For those without a job

[FFDP82 4]

The government has no right to tell me who I should or shouldn't hire.. and what criteria to use when hiring them...

 

these are both private issues.. if a business wanted to hire people who are 5 foot or shorter.. I wouldn't sit and cry about it... I wouldn't seek legal action.. I would simply take the cue that I am not wanted there and look elsewhere for employment...

 

This mentality works wonderful until a handful of large companies who hold most of the employment opportunities in the city/region/county decide to collude and all adopt the same practices, leaving you nowhere else to go look for a job.

 

Case in point, my last industry, was dominated by 3 large companies and two very small ones. Twenty years ago there were about ten companies but over the years they consolidated or were bought out. The three all paid the same low wages, with the same **** hours, in the same terrible environments. Sure, some guy in the warehouse could adopt your mentality and seek elsewhere in the same line of work - to go from one crap job to another.

 

Sure the two small ones had slightly better pay, but they had almost 1/10 as many jobs available, so going to them was a matter of luck for most.

 

You will find that there is probably a disproportionate amound of support for this bill amongst the "working man" and those who work in the office telling him what to do. That's my guess, at least. But who knows.

 

What is next? Employers are going to be prohibited from looking people up on facebook?

 

The EU is considering something similar to this, an online "right to disappear" from the internet - Mike Schmidt the CEO of Google has also spoken about how many of the young people of today will likely have to change their names in the future to escape their online past. It's stupid to post anything dumb online in the first place, and I think someone as an adult who posts pictures of them wasted drunk, half naked, or doing illicit things like drugs, is extremely stupid and in bad taste (and I don't blame a job for not hiring them)

 

But it is pretty shitty to look at the prospect of someone being 13-14, doing something stupid, pictures hit the internet, and ten years later when they're a mature, intelligent adult and don't even remember that time, it comes up during a job's Google of them and they don't get hired. Simply because they were too dumb as a kid to know not to post crap. We all did dumb things as kids but the only difference is that nowadays, my generation and future generations are unknowingly making semi-permanent public records of it.

[vladtepes 1,060]

This mentality works wonderful until a handful of large companies who hold most of the employment opportunities in the city/region/county decide to collude and all adopt the same practices, leaving you nowhere else to go look for a job.

 

Case in point, my last industry, was dominated by 3 large companies and two very small ones. Twenty years ago there were about ten companies but over the years they consolidated or were bought out. The three all paid the same low wages, with the same **** hours, in the same terrible environments. Sure, some guy in the warehouse could adopt your mentality and seek elsewhere in the same line of work - to go from one crap job to another.

 

Sure the two small ones had slightly better pay, but they had almost 1/10 as many jobs available, so going to them was a matter of luck for most.

 

You will find that there is probably a disproportionate amound of support for this bill amongst the "working man" and those who work in the office telling him what to do. That's my guess, at least. But who knows.

 

 

but again not to beat a dead horse.. that is the employers right.. the employer has no more right to know about casual drug use than delinquent bills.. if someone casually smokes marijuana it is easy to fire them irregardless as to if it was ever on the job or had impact on the job.. the mere fact that at some point prior to being tested the individual was exposed to the drug is enough.. this is an instance where someone off company time was not "doing the right thing" and paid for it with their job.. but everyone finds that totally acceptable.. which is a gross double standard..

 

when we hire, we hire based on on job ability.. I don't care if you stay up all night snorting cocaine and owe 1.5 million in credit card debt.. as long as when you come to work on Monday morning you are sober, professional, and ready to take care of business.. I as a manager choose not to get involved in people's personal lives.. but it should be at the discretion of the business to make that call NOT the government.. the employer took the financial risk to build the business.. the employer put in the time to even have job openings available.. if that individual wants to view me as a dead beat because of my bad financial choices.. again to echo it.. more power to them.. they are the ones that did everything.. where do I get off coming in backed by the feds saying "you HAVE to hire me".. it is absurd at best..

 

unfortunately what happens to the rest of the pack is irrelevant.. because you can't legislate like that.. because if you do you start to over regulate the business world.. any times you force business to hire people they don't want to you open the door for all sorts of reduction in quality.. to take this tool away is a stepping stone.. next it will be people who are just plain stupid.. sorry you can't see my grades from school, because if you know how dumb I am you might not hire me.. I do see your point and while it is a genuine honest concern.. you can not allow it to remove freedom from individual privately owned businesses as it is just not fair IMO..

