Some States May Ban Credit Checks for Employment

[Flamingo]

Pretty much everywhere: 'opening the doors to illegals' and whatnot. I never understood what the outstanding balance on someone's MasterCard has to do with screening illegals, but feel free to elaborate. If laws are passed to eliminate the use of credit checks, I'm confident that ammendments can be passed to ensure RELEVANT information, such as citizenship and education, could be verified elsewhere. Actually, they already can.

It is already illegal to discriminate against someone solely for filing bankruptcy, but the bankruptcy IS a visible public record. So actually, the filing should not even be accessible to an employer, since its visibility defeats the purpose of the anti-discrimination law. You seem to feel comfortable explaining your situation to a potential employer, but the reality is that if these checks become so routine that virtually 100% of employers use them as a weeder - all the way from janitor to flipping burgers (if they really are burgers) at McDonald's, prospective candidates will not make it to an interview to explain anything. Bad credit = Paper shredder... NEXT... and there lies the path to perpetual unemployment for millions. That's what I truly believe is in the works.

What I mentioned as to illegal persons in this country and credit checks was being discussed in our office and in other legal offices across the nation that if credit checks are eliminated, it will just make it easier for illegals to take more jobs away from citizens; granted there are other features in place to weed out illegals; it would just eliminates one more thing they would have to get past and we all know how slipshod some hiring practices are. By me mentioning that that does not mean I am "fond" of credit checks; you are putting words into my mouth. Eliminating credit checks, while beneficial for those having to file bankruptcy for good reasons, could be detrimental to others as companies will probably put other policies into place to even further check out people; i.e., contacting colleges to verify degrees, contacting more references, doing more thorough background checks, etc., etc. Again, these are decisions that are made by people who own their companies or run their businesses; if they choose to be selective about people they hire, that is their choice. In today's world it doesn't take much to find out everything about a person from the day you were born to the present. If something shows up that the hiring party doesn't like on your records or background or past employment history, they don't have to hire you.

It is illegal to discriminate solely for filing bankruptcy if one is employed and fired for that reason only. Many companies inform you upon application that if you have a bankruptcy on your record, you will not get the job. That is company policy with policies put in place by their legal departments and upper executive management.

Again, change will be a long time coming for this - changes are still taking place for insurance credit profiling with states gradually eliminating that practice one by one. But many states still have the practice. So if one is in the midst of filing now or has a past BK on their records, one can only do the best they can for the moment and do the best they can to get the job. It's all about selling yourself and your skills over the competition.

The problem with a BK is that it is on your credit reports for a very long time. That is one of the blackmarks we all face or have had to face for filing and something we will have to deal with as long as it shows on there.

[meateater]

During what was supposed to be the "final" interview with company bigwig for a job, I realized bigwig was reading a public records report about me. The only negative on that report would have been my bankruptcy - I was never sued, never arrested, never owned real estate, never had a tax lien, never had any other issues I can think of that would be public records. I didn't get the job. I checked my credit report a few weeks later - no inquiry from bigwigs company (or anyone else). While it will be great if credit checks for employment are banned, it may not be all that helpful for those of us who have actually filed.

[Pizza]

They are already verifying education and references, Flamingo. And I wasn't trying to 'put words in mouth'... it seems clearly, through reading your posts on the issue, as if you are indeed fond of the checks, and for reasons that do not, IMO, warrant the check.

The extra 'hurdle' for illegal immigrants is, in practice, nothing more than an fence for everyone else. If a business owner really wants to herd a handful of immigrants into their workplace, they will find a way to skirt the law, or just import the cheapest worker on a visa.

The stigma of bankruptcy (and bad credit in general) is bad, but it's definitely not criminal and IMO should never serve as a fence to bar employment, ever.

[Pizza]

During what was supposed to be the "final" interview with company bigwig for a job, I realized bigwig was reading a public records report about me. The only negative on that report would have been my bankruptcy - I was never sued, never arrested, never owned real estate, never had a tax lien, never had any other issues I can think of that would be public records. I didn't get the job. I checked my credit report a few weeks later - no inquiry from bigwigs company (or anyone else). While it will be great if credit checks for employment are banned, it may not be all that helpful for those of us who have actually filed.

It is, of course, very difficult to tell what the reason is for the employer to turn you down. There is intense competition, and most employers consider sending a 'why not' letter to be counterproductive. One thing that may help, however, is that there was no soft pull from the company, which could mean they just went with another candidate without doing a check at all.

[Flamingo]

It is, of course, very difficult to tell what the reason is for the employer to turn you down. There is intense competition, and most employers consider sending a 'why not' letter to be counterproductive. One thing that may help, however, is that there was no soft pull from the company, which could mean they just went with another candidate without doing a check at all.

You don't need a "soft pull" to find bankruptcy - it comes up on a background check if it is indicated to look for that. While a bankruptcy appears on one's credit report for 7 to 10 years, it is forever on public records. The entire bankruptcy can be viewed on Pacer or in the federal courthouse itself if local if an employer wants to take it that far but I need to say to him that if he made it that far in the hiring/elimination process, his not getting the position was probably not due to his filing. Unfortunately, he will never know what was in that folder. When/if credit checks are eliminated, we all can bet on seeing these dreaded words more and more on employment applications..."Have you EVER filed bankruptcy."

[Flamingo]

They are already verifying education and references, Flamingo. And I wasn't trying to 'put words in mouth'... it seems clearly, through reading your posts on the issue, as if you are indeed fond of the checks, and for reasons that do not, IMO, warrant the check.

The extra 'hurdle' for illegal immigrants is, in practice, nothing more than an fence for everyone else. If a business owner really wants to herd a handful of immigrants into their workplace, they will find a way to skirt the law, or just import the cheapest worker on a visa.

The stigma of bankruptcy (and bad credit in general) is bad, but it's definitely not criminal and IMO should never serve as a fence to bar employment, ever.

I am neither for nor against credit checks; I am certainly not "fond" of them due to any unfairness of the situation or if one's credit report is not correct, needs revision, and shows up badly when it is really not that bad...I believe it is up to those who own and run their businesses to make their decisions as to who they hire and their hiring/firing policies. Credit checks have good and bad points. Good in that it could keep someone who truly cannot control their finances or handle money/credit from making a mess of the business's finances or clients' accounts if hired in a financial capacity; bad in that it unfortunately makes it difficult for those hit with hard times due to this economy and suffering from job loss or major medical situations/bills through no fault of their own to find another job. I've seen folks with bad credit/BK hired and do fantastic jobs and I've seen the same category hired that took advantage of the situation and opened up credit card accounts under their bosses' name and controlled all the funds between the accounts and kept it hidden until discovered by an audit when something was amiss. By the time of discovery, thousands and thousands had been taken out in cash advances. The latter is what employers are afraid of.

There is no easy answer to this for anyone...I would make myself as marketable as possible by taking extra courses, expanding skills, etc. to stand out more over the competition and to hopefully offset somewhat any stigma as to any BK filing.

Pizza I am totally aware of where you are coming from; the main thing is that whether we like it or not, BK is still going to be an issue for anyone who files for some time yet and hopefully as time goes on much of that stigma will go away. This economy has put many people in the position of having to file through no fault of their own and not going crazy with credit cards and that should not be a factor against them for anything, especially in trying to find another job.