Should employers be able to check credit history?

I filled out about 30 job applications last week, and several listed that there would be a pre-employment criminal background check, drug test, and CREDIT HISTORY CHECK.

WTF?

I think it’s ridiculous that I have to surrender my urine to work with computers, but credit history is so far above and beyond reasonable.....

Quote: gamerfreak

I filled out about 30 job applications last week, and several listed that there would be a pre-employment criminal background check, drug test, and CREDIT HISTORY CHECK.

WTF?

I think it’s ridiculous that I have to surrender my urine to work with computers, but credit history is so far above and beyond reasonable.....

What is the type.of work you do?

Most financial institutions and law enforcement require these to avoid corruption

People in debt are known to do spurious things

Quote: darkoz

Quote: gamerfreak

I filled out about 30 job applications last week, and several listed that there would be a pre-employment criminal background check, drug test, and CREDIT HISTORY CHECK.

WTF?

I think it’s ridiculous that I have to surrender my urine to work with computers, but credit history is so far above and beyond reasonable.....

What is the type.of work you do?

Most financial institutions and law enforcement require these to avoid corruption

People in debt are known to do spurious things

I do IT work. Only one of these was a financial firm, there were several others that were not. An engineering firm sticks out in my memory as having the requirement.

A poor credit score indicates poor decisions making generally. I understand that there are exceptions, but if you have a have a credit score in the 500's, chances are you have poor decision making ability.

Quote: VCUSkyhawk

A poor credit score indicates poor decisions making generally. I understand that there are exceptions, but if you have a have a credit score in the 500's, chances are you have poor decision making ability.

They can evaluate my decision making ability through as many relevant interview questions as they’d like, and my overall preformance if they hire me.

I can see the credit history for something like an account controller.

I can see a drug test for something like an Airline pilot.

But as an IT guy, my personal and financial life are none of their business.

Quote: VCUSkyhawk

A poor credit score indicates poor decisions making generally. I understand that there are exceptions, but if you have a have a credit score in the 500's, chances are you have poor decision making ability.

Great minds think alike! I was just about to answer something similar, but you beat me to the punch. ;)

As an employer they have every right to want to know as much as possible about who they will be bringing on. As an applicant you have the right to decide if they are going to far for your tastes and decline to give them permission. If you are asking should a law be made to prohibit it, then the answer is no.

Quote: gamerfreak

They can evaluate my decision making ability through as many relevant interview questions as they’d like, and my overall preformance if they hire me.

I can see the credit history for something like an account controller.

I can see a drug test for something like an Airline pilot.

But as an IT guy, my personal and financial life are none of their business.

Assuming you have 2 equally qualified people who would you choose?

Quote: VCUSkyhawk

As an employer they have every right to want to know as much as possible about who they will be bringing on. As an applicant you have the right to decide if they are going to far for your tastes and decline to give them permission. If you are asking should a law be made to prohibit it, then the answer is no.

This is incorrect. Several states have laws prohibiting or limiting pre-employment credit checks.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/financial-services-and-commerce/use-of-credit-info-in-employ-2013-legis.aspx

Quote: gamerfreak

They can evaluate my decision making ability through as many relevant interview questions as they’d like, and my overall preformance if they hire me.

I can see the credit history for something like an account controller.

I can see a drug test for something like an Airline pilot.

But as an IT guy, my personal and financial life are none of their business.

Depending on the job and what access to data one has its reasonable to ask for a full background check including credit especially if you have access to anything that affects financials, including software that produces revenue or creates cost (such as payroll or financial software). A very bad credit history increases the perceived chance that one will commit fraud. For example it would be extremely easy for me (also in IT) write myself an EFT for millions of dollars simply by adjusting a supplier bank account to my own. I likely know most of the audit holes in my company -- they have the same weaknesses as most companies have. And this kind of fraud happens all of the time.

Edit -- some states have different laws. I think new Jersey's law strikes a reasonable balance.

