See above
Do you think employers should be allowed to ask a person if they have a felony or misdemeanor conviction?
03/28/2012
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Yes. I keep a handgun in my shop and a felon would not be able to be in the shop as an employee. Also there are violent misdemeanors and if you need someone who can be bonded for government jobs they need to pass the background checks. I have had an employee who did not pass and started making this one of my interview questions.
03/28/2012
Yes, I do.
03/28/2012
Yes - its still true that past behavior is still the best predictor of future behavior. Its unfortunate that some young people get into trouble before they fully comprehend the consequences - but it is necessary to screen employees - many companies use credit scores which I question. But even in that case people who are irresponsible with money could be an issue in a back-office or retail setting where cash is handled.
They are trying to get a law past that employers cannot demand Facebook passwords - that is already prohibited by Facebook - but that hasn't stopped employers and Facebook has no enforcement capabilities.
They are trying to get a law past that employers cannot demand Facebook passwords - that is already prohibited by Facebook - but that hasn't stopped employers and Facebook has no enforcement capabilities.
03/28/2012
Yes!
03/28/2012
You're kidding right? Of course they should be able to.
03/28/2012
Quote:
Most definitely. I think that an employer should be able to know their employees in and out. However, I think that they should also take into consideration the offense, how long ago was it, what were the circumstances, and ask the person questions about it. If the person seems pretty straight forward about everything, then I would take that into consideration also. (for hiring, that is).
Originally posted by
Badass
See above
Some people change. Some do stupid things that eventually they grow out of. Some don't. Hard to say
03/28/2012
As long as the employer can prove that the request is pertinent to the job at hand, they can and should ask any question they want. If your job is to work with money for example, absolutely the employer would be permitted to ask if you have a previous record. If your job involves using heavy machinery where you are required to be alert at all times, absolutely an employer should investigate any previous drug charges.
03/28/2012
Sure why not.
03/28/2012
Quote:
Agreed.
Originally posted by
MamaDivine
Most definitely. I think that an employer should be able to know their employees in and out. However, I think that they should also take into consideration the offense, how long ago was it, what were the circumstances, and ask the person questions
...
more
Most definitely. I think that an employer should be able to know their employees in and out. However, I think that they should also take into consideration the offense, how long ago was it, what were the circumstances, and ask the person questions about it. If the person seems pretty straight forward about everything, then I would take that into consideration also. (for hiring, that is).
Some people change. Some do stupid things that eventually they grow out of. Some don't. Hard to say less
Some people change. Some do stupid things that eventually they grow out of. Some don't. Hard to say less
03/28/2012
Absolutely. If I had my own business, it would legally be my responsibility to ensure that my employees and vendors are protected against incidents of work place violence and individuals with a propensity for theft. I never hold those things against business owners.
03/28/2012
Quote:
There is no way I want someone who spent 20 years in prison for a violent crime to be an employee. I don't even want to work with that person.
Originally posted by
Badass
See above
03/28/2012
Quote:
I am so torn on the credit score issue!
Originally posted by
Gunsmoke
Yes - its still true that past behavior is still the best predictor of future behavior. Its unfortunate that some young people get into trouble before they fully comprehend the consequences - but it is necessary to screen employees - many companies
...
more
Yes - its still true that past behavior is still the best predictor of future behavior. Its unfortunate that some young people get into trouble before they fully comprehend the consequences - but it is necessary to screen employees - many companies use credit scores which I question. But even in that case people who are irresponsible with money could be an issue in a back-office or retail setting where cash is handled.
They are trying to get a law past that employers cannot demand Facebook passwords - that is already prohibited by Facebook - but that hasn't stopped employers and Facebook has no enforcement capabilities. less
They are trying to get a law past that employers cannot demand Facebook passwords - that is already prohibited by Facebook - but that hasn't stopped employers and Facebook has no enforcement capabilities. less
On the one hand: Credit scores are a pretty good indicator of the amount of financial stress there is in your life. This can potentially be problematic for an employer if an employee is always running off to go pay their electric bill across town to avoid shut-off on payday and cutting into the owner's time or having to fend of debt collectors at every turn...employers don't like dealing with garnishments and judgments. They just don't. It's a huge, huge pain.
On the other hand: It shouldn't be anybody's damned business unless you are getting into a financial agreement. And that brings me back to the first hand...
You are entering into a financial agreement with your employer. They are paying you X amount of dollars for X amount of hours, expecting X amount of output. If you can't deliver that because you're worrying about your bills, then how much of an asset can you really be?
