Toon - Rall captures the employers' reasoning

Found at SMW



:rofl:

K/R

Unless you were applying to a business that handle large amounts of cash or negotiable securities.

After all, the fuckers who crashed Wall Street probably had stellar credit ratings, so a good score is no guarantee of honesty, integrity, or reliability!

they don't test for impairment (like a breathalyzer) they test for what employees do in their own time.

I know. My background has been checked and I passed. My credit history had absolutely nothing to do with my ability to do the job. And it's stated quite plainly that the background check is because the employee would be involved in finances.

Pre-employment credit check should be abolished.

from some of their clients (by trading against the positions of their clients), can you assume that just because a person has a lot of money he is honest?

It might be just the other way around.

A person who owes a lot of money may be more honest. Maybe a less honest person would owe less in some cases.

There's like an epidemic of stupid running rampant through people who make hiring decisions or something.

K&R.

I call it malevolent. Probably some of both.

systemic (a logical outgrowth of a system)
systematic (thoroughly iterated, with rules)
obedient to authority (out of fear)
identifying with authority (out of petty power neurosis)
hardhearted and cruel
anti-humanist
classist
capitalist
self-hating
neurotic
apathetic
unquestioning
stupid
ultimately self-destructive

You could write a little essay on each of these aspects.

They are never going to sell me on the notion that a person who comes to work hungover from drinking half the night is safer than a person who smoked a joint last week.

they make the existing work force work harder, and don't give them pay raises. If you bitch, they come back and say "you're lucky to have a job"- and most employees shut up at this point.

credit rating has to do with one's ability to do a job will doubtless be the day domestic swine take to the air en masse.

Research studies have proven time and time again that credit scores have no connection to a person's likelihood to cheat or steal. Even people who run the credit bureaus have admitted this.

obviously, even responsible people can have bad credit if due to unexpected expenses (medical, e.g.) and/or unemployment.
and also obviously, wealth can mask great irresponsibility in that a rich, reckless spender can still afford to pay the bills.

however, SOME of those with bad credit have bad credit because they can't be bothered to pay their bills on time even when they can easily afford it and SOME of those with bad credit simply can't stick to a budget even when they have a decent wage.

finally, personal financial responsibility doesn't always translate to professional responsibility. paying one's own bills on time isn't exactly the same trait as showing up for work on time.

still, the modern interviewing process is an exercise in making career decisions out of tiny clues that could easily be meaningless, but you have so little to go on. in this light, a credit check is not much worse than refusing to hire someone because they "seemed nervous" or "expressed too much ambition" or whatever.

that said, i personally have never done a credit check on an employee and don't see the point in spending money on one.

You might as well use someone's promiscuity as a measure of how reliable an employee they're going to be; the purported rating has nothing whatsoever to do with the job-fitness that it is nominally used to gauge.

Total bullshit, and someone's making a shitload off of it.

and values, morality, drive, ambition, creativity and people skills. It's the ultimate indicator of how an employee will perform. Between that and a drug test, you can build the ultimate company by hiring only people who reach these completely non-arbitrary benchmarks. It's a wonder that U.S. Steel, General Electric, the Big Three and so on ever got off the ground without such things.

Ergo Medical For All => vast rise in median credit score => "viable" labor pool grows by 50% or so. Problem solved.

Yet another good "side effect" of single-payer.

They're not allowed to ask health questions or if you have kids or how old you are. But they have all sorts of tricks to try to find out those things without directly asking.

Blind assumptions, not standards, lead the grazers.

:shrug:













:smoke:

did Rall go and do something to piss of the cheerleaders?

those true believers who get the joke, at least; the rest just act outraged because it's probably a safe bet.

:rofl:

K&R.

erroneously report debts to credit agencies to pressure people to pay them.

Disgusting vicious cycle.

See:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1255662&mesg_id=1255662

and

http://www.ajc.com/news/health-care/patients-in-arrears-face-966953.html
Choi, an insurance agent, thought his insurance company should pay the whole cost, so he disputed the bill and believed it was resolved in his favor.

Six years later, he applied to refinance his mortgage and discovered his credit had dropped 92 points because Capio Partners, a Duluth-based company that purchases patient debt from medical providers, reported the bill to a credit rating agency.

“It hurts my pride real bad because I’m hard-working and I abide by the law, but I’m still penalized,” he said.

Increasingly, patients are receiving collection notices not from the doctors or the hospitals who treated them, but from companies who bought their unpaid bills.

"Maxed Out"

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0762117/

There was a small MN firm that sucked the last blood from some sad sacks.

Good film, BTW - right up there with Sicko

Added it to my Netflix.
Already have "Inside Job" on the way so it looks like I'll have a double feature.

Thanks for the info.

...I was accepting of the fact that I would undergo a credit check. This was because I would be dealing with confidential and secret information that could conceivably be sold to foreign governments for a pretty penny. Anyone with a history of terrible credit would represent a genuine risk for the USAF.

This practice of just any old outfit checking applicants' credit, though, is absolutely unconscionable.

that lots of people who have no money worries wouldn't mind selling out for more of it. And lots of people who live from paycheck to paycheck are honest as the day is long.

I can understand their rationale but it isn't necessarily going to do them any good.

Easy for me not to have a problem with the policy back then because my credit was good ;)

...if you are taking out a loan from the person doing the check.

For any other purpose, some arcane score the credit reporting companies conjure up is a ludicrous measure.

It's a layer of bureaucracy sold to companies on the flimsiest of premises (which is probably why Human Resources and CEO's are so easily sold on various bullshit metrics for everything).

It's pseudoscience when it's used like that. No way around that.

In a consumer-driven economy you can't have consumption without employing people at a decent wage.

But I'm being redundant . . . ;)

But here's how it would go for an illegal alien job applicant:

HR: "So you are in this country illegally, right?"
Alien: "Yes, I came across the border without official permission."
HR: "That means that you have committed a FELONY."
Alien: "I don't care about your laws, I came here to take a job away from an American citizen."
HR: "I see here that you are using someone else's social security number..."
Alien: "Yes, that's because Human Resources personnel are ignorant and will never check on it."
HR: "You know that is also a FELONY (identity theft), right?"
Alien: "Yes. I already told you I DON'T CARE ABOUT YOUR LAWS. I'll break any of your laws I have to in order to steal a job from an American."
...
HR: "Good enough for me. YOU'RE HIRED!"