Anyone have a job offer rescinded for bad credit?

[momisery]

Comparing a BK to murder or child molesting is like comparing ice to ice cream... No comparision.

[backtoschool]

So, wall street is worried about our "ethics"? lol

I know, it's pretty ironic isn't it!

[Bell30656]

Comparing a BK to murder or child molesting is like comparing ice to ice cream... No comparision.

I just knew someone would go there. The statement was that bankruptcy was a personal matter that had nothing to do with work. My point was that a felony such as child molestation or murder doesn't have anything to do with work either but should they be considered?

Are employers worried about the ethics of bankruptcy? I don't think that bankruptcy is unethical. It's part of the rules. Corporations file bankruptcy all the time especially on Wall Street.

[ApresMoi]

Hilarious! Thanks for the laugh.

So, wall street is worried about our "ethics"? lol

[DiamondsR]

I just knew someone would go there. The statement was that bankruptcy was a personal matter that had nothing to do with work. My point was that a felony such as child molestation or murder doesn't have anything to do with work either but should they be considered?

Are employers worried about the ethics of bankruptcy? I don't think that bankruptcy is unethical. It's part of the rules. Corporations file bankruptcy all the time especially on Wall Street.

So corporations can file bankruptcy, with no repercussions to the managers or workers who may have had direct influence on the circumstances precipitating the BUSINESS and yet someone who has declared personal bankruptcy due to circumstances unrelated to work should expect to be barred from employment? As a teacher, of course I would expect to be barred from employment if I had endangered a child because that directly relates to my work. That my bk interferes with my ability to enter new enrollee information into a health care database is ridiculous.

Comparing bankruptcy to anyone with a felony conviction isn't valid (aside from the fact they have people who work with them to find employment and housing). I know because my neighbor works to help paroles find work. There isn't an equivalent for bankruptcy petitioners.

Isn't it amazing how Washington and Wall Street manage to have us, the "little people" turn on each other and justify their asinine regulations on why they won't/can't hire us, the bankrupt masses. While "talking out the sides of their necks", they complain that consumers "aren't buying" and that the recovery "depends on us" (apparently all going into debt). All the while we fund them and clean up their mess through tax breaks and bail-outs so THEY won't have to declare bankruptcy? I wish we could remove them all from office (democrat and republican) and start over but what I really think we should do is everyone that has declared bankruptcy not patronize businesses that discriminate against us (although it appears that would be difficult with insurance companies because they all do). Great, now we get to fund them by this mandatory insurance (profit) masquerading as a health care bill (that's another rant).

My apologies for the rant but I thought I would be at work today. :-(

[logansdad]

So if a person committed a crime such as murder, theft, child molestation or whatever that shouldn't be considered in the hiring decision? After all it is in their personal life not work related.

.

Your an Idiot those are victim crimes and to compare that to bk shows me how obtuse you really are no wonder why you have failed marriages.


Good Bye you are on ignore.

[RBisDebtFree]

Bankruptcy is a civil matter. Murder, theft, child molestation, etc. is criminal.

I am not a law expert but I would guess that civil and criminal is two different things not just two different words.

[Bell30656]

I can see where someone would take personal decisions into consideration when there is no work history. But where there is, that is what the decision should be based on. Not their personal life.

An early post said that bankruptcy should not be considered when hiring someone because it is a PERSONAL MATTER not related to the job. I merely pointed out that many felonies are PERSONAL MATTERS that don't relate to the job.

After a bankruptcy one may find it difficult to get a job in certain industries or at certain levels. After a felony one may find it difficult to get a job in certain industries or at certain levels. The situations seem very similar.

I clearly do not equate child molesters to bankruptcy filers as one and the same. I guess there are times when some are not able to debate intelligently without jumping on the "freak out" train and resorting to name calling.

There are repercussions for corporations that file bankruptcy. Those corporations spend years trying rebuild trust. Many times they are forced to pay vendors upfront before services are rendered, no one wants to give them a chance and invest in their stock and many people don't want to work for them. Not to mention that the executives are branded as failures and can't find employment after a company fails for whatever reason.

[DiamondsR]

An early post said that bankruptcy should not be considered when hiring someone because it is a PERSONAL MATTER not related to the job. I merely pointed out that many felonies are PERSONAL MATTERS that don't relate to the job. .........
...snip snip .....
After a bankruptcy one may find it difficult to get a job in certain industries or at certain levels. After a felony one may find it difficult to get a job in certain industries or at certain levels. The situations seem very similar.

I clearly do not equate child molesters to bankruptcy filers as one and the same. I guess there are times when some are not able to debate intelligently without jumping on the "freak out" train and resorting to name calling.

That earlier post, actually several posts about personal finances having no bearing on certain types of employment, originated from me. You never addressed any of my points directly, however. I didn't take offense (and thought you merely wanted to make your points geared towards the replies with more general information than replying to my specific statements/questions). For example, I stated that someone who filed bankruptcy due to mounting medical bills should not be punished for that decision through no fault of their own.

That being said, you were the poster who brought child molesters and murderers into the equation and now to state that some are unable to "debate intelligently" when you were the person who in fact brought the terms up seems a bit hyprocritical. Almost as hypocritical as one declaring bankruptcy and discriminating against applicants for their business. Furthermore, to say that others are "name calling", which I never called you a name, in the same sentence when casting the rather condescending assertation that others cannot "debate intelligently" is in fact name calling.