Buuuuut! Huge, huge but! There is some serious fuckwittery going down when it comes to credit scores and I don't agree with the system in even the slightest bit. So, no employers shouldn't have that information because I don't believe that the credit scores are fair, nor are they accurate in most cases and do not give you the complete picture of a person, but instead gives you a piece of the puzzle that just happens to contain, dependent on the situation, pertinent information.
03/28/2012
Yes they definitely should have that right. You need to know who are hiring. Some jobs are working with people that people with certain convictions can't work with.
My home town school, that I went to, just had an issue with someone they hired. They hired a bus driver that had previous child sex abuse charges. Now, if they would have done the background check, like they should have, he would not have been hired. That is a job position he should have never been in.
A good friend of my Mother in Law's has spina bifida so she has regular around the clock care in her home. The company had hired a new Aid and sent her to her house. The Aid stole all of her pain medication. Now, that company did the same thing. They decided not to run the background check on her otherwise they would have seen she has prior convictions of theft.
As for the credit scores to employers, that is not right. Someone in debit needs a job to pay off that debit or to file bankruptcy. Plus not to mention the amount of times your credit scores are wrong. My MIL has really great credit, but whenever she tries to get something on credit they always confuse her with a lady who is roughly the same age and has the same name. Whoever this lady is has terrible credit. Things that this lady gets and doesn't pay for end up mixed up on her stuff. It is ridiculous because then she has to prove that is not her every time. If they are taking that into consideration for hiring you, then the stuff should be accurate, but it is not.
My home town school, that I went to, just had an issue with someone they hired. They hired a bus driver that had previous child sex abuse charges. Now, if they would have done the background check, like they should have, he would not have been hired. That is a job position he should have never been in.
A good friend of my Mother in Law's has spina bifida so she has regular around the clock care in her home. The company had hired a new Aid and sent her to her house. The Aid stole all of her pain medication. Now, that company did the same thing. They decided not to run the background check on her otherwise they would have seen she has prior convictions of theft.
As for the credit scores to employers, that is not right. Someone in debit needs a job to pay off that debit or to file bankruptcy. Plus not to mention the amount of times your credit scores are wrong. My MIL has really great credit, but whenever she tries to get something on credit they always confuse her with a lady who is roughly the same age and has the same name. Whoever this lady is has terrible credit. Things that this lady gets and doesn't pay for end up mixed up on her stuff. It is ridiculous because then she has to prove that is not her every time. If they are taking that into consideration for hiring you, then the stuff should be accurate, but it is not.
03/28/2012
Quote:
I agree, there's more to it than just privacy. I think that it's the same as being a registered sex offender, you don't want to hire them and then find out they can't work in your store when children are there. Especially government institutions and such, it should be a question.
Originally posted by
js250
Yes. I keep a handgun in my shop and a felon would not be able to be in the shop as an employee. Also there are violent misdemeanors and if you need someone who can be bonded for government jobs they need to pass the background checks. I have had an
...
more
Yes. I keep a handgun in my shop and a felon would not be able to be in the shop as an employee. Also there are violent misdemeanors and if you need someone who can be bonded for government jobs they need to pass the background checks. I have had an employee who did not pass and started making this one of my interview questions.
less
03/28/2012
Quote:
Stormy - I agree - mostly. There are certain jobs that have to do with handling and managing money where your credit score could be pertinent. But its so hard to police. How do regulate the practice? I think the answer is they don't, I believe it's perfectly legal for any employer to ask for you to sign the release. You don't have to do it - but you probably will not get that job.
Originally posted by
Ansley
I am so torn on the credit score issue!
On the one hand: Credit scores are a pretty good indicator of the amount of financial stress there is in your life. This can potentially be problematic for an employer if an employee is always running ... more
On the one hand: Credit scores are a pretty good indicator of the amount of financial stress there is in your life. This can potentially be problematic for an employer if an employee is always running ... more
I am so torn on the credit score issue!
On the one hand: Credit scores are a pretty good indicator of the amount of financial stress there is in your life. This can potentially be problematic for an employer if an employee is always running off to go pay their electric bill across town to avoid shut-off on payday and cutting into the owner's time or having to fend of debt collectors at every turn...employers don't like dealing with garnishments and judgments. They just don't. It's a huge, huge pain.
On the other hand: It shouldn't be anybody's damned business unless you are getting into a financial agreement. And that brings me back to the first hand...
You are entering into a financial agreement with your employer. They are paying you X amount of dollars for X amount of hours, expecting X amount of output. If you can't deliver that because you're worrying about your bills, then how much of an asset can you really be?