Quote: gamerfreak

This is incorrect. Several states have laws prohibiting or limiting pre-employment credit checks.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/financial-services-and-commerce/use-of-credit-info-in-employ-2013-legis.aspx

And I disagree with them.

Quote: VCUSkyhawk

As an employer they have every right to want to know as much as possible about who they will be bringing on. As an applicant you have the right to decide if they are going to far for your tastes and decline to give them permission. If you are asking should a law be made to prohibit it, then the answer is no.

This is not true.

Quote: boymimbo

Depending on the job and what access to data one has its reasonable to ask for a full background check including credit especially if you have access to anything that affects financials, including software that produces revenue or creates cost (such as payroll or financial software). A very bad credit history increases the perceived chance that one will commit fraud. For example it would be extremely easy for me (also in IT) write myself an EFT for millions of dollars simply by adjusting a supplier bank account to my own. I likely know most of the audit holes in my company -- they have the same weaknesses as most companies have. And this kind of fraud happens all of the time.

Edit -- some states have different laws. I think new Jersey's law strikes a reasonable balance.

I was about to completely disagree with your post, but then I saw you wrote "perceived fraud" I don't think there is a correlation between honesty and credit score. At least if you take annual income out as a variable.

Quote: VCUSkyhawk

As an employer they have every right to want to know as much as possible about who they will be bringing on. As an applicant you have the right to decide if they are going to far for your tastes and decline to give them permission. If you are asking should a law be made to prohibit it, then the answer is no.

I agree, just say no. Companies are also now asking for social media accounts of employees, again just say no.

Quote: boymimbo

Depending on the job and what access to data one has its reasonable to ask for a full background check including credit especially if you have access to anything that affects financials, including software that produces revenue or creates cost (such as payroll or financial software). A very bad credit history increases the perceived chance that one will commit fraud. For example it would be extremely easy for me (also in IT) write myself an EFT for millions of dollars simply by adjusting a supplier bank account to my own. I likely know most of the audit holes in my company -- they have the same weaknesses as most companies have. And this kind of fraud happens all of the time.

Edit -- some states have different laws. I think new Jersey's law strikes a reasonable balance.

I agree that IT people have a lot of access, but I have doubts that credit history has a strong correlation with willingness to commit white collar crime.

I’d be interested to know if there were actually any statistics on it.

Quote: gamerfreak

I agree that IT people have a lot of access, but I have doubts that credit history has a strong correlation with willingness to commit white collar crime.

I’d be interested to know if there were actually any statistics on it.

It seems obvious to me that poor credit scores increase the risk of criminal activity and that some correlation might be found. Certainly some employers are convinced of that. However I don't think that should in itself be used to excuse a candidate. If however information on a credit report contradicts a resume one's honesty might be compromised, and for me if I discovered any anomaly between a resume or a candidates statements Vs the truth it would give me cause for concern.

I think I would toss any application that asked for a credit check in the trash, indicator of company ethics and a general lack of respect for employees to me.

I've heard a lot of people say they don't care if credit like that is due to medical bills. It's the purpose of medicine to bankrupt you. 😎

This system isn't fool proof, I'm sure there are a lot of people that are better than a bad credit report. Wouldn't doubt if it's racially discriminatory, so I'm against this. Negative things are removed after 7 years, so in 7 years you'll be a good candidate, doesn't make sense.

Credit score is a way for a bank to determine the likelihood of you repaying a loan. You're applying for a job, not a loan.

Young people almost always have poor credit due to lack of a long history of having credit (given that you can't start until you're 18). Poor people almost always have poor credit due to inability to pay bills on a credit card when they lose their job, because in order to get a credit card, you have to have sufficient income. People who get divorced often end up with poor credit thanks to family court stealing all the earner's income to hand over to the non-earner (this happened to me). Extremely wealthy people often have poor credit because they never borrow money (same problem as young people).

