Deadly Sushi
Formerly The Giant Mojito
Whomever thought that checking someones credit.... something 100% PERSONAL.... for a job should be hung from the gallows.
In some cases, a job candidate with bad credit could even turn out to be a better worker, critics like Leonard argue.
“The simple case is somebody who has lost a job and suffered damage to their credit score,” he said. “They’re going to be a more motivated and inspired employee than somebody who hasn’t because they need the income more.”
Under current law, employers can access any job applicant’s credit history, with some restrictions. The reports made available to employers don’t include the applicant's age or credit score, for example. Job candidates have to be notified of the credit check and give their permission to access their credit data. And if you’re turned down for a job explicitly because of bad credit, the employer has to give you a copy of the report.
Employment screening consultants caution that credit histories should be used sparingly — in part because, as many consumers have learned the hard way, the information in a credit history isn’t always reliable. Credit agencies themselves routinely caution anyone using their reports that the information may be inaccurate or out of date. But correcting an error can take 30 to 60 days — long after an employer has made a hiring decision and moved on.
Though many employers run credit checks on some applicants, relatively few are turned down for a job because of bad credit, according to Rosen of ESRcheck.
“It’s only when they’re down to a finalist or one or two finalists that they’ll run a background check,” he said. “And in the real world, what we see is that it really takes something pretty horrendous in the credit report to reverse a decision that they’re vested in.”
But critics of the process say the information provided in a credit report is being used too broadly and shouldn't be available to all employers for all job applicants.
The use of credit reports in hiring decisions also faces a legal challenge on the grounds that it discriminates against minorities and other groups that have lower-than-average credit scores.
In a suit filed last September in Baltimore, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charged a corporate marketing company, Freeman, with unlawful discrimination by refusing to hire black job applicants based on their credit history.
The Commission argues that because the practice has a “significant disparate impact” on black applicants, it is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case is pending.
Proposals to ban the use of credit histories in job screening have been introduced in several states and in Congress, but the measures face an uphill battle. Last fall, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have sharply limited the use of credit histories to job candidates who would have access to large amounts of cash or confidential financial information, among special situations.
CONTINUED: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35512038...conomy/page/2/
In some cases, a job candidate with bad credit could even turn out to be a better worker, critics like Leonard argue.
“The simple case is somebody who has lost a job and suffered damage to their credit score,” he said. “They’re going to be a more motivated and inspired employee than somebody who hasn’t because they need the income more.”
Under current law, employers can access any job applicant’s credit history, with some restrictions. The reports made available to employers don’t include the applicant's age or credit score, for example. Job candidates have to be notified of the credit check and give their permission to access their credit data. And if you’re turned down for a job explicitly because of bad credit, the employer has to give you a copy of the report.
Employment screening consultants caution that credit histories should be used sparingly — in part because, as many consumers have learned the hard way, the information in a credit history isn’t always reliable. Credit agencies themselves routinely caution anyone using their reports that the information may be inaccurate or out of date. But correcting an error can take 30 to 60 days — long after an employer has made a hiring decision and moved on.
Though many employers run credit checks on some applicants, relatively few are turned down for a job because of bad credit, according to Rosen of ESRcheck.
“It’s only when they’re down to a finalist or one or two finalists that they’ll run a background check,” he said. “And in the real world, what we see is that it really takes something pretty horrendous in the credit report to reverse a decision that they’re vested in.”
But critics of the process say the information provided in a credit report is being used too broadly and shouldn't be available to all employers for all job applicants.
The use of credit reports in hiring decisions also faces a legal challenge on the grounds that it discriminates against minorities and other groups that have lower-than-average credit scores.
In a suit filed last September in Baltimore, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charged a corporate marketing company, Freeman, with unlawful discrimination by refusing to hire black job applicants based on their credit history.
The Commission argues that because the practice has a “significant disparate impact” on black applicants, it is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case is pending.
Proposals to ban the use of credit histories in job screening have been introduced in several states and in Congress, but the measures face an uphill battle. Last fall, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have sharply limited the use of credit histories to job candidates who would have access to large amounts of cash or confidential financial information, among special situations.
CONTINUED: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35512038...conomy/page/2/