Buuuuut! Huge, huge but! There is some serious fuckwittery going down when it comes to credit scores and I don't agree with the system in even the slightest bit. So, no employers shouldn't have that information because I don't believe that the credit scores are fair, nor are they accurate in most cases and do not give you the complete picture of a person, but instead gives you a piece of the puzzle that just happens to contain, dependent on the situation, pertinent information. less
On the one hand: Credit scores are a pretty good indicator of the amount of financial stress there is in your life. This can potentially be problematic for an employer if an employee is always running off to go pay their electric bill across town to avoid shut-off on payday and cutting into the owner's time or having to fend of debt collectors at every turn...employers don't like dealing with garnishments and judgments. They just don't. It's a huge, huge pain.
On the other hand: It shouldn't be anybody's damned business unless you are getting into a financial agreement. And that brings me back to the first hand...
You are entering into a financial agreement with your employer. They are paying you X amount of dollars for X amount of hours, expecting X amount of output. If you can't deliver that because you're worrying about your bills, then how much of an asset can you really be?
Buuuuut! Huge, huge but! There is some serious fuckwittery going down when it comes to credit scores and I don't agree with the system in even the slightest bit. So, no employers shouldn't have that information because I don't believe that the credit scores are fair, nor are they accurate in most cases and do not give you the complete picture of a person, but instead gives you a piece of the puzzle that just happens to contain, dependent on the situation, pertinent information. less
03/28/2012
I am in favor of criminal records being a legitimate question on an employment interview/application. There are some jobs for which that doesn't matter but in many cases it is important to know.
As for credit records, I think that is a little less reasonable.
As for credit records, I think that is a little less reasonable.
03/28/2012
Definitely, I mean it's not going to necessarily disqualify you from a position. Perhaps in a professional setting it would to an extent but I think there are still jobs open to rehabilitated felons.
03/28/2012
Yes
03/28/2012
I understand the necessity of it for legal reasons, and it makes sense that certain people should not be allowed certain positions, i.e. sex offenders shouldn't be around children, and someone convicted of identity theft/fraud shouldn't be around sensitive information. However, I do think that a felony or misdemeanor conviction should be an automatic disqualification.
Credit scores shouldn't be taken into account at all. There are three major agencies that report FICO scores, and it's a known fact that their "reporting" is rife with errors. For example, two agencies can have you at 700, while the third has you at 560. Just checking on the score will lower it. And if you place any action on your record — for example, a temporary freeze on new lines of credit because you see activity you don't recognize — your score gets lowered again.
Meanwhile, if you're the type who pays cash or debit card for everything, your credit score will also be crappy because it's based on borrowing money. That you don't spend beyond your means will work against you.
A credit score is nothing but a shortcut for someone in HR trying to weed out candidates, and it's a useless and inaccurate method.
Credit scores shouldn't be taken into account at all. There are three major agencies that report FICO scores, and it's a known fact that their "reporting" is rife with errors. For example, two agencies can have you at 700, while the third has you at 560. Just checking on the score will lower it. And if you place any action on your record — for example, a temporary freeze on new lines of credit because you see activity you don't recognize — your score gets lowered again.
Meanwhile, if you're the type who pays cash or debit card for everything, your credit score will also be crappy because it's based on borrowing money. That you don't spend beyond your means will work against you.
A credit score is nothing but a shortcut for someone in HR trying to weed out candidates, and it's a useless and inaccurate method.
03/28/2012
Quote:
I think formerly incarcerated people deserve equal employment opportunities.
Originally posted by
Badass
See above
03/28/2012
Quote:
Originally posted by
Petite Valentine
I understand the necessity of it for legal reasons, and it makes sense that certain people should not be allowed certain positions, i.e. sex offenders shouldn't be around children, and someone convicted of identity theft/fraud shouldn't be
...
more
I understand the necessity of it for legal reasons, and it makes sense that certain people should not be allowed certain positions, i.e. sex offenders shouldn't be around children, and someone convicted of identity theft/fraud shouldn't be around sensitive information. However, I do think that a felony or misdemeanor conviction should be an automatic disqualification.
Credit scores shouldn't be taken into account at all. There are three major agencies that report FICO scores, and it's a known fact that their "reporting" is rife with errors. For example, two agencies can have you at 700, while the third has you at 560. Just checking on the score will lower it. And if you place any action on your record — for example, a temporary freeze on new lines of credit because you see activity you don't recognize — your score gets lowered again.
Meanwhile, if you're the type who pays cash or debit card for everything, your credit score will also be crappy because it's based on borrowing money. That you don't spend beyond your means will work against you.
A credit score is nothing but a shortcut for someone in HR trying to weed out candidates, and it's a useless and inaccurate method. less
Credit scores shouldn't be taken into account at all. There are three major agencies that report FICO scores, and it's a known fact that their "reporting" is rife with errors. For example, two agencies can have you at 700, while the third has you at 560. Just checking on the score will lower it. And if you place any action on your record — for example, a temporary freeze on new lines of credit because you see activity you don't recognize — your score gets lowered again.