So apparently these idiot businesses are not interested in hiring young people, poor people, divorced people, and extremely wealthy people. They just want average people who were fortunate enough to not get divorced (is that really poor decision making? wedding chapels don't have crystal balls).

In this labor market, there is no need to think twice about tossing an application in the trash that wants your urine (except transportation related jobs), your credit score, and your social media accounts.

Quote: onenickelmiracle

I've heard a lot of people say they don't care if credit like that is due to medical bills. It's the purpose of medicine to bankrupt you. 😎

This system isn't fool proof, I'm sure there are a lot of people that are better than a bad credit report. Wouldn't doubt if it's racially discriminatory, so I'm against this. Negative things are removed after 7 years, so in 7 years you'll be a good candidate, doesn't make sense.

Maybe I’m not understand¡ng what you’re saying here. Are you say¡ng requ¡r¡ng a cred¡t report ¡s (or m¡ght be) rac¡al d¡scr¡m¡nat¡on? Are certa¡n races supposed to have better or worse cred¡t scores than others? To me, ¡t seems k¡nd of rac¡st to ¡mply the requ¡rement of a cred¡t is rac¡st.

Quote: KevinAA

Credit score is a way for a bank to determine the likelihood of you repaying a loan. You're applying for a job, not a loan.

Young people almost always have poor credit due to lack of a long history of having credit (given that you can't start until you're 18). Poor people almost always have poor credit due to inability to pay bills on a credit card when they lose their job, because in order to get a credit card, you have to have sufficient income. People who get divorced often end up with poor credit thanks to family court stealing all the earner's income to hand over to the non-earner (this happened to me). Extremely wealthy people often have poor credit because they never borrow money (same problem as young people).

So apparently these idiot businesses are not interested in hiring young people, poor people, divorced people, and extremely wealthy people. They just want average people who were fortunate enough to not get divorced (is that really poor decision making? wedding chapels don't have crystal balls).

In this labor market, there is no need to think twice about tossing an application in the trash that wants your urine (except transportation related jobs), your credit score, and your social media accounts.

Wealthy people borrow money all the time. I’m not sure what type of net worth you mean by ‘extremely wealthy’, but I’m pretty sure Zuckerberg or Gates aren’t applying for the same job as gamerfreak.

You write as if the credit check is the end all be all for the application. It might be, but it doesn’t seem likely. They probably just want to make sure the applicant isn’t a total idiot financially. I’d expect a company, at least one worthy of applying to, would be smart enough to figure out there’s a difference between an 18 year old and a 45 year old when they look at the credit check.

If I’m hiring, I’d prefer to hire someone who doesn’t use drugs vs a drug user, all else being equal. I think I’d almost certainly not hire someone who tested positive for a hard drug, excluding a valid reason like a prescription or he is miles ahead of every other applicant. Even for weed in states where it’s illegal, I’ll be leaning towards the non-user than the guy who smokes weed. I may view it as an unnecessary risk to take on someone who may end up in jail or worse.


Idk what level of a job gamerfreak is applying to, but it’s not like they’re going to disqualify you for one small thing. They’re looking at the big picture. Now, if you do get disqualified for some small thing, then that’s going to be a pretty good job and only the creme of the crop are going to get hired.

It may be like applying to a prestigious university. You may need to be the best of the best in terms of your GPA, essay, community service, extra-curriculars, etc.


You’re not forced to submit to a drug test, credit and background check, give them your social media account information, submit info for previous employers, or give them letters of recommendations. Just don’t apply. But if you want the job, you’ll have to do it on their terms, though.

Quote: gamerfreak

I filled out about 30 job applications last week, and several listed that there would be a pre-employment criminal background check, drug test, and CREDIT HISTORY CHECK.

WTF?

It is about personal responsibility and as others have said, if your job involves cash or other such things it is about possible theft.

Back when I was in auto loans they were just starting to check credit to rate your insurance risk. The CEO pointed out that there was a strong and direct correlation to people with late payments and collections and to safe driving. It is the same thing with employees. Generally the better the credit the better the employee.

