Nowadays, they run a credit check on you if you try to do anything. Even if you are applying for a job so you can pay back your creditors. If you have creditors angry at you, you don't get the job. Catch 22.
If that's the new rule, then let's apply it to the guys who run AIG, Goldman Sachs and the rest of the too-big-to-fail "banks." Because nobody in history has run up unpayable debt the way those clowns did.
6 comments:
I love your blog, really missed you and if I had money I would sent it to you. And yeah it is a catch 22. I guess the congress will jump on that REAL SOON. NOT.
When I first found out about this practice, it made no sense to me, since it seems to me a person with debts would work harder, longer, and in general be a better employee than one without, because he or she would need the job more.
That being said, it's too bad running up debts (for no good purpose) couldn't have been made a criterion for denial of employment for Congress and the Office of President starting back in, say, 1981. :)
Sergei Rostov
Goldman repaid their debts and the Treasury got a 20% annualized return on their investment.
Well put! Add to that, banks and credit unions are denying and revoking lines of credit from those with collateral! Those whose houses are not mortgaged to the hilt and are still worth a lot. So just because they screwed up, we're all paying!
I guess the employer thinks that if you're in debt you're gonna embezzle funds or steal the office furniture to fence to pay off your debt, or something like that. I've never understood this practice either and they've been doing it for awhile.
Bluelyon- I have to say, I agree. And merely having good credit doesn't mean one isn't embezzling or a poor risk for embezzling. It may only mean one hasn't been caught yet.
There are so many reason for having a poor short term credit history. Divorce, family illness, job loss. Most people will undergo one of these circumstances at least once in their life. It makes no sense to me to let a short term credit issue prevent a person with otherwise good qualifications from receiving a job offer.
I wonder how this compares to the job market for persons with a criminal background. For instance, my son was convicted of underage consumption of alcohol. That is a misdemeanor. Now is he only one of a very few people who ever did this? No. But will it show up on a background check? Yes.
I am also surprised at the number of jobs that "require" a degree. For instance, some local job listings require a degree for a recepionist position or customer service postion. !!???!!?! Seems like all of this is yet another way to continue the class war.
sleepingdogs
Post a Comment