Meanwhile, if you're the type who pays cash or debit card for everything, your credit score will also be crappy because it's based on borrowing money. That you don't spend beyond your means will work against you.
A credit score is nothing but a shortcut for someone in HR trying to weed out candidates, and it's a useless and inaccurate method. less
That should read:
"However, I do NOT think that a felony or misdemeanor conviction should be an automatic disqualification."
03/28/2012
Quote:
I totally agree here! A divorce can really mess with your finances. Should divorced people be denied employment because they're no longer married?
Originally posted by
Petite Valentine
I understand the necessity of it for legal reasons, and it makes sense that certain people should not be allowed certain positions, i.e. sex offenders shouldn't be around children, and someone convicted of identity theft/fraud shouldn't be
...
more
I understand the necessity of it for legal reasons, and it makes sense that certain people should not be allowed certain positions, i.e. sex offenders shouldn't be around children, and someone convicted of identity theft/fraud shouldn't be around sensitive information. However, I do think that a felony or misdemeanor conviction should be an automatic disqualification.
Credit scores shouldn't be taken into account at all. There are three major agencies that report FICO scores, and it's a known fact that their "reporting" is rife with errors. For example, two agencies can have you at 700, while the third has you at 560. Just checking on the score will lower it. And if you place any action on your record — for example, a temporary freeze on new lines of credit because you see activity you don't recognize — your score gets lowered again.
Meanwhile, if you're the type who pays cash or debit card for everything, your credit score will also be crappy because it's based on borrowing money. That you don't spend beyond your means will work against you.
A credit score is nothing but a shortcut for someone in HR trying to weed out candidates, and it's a useless and inaccurate method. less
Credit scores shouldn't be taken into account at all. There are three major agencies that report FICO scores, and it's a known fact that their "reporting" is rife with errors. For example, two agencies can have you at 700, while the third has you at 560. Just checking on the score will lower it. And if you place any action on your record — for example, a temporary freeze on new lines of credit because you see activity you don't recognize — your score gets lowered again.
Meanwhile, if you're the type who pays cash or debit card for everything, your credit score will also be crappy because it's based on borrowing money. That you don't spend beyond your means will work against you.
A credit score is nothing but a shortcut for someone in HR trying to weed out candidates, and it's a useless and inaccurate method. less
As for felonies/misdemeanors, it's absolutely apropos. There are plenty of good examples on the thread already of this. Background checks are necessary in some cases.
I used to run background checks on applicants when I worked in HR for a private security company. There were a couple times when I had to send a rejection letter because something turned up on someone's background check.
03/28/2012
Quote:
Yes
Originally posted by
Badass
See above
03/28/2012
I personally have a one-time felony conviction from years ago that was completely out of character and I absolutely hate that employers can deny me employment because of it.
I had to drop out of college and couldnt get a masters degree because of it...and on top of that I can't even get little part time jobs either?
Being convicted of a crime doesn't necessarily make you a hardened criminal.
I had to drop out of college and couldnt get a masters degree because of it...and on top of that I can't even get little part time jobs either?
Being convicted of a crime doesn't necessarily make you a hardened criminal.
03/28/2012
i think they should be able to ask
03/28/2012
I think they should definitely be allowed to ask/check. At the spa I work at we had a man apply to be a massage therapist who had been convicted of rape and fortunately my boss did get background check on him and then didn't hire him. I know people can change, but if I'm going somewhere to relax, I don't want to be alone in a room naked with someone who has preyed on a vulnerable victim before.
I don't think it should disqualify from every type of job, and I know they probably get a lot of unfair discrimination, but sometimes measures need to be taken to prevent future incidents.
I don't think it should disqualify from every type of job, and I know they probably get a lot of unfair discrimination, but sometimes measures need to be taken to prevent future incidents.
03/28/2012
it puts the company at risk
03/28/2012
yes
03/28/2012
Quote:
Yes, they do. But it depends on the job they are applying for. I cannot have anyone that will fail bonding on government jobs working for me. I have a school contract...no sex offenders. I have a jail contract...no felons/midemeanors. I have a contract with the job corps....no felon/misdemeanors. I have a contract with the SAFE house...etc. etc. etc.
Originally posted by
sneako
I think formerly incarcerated people deserve equal employment opportunities.
It depends on the job. I can not afford to hire anyone that can not perform their tasks for any agency I am making signs for, and installing them on premises.
03/29/2012
Total posts: 44
Unique posters: 38
-
1
- 2