job, go work for a dot-com. Nobody is forcing you to work for a bank.

Re:It's a financial institution

[rblancarte]

And let's also add to this, they are doing a SCREENING. They are probably looking up her fingerprints against known criminals. I am sure they are doing this to make sure she hasn't done masterful job of identity theft. You can change IDs, not fingerprints.

I agree with you Score - don't like it, drop out of the running for the job. There are a ton of jobs that don't require this.

RonB

Sometimes,yes

[SecurityGuy]

Depending on the sensitivity of the position, you *will* have to do things like this. If you're a programmer in a financial services firm, you might be in a position to backdoor systems for financial gain. I can see why they'd want to make sure you're not a known criminal.

Re:Ummmm.... No.

[Kevin Stevens]

I think the poster is way off. When you work in finance, you get fingerprinted because of SEC requirements (when they investigate insider trading or other wrongdoing, they often fingerprint the documents used so you can't say someone forged your signature). She probably falls under the class of employee requiring this because she has access to some sort of non-public information or real time market data not generally available to the public. I don't see anything to get heated over here. This is standard practice in finance.

Re:Ummmm.... No.

[xtracto]

Sorry pal, I was about to mod you Insightful (two spare mod points :) but I have seen a lot of comments against fingerprinting and I thought I would better write my comment to "defend" it.

The first poster (Anonymous Coward) stated it very well, she is working in a Financial Institution. I think the security on those is similar if not better (or worst? depending on POV) than the goverment agencies (CIA, FBI, DOD, ETC) because the information being played with there is *very* sensitive.

Also, I do not know what is so fucking outrageous about finger prints, my father has a ranch, and when I was younger we went every saturday to pay the pawns theyr week salary, and my dad kept a book for the payments (ala spreadsheet). Some of the pawns didn't know how to read/write, hence my father used their fingerprint as a signature to acknowledge payment. That is a common practice to autenticate people in poor countries. And it is way better thana lousy signature.

Again agreeing with the AC, I think that, if she does not want to be deeply screened then Finance is not an industry where she should get a job. She might preffer going to Google, Amazon or any standard software shop...

Re:Ummmm.... No.

[shabble]

Both companies seemed appalled that I would turn them down for something so "petty".

I hope you pointed out that since they think it's so petty, then why should they enforce it on you/anyone?