Not Hiring Immigrants

[one...two...tree 2,762]

[quote name='meow mix' post='1277973'

I was going to say that if a company won't hire someone with a poor credit score, that's discrimination. I understand the logic behind screening applicants with bad credit, but it's taking information that is private and using it for a different purpose than its original intent.

the shack does it.. and, you have to sign a consent form that they're checking your credit.. besides they don't mind a poor credit score or no score.. they care about BAD credit score, which is not the same.. the logic I think is that if you have a gazillion of unpaid cards, and collection agencies bills and stuff, means you're not enough responsible for a job.. which I think is kinda reasonable... also they mainly use it to catch an applicant lying..

What about driving record (other than jobs that require you to drive)? Voting record? Income tax forms? Hospitalization records? Medical prescription records? These are private information, separate and unique records for their various purposes, yet if collected on a single applicant by a potential employer could give a more descriptive evaluation of an applicant. Do you see what I mean? One could logically reason a benefit to employers by collecting such information, but my concern is that if the information is private and unless something like a clean driving record is required for the job, should remain private. Otherwise, a Right to Privacy is pretty much meaningless.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

[quote name='meow mix' post='1277973'

I was going to say that if a company won't hire someone with a poor credit score, that's discrimination. I understand the logic behind screening applicants with bad credit, but it's taking information that is private and using it for a different purpose than its original intent.

the shack does it.. and, you have to sign a consent form that they're checking your credit.. besides they don't mind a poor credit score or no score.. they care about BAD credit score, which is not the same.. the logic I think is that if you have a gazillion of unpaid cards, and collection agencies bills and stuff, means you're not enough responsible for a job.. which I think is kinda reasonable... also they mainly use it to catch an applicant lying..

What about driving record (other than jobs that require you to drive)? Voting record? Income tax forms? Hospitalization records? Medical prescription records? These are private information, separate and unique records for their various purposes, yet if collected on a single applicant by a potential employer could give a more descriptive evaluation of an applicant. Do you see what I mean? One could logically reason a benefit to employers by collecting such information, but my concern is that if the information is private and unless something like a clean driving record is required for the job, should remain private. Otherwise, a Right to Privacy is pretty much meaningless.

All three jobs I've held for the last 8 years required FBI and credit checks. I don't think it is unreasonable to screen people in that manner in this particular line of work. And I take comfort in knowing that my all of my staff has passed these checks.

That said and back to topic, I first entered this line of work when I was still an immigrant and there have always been lots of immigrants in our offices. I don't really remember ever having worked at any place where there weren't people from various countries speaking with various accents. If there are companies that rather keep it all "in the family", so to speak, it's their loss. I certainly wouldn't want to work there.

Edited October 27, 2007 by Mr. Big Dog

[Caladan 19]

When the government screens people for security clearances, one of the things they check is their credit history. People who are in debt tend to be easier to corrupt.

I am not sure if such reasoning would fly for a friggin' retailer, but I'm not sure it would count as unlawful discrimination unless they were using 'poor credit score' to only screen out applicants of a certain race or gender or creed or somesuch.

Anyhow, it's illegal to discriminate on national origin, but unless the person is dumb enough to write it down or has a history of it, it's going to be hard to show, especially if they can point to something like weak language skills to cover their butts. And you'd still not end up with a job you'd want there anyway! There are plenty of places that don't mind accents and aren't afeared a' furriners, so don't worry about the idiots.

[Jenn! 918]

What if every employer started doing credit checks? How are people with bad credit histories supposed to break out of the vicious cycle?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

What if every employer started doing credit checks? How are people with bad credit histories supposed to break out of the vicious cycle?

Why would every employer want to go through that trouble? They do it where necessary.

It's not an easy and inexpensive thing to administer for an employer.

[Jenn! 918]

What if every employer started doing credit checks? How are people with bad credit histories supposed to break out of the vicious cycle?

Why would every employer want to go through that trouble? They do it where necessary.

It's not an easy and inexpensive thing to administer for an employer.

Well, that's good then.

[mawilson 2,133]

What if every employer started doing credit checks?

That would be cool.