Having worked in credit for years I can say that you very often see why people with bad credit have bad credit and those with good have good. A few minutes talking with them and you see it.

Quote: DRich

I agree, just say no. Companies are also now asking for social media accounts of employees, again just say no.

Exactly. I may believe they have the right to be able to ask for these things, but there is no way in hell I would allow it. If enough qualified applicants pass and let them know it is because of this policy, they will change the policy.

As far as the credit score check, I work in the mortgage industry, so it is standard practice.

Quote: VCUSkyhawk

As far as the credit score check, I work in the mortgage industry, so it is standard practice.

When I was in mortgage I remember hearing that they had a hard time getting enough underwriters that had credit that could pass.

But a UW is for sure one place you cannot let bad credit slide.

Quote: VCUSkyhawk

Exactly. I may believe they have the right to be able to ask for these things, but there is no way in hell I would allow it. If enough qualified applicants pass and let them know it is because of this policy, they will change the policy.

As far as the credit score check, I work in the mortgage industry, so it is standard practice.

I look at it this way. If legal, the employer can ask any question it wants. It is not up to the employee to determine the standards the employer wants. It is up to the employer! If a potential employee will not surrender the information then that potential employee is not what the employer wants.
If the employer is too restrictive and cannot find employees then the employer will need to change its requirements.
I think it is pretty standard now for big companies to do background checks on applicants, including credit check, arrest records, and social media check. My job is with a county government hospital, I am sure back then they did a background check and I did give a urine sample as well. I didn't think twice about it.

Quote: KevinAA

Credit score is a way for a bank to determine the likelihood of you repaying a loan. You're applying for a job, not a loan.

Young people almost always have poor credit due to lack of a long history of having credit (given that you can't start until you're 18). Poor people almost always have poor credit due to inability to pay bills on a credit card when they lose their job, because in order to get a credit card, you have to have sufficient income. People who get divorced often end up with poor credit thanks to family court stealing all the earner's income to hand over to the non-earner (this happened to me). Extremely wealthy people often have poor credit because they never borrow money (same problem as young people).

So apparently these idiot businesses are not interested in hiring young people, poor people, divorced people, and extremely wealthy people. They just want average people who were fortunate enough to not get divorced (is that really poor decision making? wedding chapels don't have crystal balls).

In this labor market, there is no need to think twice about tossing an application in the trash that wants your urine (except transportation related jobs), your credit score, and your social media accounts.

You have good points until your final paragraph. The reason that Companies do urine tests are to weed out drug addicts. You don't want a drug addict stealing money from you or customers/clients to go get their fixes or a drug addict who will skip work due to getting their fixes or due to a reaction from getting their fixes. "My Employee missed an important Client meeting because he fell into a drug induced deep sleep after getting a fix of Heroin," does not look good for your business.

Quote: gamerfreak

I think it’s ridiculous that I have to surrender my urine to work with computers, but credit history is so far above and beyond reasonable.....

My nephew owns a company that develops applications. Two years ago, he was looking to hire six more developers.

All he required was 42 months experience and proven skills.

He complained, he has a hard time finding people, because companies like Facebook hire the best developers for $250k, and shelve them, so other companies can’t hire them.

A few months after he started hiring, I asked how the search was going. “Good. I just hired two more. One from Argentina, and another from Russia.” “Are they here on visas?” “No, they live in Argentina and Russia.”

You have much more than credit checks and drug tests to worry about, when someone twelve thousand miles away can get the job.

These days, you need a career that is Amazon proof, and global competition proof.

Quote: Tanko

My nephew owns a company that develops applications. Two years ago, he was looking to hire six more developers.

All he required was 42 months experience and proven skills.

He complained, he has a hard time finding people, because companies like Facebook hire the best developers for $250k, and shelve them, so other companies can’t hire them.

A few months after he started hiring, I asked how the search was going. “Good. I just hired two more. One from Argentina, and another from Russia.” “Are they here on visas?” “No, they live in Argentina and Russia.”