 

financial history should be allowed to be used as a disqualifies just as any other history..

 

and you know what.. just to add this.. having decent credit is really not all that hard... I got stuck with tens of thousands of dollars in debt with my ex.. I had nothing.. bankruptcy was the easy option.. instead I called all the creditors that I got stuck with and worked out agreements with them.. and yeah my credit still probably not so hot, at least I am doing something about it.. we are really beating around the bush and avoiding the real problem..

 

having bad credit.. that is essentially stealing.. you used your credit card for goods and or services.. and you got them.. and you got them immediately.. having bad credit means that you are not making good on the payment... we like to sugar coat it and talk about how bad the economy is and all that.. but at the end of the day..

goods in hand.. no payment.. THEFT

I would say that is a pretty good indicator of character..

[FFDP82 4]

I'm sorry, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I fully support government regulation for minimum wage laws, safe working standards, ethical hiring/firing practices, etc. I also support the right of workers to unionize and seek better pay/conditions/etc., whether they are teachers and cops, or dock builders and pipe fitters.

 

As for credit, I actually don't even have any active credit cards and am in $0 debt. But I still support the idea of a working man not being denied a job based on credit score (which for many is a result of the system's failure, bad luck in life, or predatory lending practices). I'm more concerned with regular people getting to hold jobs, not fat cats having an easier time finding reasons not to hire people. But that's just me

 

the employer has no more right to know about casual drug use than delinquent bills.. if someone casually smokes marijuana it is easy to fire them irregardless as to if it was ever on the job or had impact on the job.. the mere fact that at some point prior to being tested the individual was exposed to the drug is enough.. this is an instance where someone off company time was not "doing the right thing" and paid for it with their job.. but everyone finds that totally acceptable.. which is a gross double standard..

 

when we hire, we hire based on on job ability.. I don't care if you stay up all night snorting cocaine and owe 1.5 million in credit card debt.. as long as when you come to work on Monday morning you are sober, professional, and ready to take care of business.. I as a manager choose not to get involved in people's personal lives..

 

I agree with you here on both points and wish more managers were like you. Unfortunately, though, they are not - most of them will not "play nice" like you do.

[vladtepes 1,060]

I'm sorry, I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. I fully support government regulation for minimum wage laws, safe working standards, ethical hiring/firing practices, etc. I also support the right of workers to unionize and seek better pay/conditions/etc., whether they are teachers and cops, or dock builders and pipe fitters.

 

As for credit, I actually don't even have any active credit cards and am in $0 debt. But I still support the idea of a working man not being denied a job based on credit score (which for many is a result of the system's failure, bad luck in life, or predatory lending practices). I'm more concerned with regular people getting to hold jobs, not fat cats having an easier time finding reasons not to hire people. But that's just me

 

 

we will agree to disagree.. with ONE exception..

 

blaming bad credit on the system is nothing but complete and total bs..

I had lots of credit cards..

I had a terrible car loan...

I suffered from that here buy a house you can't afford we will approve you situation..

 

but at the end of the day.. they are ALL my fault.. because I made the choice to agree to the terms.. and that is why I could not in good conscious file bankruptcy... I would file if I absolutely had no other financial choice.. but these are bills I chose to make.. just like anyone else.. and they are bills that should be paid..

 

people with bad credit have one person to blame.. and that is themselves..

 

but yes.. besides that we will definitely agree to disagree..

[Maksim 1,504]

For all the people bitchin....

 

START YOUR OWN BUSINESS if you do not like it. You do have that right.

 

But Vlad did just put this exactly right... it is a very slipper slope...

 

in NJ, if this passes we will not be able to see the way you are financially smart... next, you are right, we will not be able to ask for High school scores and college grades.

 

This is all heading to a Socialist economy... a job guaranteed for everyone.

 

Only when the government steps in and makes it a guarantee/law, it becomes an issue.

 

this is one piece of feel good legislation, just like One gun a month, that takes away your freedoms one at a time.