[momisery]

Cat I am glad you enjoyed the laugh.. And Diamond thank you for the words that I have in my heart but did not put onto paper. You can not discriminate against people who have small children when you hire them, and yet the ones I work with miss three times more work than I do, and they are on the phone or texting 25% of the working hours. But we all know that family comes first, and we look the other way. BK is about Family, and choices you have to make. We left GA, and I have a scar on my arm to prove it because of "terror" in our neighborhood that the police could not control. Nothing like a guy at your front door at 2AM with a butcher knife to wake you up a bit. And nothing like threats of violence and then actual violence after the fact, but not being able to get the police to "fix" the problem. They can not fix every thing, so I am not angry with them. Those circumstances led us to move from GA while we still could, even when the sale on our home fell thru. After that lay offs for my hubby who is almost 60, and now medical issues and I think stress helped those along their way too. The only responsible thing we could do was give it all up, and plan on how we could afford his medicines and mine too. We can afford his now, and mine if we can get him a job. So, what about us makes us irresponsible enough to be criminals? What about anyone on this board who simply bought into the American dream fed to us by BUSINESS makes them bad? Why are the people irresponsible when government allows us to be fed snake oil even when that is illegal to do? I don't get it, I just don't. Why would we fight each other instead of against the real enemy in this issue? Why are we not going to our congress people and yelling at them to fix this BK law and to fix the law regarding getting a job afterward? Clearly if I were a threat to where I work I would be steal things, not filing a BK. A BK is a financial decision, one that I did not want to make but on the other hand I thought it would be the best choice between say stealing funds from the bank where I work, or simply filing a BK since I could not pay my bills. Which is better by the way in your opinion? Should I have stolen funds and paid my bills so my credit looks good so I and hubby could get our "dream" jobs? I can not steal, sorry... but if I can not pay and they will not accept that then they give me no choice but to file. We were paying until the job market came unwound... so we were not over extended, in fact we tapped our savings to pay instead of stealing or going to the taxpayers or begging on this board for help.. lol... We did the right thing, and we are respectful people, there is no reason to not give any job to anyone on this board unless you find out they would steal from you.. then I get it... but a BK at 60 does not make me a criminal. I have worked since I was 15 and have yet to steal, why would I start now? Why would hubby? This is all about people trying to make themselves feel better about the bad decisions they are making in hiring. And you should not feel better about it, your wrong, we are good people and deserve better treatment...

[Bell30656]

DiamondsR, it wasn't you I was quoting and it wasn't you that was accused of name calling. The quote was from Helpmeout who stated that bankruptcy was in the personal life and shouldn't be considered. And Logansdad went into calling me an idiot.

You stated that as a teacher you couldn't teach with certain things in your background. Should a person be handling a company or department's budget with certain problems in his/her background?

The executives of companies that file bankruptcy suffer heavily. Many bonuses are paid in company stock and/or options. When a company files bankruptcy what happens to the stock? The executives and managers of failed companies wind up having severe difficulties finding new jobs. A stigma is attached to them.

I give... I'll bow out of this discussion. The discussion has fell to a level that no longer is productive.

[helpmeout]

So if a person committed a crime such as murder, theft, child molestation or whatever that shouldn't be considered in the hiring decision? After all it is in their personal life not work related.

Murder, theft and child molestation are against the law. Filing for bankruptcy is not.

And anyone who would even compare these crimes (and you did) to lawfully filing for bankruptcy is, well, not too bright.

BTW, since you are so against bankruptcy, why are you here?

[Flamingo]

well, i guess one would have to know why a person filed to figure out whether it's a negative or positive. in my case, i actually never got into debt at all. a few crooky lawyers and a biased judge managed to get a 6-figure judgment against me even while admitting that i actually owed nothing. yet it was there, signed and sealed. so at least for me, the bk wasn't a result of a financial mishap. i certainly learned a lot from it, but none of what i learned was about finances. and there are many people out there who file for medical debt, which is something that really should not be raising a red flag at all.

and, as an employer you probably know that it's illegal to consider bk in itself as a factor in hiring decisions. i know, though, that this is impossible to enforce and everybody does it. the fact that people almost never follow the law is one of those non-financial things i learned in the process.

What I highlighted above is not true. Many companies have policiesin place for insurance purposes and legal purposes to protect themselves, their employees and stockholders from fraud, theft, etc. Unfortunately, along with filing BK comes the stigma that one cannot handle their finances. While that may be true for some people, for the majority they had to file for other reasons. Many companies are straight up front that they will not hire anyone with a BK (or bad credit) on their records and I have personally done contract work at a major national financial bank that had that practice. Even folks that did contract work on the site (not employees) were required to have good credit to work on site. Pre-employment forms were filled out prior to any hiring decisions and checked against credit reports.

It IS illegal to be employed and THEN be fired for just filing bankruptcy, but know that a bankruptcy on your records can prevent one from getting a job if the company you are applying to is not BK friendly or requires good financial housekeeping as part of its policies.

[Flamingo]

Last time I checked, BK was legal and a perfectly rational decision, particularly in this environment. The truth is that people who have to make hiring decisions don't really know what they are doing, so they figure this is a good way to screen applicants.

Simply not true...see my previous posting just above.

[Flamingo]

Your an Idiot those are victim crimes and to compare that to bk shows me how obtuse you really are no wonder why you have failed marriages.


Good Bye you are on ignore.

I read the posting everyone is arguing about...here is the quote "So if a person committed a crime such as murder, theft, child molestation or whatever that shouldn't be considered in the hiring decision? After all it is in their personal life not work related." What they are referring to are crimes (felonies) for which searches are done also for employment. I take it as meaning that if employers ignore BK on records should they also ignore felonies? Both fall under searches done for employment. Sometimes it is easy to read more into a posting than what it is intended to be.

Logansdad, that was really uncalled for as to what you called the poster as it is easy to see, at least to me, that they were not making any comparison to crime and BK.