You have much more than credit checks and drug tests to worry about, when someone twelve thousand miles away can get the job.

These days, you need a career that is Amazon proof, and global competition proof.

This is part of the reason why I am pushing my career away from software development and more into IT.

Not that IT work is completely immune from this type of thing, just look at what Disney did with H1B visas, but it’s a much harder process because IT infrastructure is a more localized, physical thing.

So many companies are sending their software development jobs to India. American devs/engineers want $120k+ in many areas. The writing is on the wall.

Quote: AZDuffman

Having worked in credit for years I can say that you very often see why people with bad credit have bad credit and those with good have good. A few minutes talking with them and you see it.

So then why isn't an detailed interview process enough? Somehow these companies got along fine 20-30 years ago when drug tests and credit checks weren't so easy. Why all of a sudden are we saying it's IMPOSSIBLE for them to make good hiring decisions without invading an applicant's privacy? There are companies that are going even further and asking for personal social media and email account PASSWORDS. As in full access.

We are saying all of this is suddenly okay just because technology makes it easy? I think that's a sorry excuse. Communist China recently starting doing something that has been coined "Social Credit"

"Imagine a world where many of your daily activities were constantly monitored and evaluated: what you buy at the shops and online; where you are at any given time; who your friends are and how you interact with them; how many hours you spend watching content or playing video games; and what bills and taxes you pay (or not). It's not hard to picture, because most of that already happens, thanks to all those data-collecting behemoths like Google, Facebook and Instagram or health-tracking apps such as Fitbit. But now imagine a system where all these behaviours are rated as either positive or negative and distilled into a single number, according to rules set by the government. That would create your Citizen Score and it would tell everyone whether or not you were trustworthy."

I don't think we are far from something similar in the USA.

Quote: SOOPOO

I think it is pretty standard now for big companies to do background checks on applicants, including credit check, arrest records, and social media check. My job is with a county government hospital, I am sure back then they did a background check and I did give a urine sample as well. I didn't think twice about it.

I really don't have anything to hide.

I've never been in legal trouble, not even a traffic ticket. My credit is fine. I occasionally enjoy Marijuana in my own home, on my own time, but I am an adult and can stop doing that for a few weeks for a few weeks to pass a drug test (which tells you how flawed the process really is).

But what is a bit worrisome is that I take prescription ADD medication that shows up as meth on a drug screening. So I am now required to disclose a condition/medication that does not affect my ability to do my job. This would be illegal in pretty much any other scenario.

My sister takes the same medication, and has had job offers rescinded after she has provided documentation to a lab, and they end up reporting a dirty test to the employer anyway.

Quote: gamerfreak

But what is a bit worrisome is that I take prescription ADD medication that shows up as meth on a drug screening. So I am now required to disclose a condition/medication that does not affect my ability to do my job. This would be illegal in pretty much any other scenario.

My sister takes the same medication, and has had job offers rescinded after she has provided documentation to a lab, and they end up reporting a dirty test to the employer anyway.

Yeah, as much as I support businesses having a right to information to make an informed decision in the hiring process this is where I draw the line. Your medical information should be confidential and not be required to disclosed. If you provide documentation of a legally prescribed drug to the medical center collecting your specimen they should not be allowed to disclose that to the employer.

Quote: gamerfreak

But what is a bit worrisome is that I take prescription ADD medication that shows up as meth on a drug screening. So I am now required to disclose a condition/medication that does not affect my ability to do my job. This would be illegal in pretty much any other scenario.

My sister takes the same medication, and has had job offers rescinded after she has provided documentation to a lab, and they end up reporting a dirty test to the employer anyway.

Yeah, as much as I support businesses having a right to information to make an informed decision in the hiring process this is where I draw the line. Your medical information should be confidential and not be required to disclosed. If you provide documentation of a legally prescribed drug to the medical center collecting your specimen they should not be allowed to disclose that to the employer.