 

Here is my promise... if this POS legilation passes, I WILL NOT be hiring anyone in NJ, and will open the main office in PA. Considering NJ already has some of the highest business taxes, people want to tack on more garbage. Is it any surprise more and more companies are moving to PA and other free states?

 

Lets be totally honest... if it was not for small business owners taking the financial risk to start their own companies, growing their business, working 60 hours a week, PAYING YOU WAGES, for most people's mediocre work.... there would be no local economy, and the people complain about it.

 

If you are a good employee, you can rest assured you will always get your way. The biggest risk an employer has, is loosing good employees. They will do anything in their power to make you a happy employee and throw money your way if you pull your weight. If you are an employee who just complains all day and just wants a pitty party.... no law is going to protect you.

[vladtepes 1,060]

For all the people bitchin....

 

START YOUR OWN BUSINESS if you do not like it. You do have that right.

 

But Vlad did just put this exactly right... it is a very slipper slope...

 

in NJ, if this passes we will not be able to see the way you are financially smart... next, you are right, we will not be able to ask for High school scores and college grades.

 

This is all heading to a Socialist economy... a job guaranteed for everyone.

 

Only when the government steps in and makes it a guarantee/law, it becomes an issue.

 

this is one piece of feel good legislation, just like One gun a month, that takes away your freedoms one at a time.

 

Here is my promise... if this POS legilation passes, I WILL NOT be hiring anyone in NJ, and will open the main office in PA. Considering NJ already has some of the highest business taxes, people want to tack on more garbage. Is it any surprise more and more companies are moving to PA and other free states?

 

Lets be totally honest... if it was not for small business owners taking the financial risk to start their own companies, growing their business, working 60 hours a week, PAYING YOU WAGES, for most people's mediocre work.... there would be no local economy, and the people complain about it.

 

If you are a good employee, you can rest assured you will always get your way. The biggest risk an employer has, is loosing good employees. They will do anything in their power to make you a happy employee and throw money your way if you pull your weight. If you are an employee who just complains all day and just wants a pitty party.... no law is going to protect you.

 

people have NO idea what it takes.. I have been with this business from almost day one.. over a decade ago.. I put in 50+ hours a week for next to nothing at times to even make a business that can employ people.. while I am NOT the owner I have put a LOT into it.. and it is everything you are saying!

 

I worked my a** of for YEARS to get it going..... I offer XX amount a year to do XX job.. and require this this and that.. only to have the unions come in and say.. well no.. I don't like XX pay.. if you don't pay XXX we are going to make it REAL tough for you.. THEN the government comes in and says.. you can ask for this.. BUT NOT this and that..

 

at the end of the day.. if you make it MORE rewarding to be an EMPLOYEE the EMPLOYERS will close up shop and simply become EMPLOYEES...

 

and you know what happens then right?

[matty 810]

For all the people bitchin....

 

START YOUR OWN BUSINESS if you do not like it. You do have that right.

 

 

Lets be totally honest... if it was not for small business owners taking the financial risk to start their own companies, growing their business, working 60 hours a week, PAYING YOU WAGES, for most people's mediocre work.... there would be no local economy, and the people complain about it.

 

If you are a good employee, you can rest assured you will always get your way. The biggest risk an employer has, is loosing good employees. They will do anything in their power to make you a happy employee and throw money your way if you pull your weight. If you are an employee who just complains all day and just wants a pitty party.... no law is going to protect you.

 

+10^23, maks.

I got sick of the BS and sold the company I had for 9 years, and had started from NOTHING, but my credit cards, and willingness to sacrifice my time (nights, weekends, holidays, no savings, no retirement, no support or fallback, and no financial stability, didnt know if or when I would get paid, etc.). Try starting and running a business, as many on this forum do and are running now. I would bet the two sponsors of this bill have had long 'careers' as 'community organizers' before getting into the legislature, have never even been a private sector employee

[Malsua 1,422]

. Try starting and running a business

 

I did. 7 days a week, upwards of 80 hours a week for 4.5 years. I had sales in 1995 over $500,000 and I was hand to mouth, doing as much contract work on the side as I could to actually pay the bills. All my customers wanted to pay me net 30, all my vendors wanted COD cash. Eventually I had two part time(when I'd get big orders) employees and two partners to help with financing but I still took all the risk. I won't do it again if I can help it. It set me easily 30k in debt that didn't get paid off until 5 years after the company was long gone.