There is an easy solution to all of this. Start your own business and make your own rules. Heck, you can hire all the rejected "qualified" applicants from your competitors while you are at it.

Quote: MaxPen

There is an easy solution to all of this. Start your own business and make your own rules. Heck, you can hire all the rejected "qualified" applicants from your competitors while you are at it.

That’s what I’ve been doing up until now. But I’m a bit burned out on it, thus the job applications.

So credit is fine, but medical isn’t?

Or rather, what I have a clean report of - they should check. What I have potential issues with - they shouldn’t be able to.

Got it.

Quote: FinsRule

So credit is fine, but medical isn’t?

Or rather, what I have a clean report of - they should check. What I have potential issues with - they shouldn’t be able to.

Got it.

??

I’ve said that I don’t think they should be able to do any of it, except for very specific situations like account controllers or airline pilots.

SOOPOO said, in so many words, why care if you have nothing to hide. And I explained why I care.

Quote: gamerfreak

??

I’ve said that I don’t think they should be able to do any of it, except for very specific situations like account controllers or airline pilots.

SOOPOO said, in so many words, why care if you have nothing to hide. And I explained why I care.

I think that was directed at me since I argued for company's to allow credit checks, but not allow medical information. I draw a big line of difference there, apparently he doesn't...shrug. To each their own, just my two cents.

Quote: gamerfreak

Quote: AZDuffman

Having worked in credit for years I can say that you very often see why people with bad credit have bad credit and those with good have good. A few minutes talking with them and you see it.

So then why isn't an detailed interview process enough? Somehow these companies got along fine 20-30 years ago when drug tests and credit checks weren't so easy. Why all of a sudden are we saying it's IMPOSSIBLE for them to make good hiring decisions without invading an applicant's privacy?

Nobody said it is "impossible." It is about improving security and avoiding bad hires. If someone gets hurt because an employee is stoned, you have a lawsuit. Just one example.

People with bad credit are more likely to be "on the rim of life" people who constantly have this or that problem. More likely to call off work, etc. You may not like it, but I have seen it happen. As stated earlier, auto insurance now uses a "blend" of your MVR, claims, and credit rating.

Sorry, but you are not going to change it, better to adapt.

My comment was mostly directed at VCU.

As someone who hires people for a living, I think credit history is meaningless in over 95% of positions hired for.

And I think someone’s credit would have to be extremely bad for it to make an impact on a hiring decision.

Medical history would actually be a much better predictor of future success, but it’s illegal (and for good reason).

I agree with gf.

I'm pretty pro privacy and I don't really make a big distinction about who is violating it. I hate the idea of anybody combing through my private affairs, extracting my bodily fluids etc.

One reason I'm not a Libertarian is this strange notion of voluntary. Well you could always just become homeless.

There are few decent jobs. Its hard to find them. It's going to get worse. You're competing with many other people for the same jobs. The employer has all the leverage. There is almost no limit to what they could demand as long as it is a gradual creep. How about your browser history? The books you've purchased? Your medical history?

The effect is, your employer comes to regulate your personal life.

I couldn't care less what is or is not useful information for them. Society should care mainly about the individual person first.

Companies seem to have functioned fine without monitoring our political opinions, recreation and financial histories up until now.

Look, at least the gov can argue that they are trying to thwart terrorist attacks. It's BS but they can argue it. I still don't want them evaluating what I read and say privately without cause.

MegaCorp is afraid of making a bad hire? Deal with it.

Quote: Rigondeaux

There are few decent jobs. Its hard to find them. It's going to get worse. You're competing with many other people for the same jobs. The employer has all the leverage. There is almost no limit to what they could demand as long as it is a gradual creep. How about your browser history? The books you've purchased? Your medical history?

Answer is get skills. Lots of good jobs they cannot fill. Too man people getting a meaningless degree and too few learning a trade.

Quote: AZDuffman

Answer is get skills. Lots of good jobs they cannot fill. Too man people getting a meaningless degree and too few learning a trade.

Good advice for the individual. But it doesn't address the problem as a whole.

I believe in personal privacy regardless of what one can do with a computer.

This sort of reminds me of a joke i once saw, because I wrote it. It was supposed to be a headline or something. I forget the details.

Central computer awards last job on earth to man with 9 PhDs. "If I can do it, so can anyone else," he says.

Quote: AZDuffman

Answer is get skills. Lots of good jobs they cannot fill. Too man people getting a meaningless degree and too few learning a trade.

The reason a lot of jobs can't get filled is many of these companies are trying to fill incredibly specific jobs with insanely ridiculous job requirements.

You never see something like "Toyota is hiring accountants! Apply within!"

It's always something like "Toyota is looking to fill the position of historical forensic accountants. Applicants must have a Ph.D. in historical forensic accounting with a focus on late 19th century accounting practices and 12-15 years of experience in historical forensic accounting at the executive level for Fortune 500 companies. Knowledge of all known accounting software from 1960-2000 is a must."

Like, holy s***, there's probably like 3 people in the world who would match that skillset, and none of them are looking for a job, but you have a 100,000 people with a general accounting degree who can't get a job because the job requirements are ludicrous, but they know the basics of accounting and could be taught everything else on the job.

I mean, I'm not looking for work right now, but I browse job sites like usajobs.gov every once in a while just to see what's out there and I see stuff like that ALL THE TIME, and it just cracks me up at the nonsense some of these employers post hoping to find people. I really find it comical.

Quote: TigerWu

The reason a lot of jobs can't get filled is many of these companies are trying to fill incredibly specific jobs with insanely ridiculous job requirements.

You never see something like "Toyota is hiring accountants! Apply within!"

It's always something like "Toyota is looking to fill the position of historical forensic accountants. Applicants must have a Ph.D. in historical forensic accounting with a focus on late 19th century accounting practices and 12-15 years of experience in historical forensic accounting at the executive level for Fortune 500 companies. Knowledge of all known accounting software from 1960-2000 is a must."

I see entry jobs advertised all the time. The thing on "general" jobs is they just get posted to the company HR department, and get filled. Of course, HR people are usually there because they cannot get a more important gig, so they figure their job is to reject people. So you have to try to work around the system at a big place. I broke into banking because I met someone who worked there at a bar and they told me the secret to get past the electronic gatekeeper. Such is life.

Quote:

Like, holy s***, there's probably like 3 people in the world who would match that skillset, and none of them are looking for a job, but you have a 100,000 people with a general accounting degree who can't get a job because the job requirements are ludicrous, but they know the basics of accounting and could be taught everything else on the job.

I mean, I'm not looking for work right now, but I browse job sites like usajobs.gov every once in a while just to see what's out there and I see stuff like that ALL THE TIME, and it just cracks me up at the nonsense some of these employers post hoping to find people. I really find it comical.

They cannot get THAT job, but they can find A job. Little by little you might specialize and get into that club. My job is fairly specialized, takes maybe a week for basic training but a few years to really be good. Brokers want the good. They need someone who can jump right in. I have to imagine it is the same in any industry. Life has to be dealt with.

Quote: TigerWu

I mean, I'm not looking for work right now, but I browse job sites like usajobs.gov every once in a while just to see what's out there and I see stuff like that ALL THE TIME, and it just cracks me up at the nonsense some of these employers post hoping to find people. I really find it comical.

I saw a job listing that required 8 years experience with the Swift programming language. Swift was only released 3 years ago.

Some of these HR departments are a joke.

Quote: gamerfreak

I saw a job listing that required 8 years experience with the Swift programming language. Swift was only released 3 years ago.

Some of these HR departments are a joke.

It’s almost always the hiring manager that makes these requirements. Why would I make the decision about how many years programming experience a programmer needs?

Quote: FinsRule

It’s almost always the hiring manager that makes these requirements. Why would I make the decision about how many years programming experience a programmer needs?

In NYC, at least, often these highly specific job ads are designed so no one qualifies or even applies.
Say I have a cousin in Ireland looking for a job. He has skills but nothing outstanding. He does speak English and Gaelic.
I advertise I'm looking for a recent college grad with a background in X, a working knowledge of Y and the ability to speak Gaelic.
No one applies or if they do they fall through. I can now seek a waiver to import a person that has the skills to do the job that doesn't really exist. Multiply that by a few hundred agencies doing this for clients and you have a lot of fake job ads out there.

Quote: billryan

Multiply that by a few hundred agencies doing this for clients and you have a lot of fake job ads out there.

A recruiter told me about that. Said he ran an ad almost every week for a call center manager, his specialty. His key was to place 1-2 people a month, but to do it he had to have a resume bank to call so he could get people fast. This was when most people still used the Sunday paper so it gave him a week or more of lead time skipped.

It is breaking my brain watching AZD promote the freedom impinging, privacy violating, MBA-type generated horseflop being bandied in this thread. You alright, hoss? The city getting to you? Just bought a boat (paid cash, #hustlelife) if you need to go fishing or something...lol

I'm with gamer, Rig, et al. I completely get the intention, and I don't doubt for a minute that the correlation of bad credit = disaster employee that AZD claims actually exists. But think, people. Even if the purpose or intention of the restriction is righteous, look who's implementing it. I've held some... I don't even know, 15+ jobs, and of all the HR folks I've rolled through, I ain't met a Socrates once. Plenty of well meaning, quite a few successful, but that system is a joke. It was one of my greatest challenges / triumphs when I got to the position of being "that guy" to shake it up and throw the status quo out the GD window. All that info is valuable, it all certainly points in directions, but every single person I've dealt with uses it like Scripture. He has this so that's -X points, or so and so is that so +5. Those types of rigid structures don't allow for active thought; you just turn off and plug numbers. You've any idea how much of a incredible disaster I have been at times, or how completely irreplaceable I've been at others? Without an intelligent interview AND interviewer, you're just throwing darts, fancy formula or not.

I still remember getting grilled upon a change of the guard about my position and my complete lack of any of the "required qualifications", this when I was high level casino. Here I've put in 6 years of stellar work, leading in every category and breaking completely new grounds all on my own, with mad success, and I had some non-casino chump of the street challenging me over a Bachelor's. I told him he could test my knowledge or skills in any way that would suffice his concern, and dude didna even know what to ask me to prove my worth, he was that out to lunch. Pah.

I'm with y'all. Was it Rig who mentioned "creep"? That it's, my friend. Who here hasn't been reminded "You represent the company at all times employed regardless if off the clock"? How about f#$% you? Because I ride my wheeler down the road, that somehow means I will take chances in co. vehicles, more prone to defraud, or am less trustable? 12 years of daily opiate use, no one bats an eye. Burn one at the pond to get a few more hours out of my ailing back, and everyone loses their jobs. FOH.

I hired roughly 15 people over the course of almost 2 years. After the first batch, I threw that formulaic bitch out the window and asked what I wanted answered, and purged all their pointless bullspit. I hired a majority of alcoholics and active drug users. By the time I was rolling good, there wasn't 5 clean people on the job. Exactly ONE quit on me, 3 or 4 moved up and on, and the revolving door of my shop finally came to rest. Fraud? Theft? Accidents? None, no more than usual, and not a single one. And, we covered the increased profit expectation during the beginning of the recession and $4+ a gallon gas, at a truck stop. Famously, the one chick who they thrust upon me because she "had a Masters" (for a truck stop supervisor gig O.o) was an unmitigated disaster. She was one of only 3 people I have ever had to fire.

Anecdotal, yes. But this pre employment rigmarole nowadays is for the birds. Laughable, ridiculous garbage, the lot.

It's very common for jobs to be posted that are not actually available, employers do this for various reasons. Perhaps this credit check is a built-in excuse.