 

I understand that people want to fully vet employees. At some point a line has to be drawn. The reason this has become an issue is employers who are abusing it. They have a wide swath of applicants and just punt bad credit people straight out of the gate. I have a real big issue with that. I've known people that have struggled and I even took in a friend and her fiance for 8 months when they were out on the street due to circumstances out of their control. Their credit scores went into the toilet yet both were good, honest people who had to move because their house was ruled unlivable(sewage backed up into the house from the neighborhood). That led into a cascade of things when the company they worked sold and the new owners laid off everyone. No place to live, no income and now bad credit. Try climbing out of that hole.

 

Criminal background checks are important. Character is important. Credit worthiness is now a gateway for anything other than a "want fries with that" job? No thanks. It really doesn't matter anyway. HR folks will just circumvent the law and get what they want regardless.

[average joe 5]

Credit checks, Background checks, NICS checks, Body checks at airports. Are we giving up our rights to privacy ?

[vladtepes 1,060]

here is what is happening in this thread IMO...

 

people who generally HIRE people are going to support the rights of businesses

 

people who generally get hired are going to support the rights of the worker

 

 

the problem is when you allow your own gain to skew your perspective of right and wrong.. it is IMO wrong for a business to go slopping through your past looking for this that and the other.. this is why we as a business don't bother.. but it is far MORE of an issue to have the government tell a business what disqualifying factors they are allowed to use.. companies should literally be able to hire whoever they want.. only pretty people.. only smart people.. only financially responsible people.. all those people who cry unfair... well life is not always fair.. some people are born prettier.. smarter.. more athletic.. is it fair that Maks can't play professional football(not picking on you just saying.. lol)? what if he bitches and moans enough.. should he really be discriminated against based on the physical ability to play that god gave him? maybe the government should step in and FORCE the NFL to hire him.. to give him a fair shot.. it is an excessive stretch of an example just to prove a point.. maybe.. if you are investing your life savings into something.. it is a good idea to have a financial adviser who can manage something as simple as his own credit.. lol

 

and just to keep it in perspective.. last time I checked, the local union wasn't running credit applications.. these are certain specific (generally financial based) jobs that do so.. maybe more are catching on.. but I am pretty sure it is mostly financial based.. banks have been doing it for years..

[vladtepes 1,060]

Credit checks, Background checks, NICS checks, Body checks at airports. Are we giving up our rights to privacy ?

no one forces you to ride on a plane.. or work in a business that requires you to get a credit check done.. your right to privacy ends when it impacts others.. what about the rights to privacy a pedophile has.. maybe we should revoke Megan's law? there are plenty of situations where someones "privacy" may have grave impact on others.. and you can't even apply a "right to privacy" when discussing voluntary employment.. IMO...

[FFDP82 4]

people who generally HIRE people are going to support the rights of businesses

 

people who generally get hired are going to support the rights of the worker

 

 

ding ding ding

 

Exactly!

 

Now, here's the fun part, where democracy comes in. Are there more Chiefs, or Indians? More worker bees, or queens?

 

People love to justify this by "oh boy I'm the one who gives you a job" and you're right, without business owners there could be no employees. But here's what some people don't get - without employees, there are no business owners! I know "a poor man never wrote a paycheck" well guess what, the rich man probably his money with the help of a whole lot of poor people.

 

Cause it sure as hell ain't the stuffed suit in the fancy office full of football memorabilia that gets the work done

 

They have a wide swath of applicants and just punt bad credit people straight out of the gate. I have a real big issue with that. I've known people that have struggled and I even took in a friend and her fiance for 8 months when they were out on the street due to circumstances out of their control. Their credit scores went into the toilet yet both were good, honest people who had to move because their house was ruled unlivable(sewage backed up into the house from the neighborhood). That led into a cascade of things when the company they worked sold and the new owners laid off everyone. No place to live, no income and now bad credit. Try climbing out of that hole.

 

Thank you, well said.

[vladtepes 1,060]

ding ding ding

 

Exactly!

 

Now, here's the fun part, where democracy comes in. Are there more Chiefs, or Indians? More worker bees, or queens?

 

People love to justify this by "oh boy I'm the one who gives you a job" and you're right, without business owners there could be no employees. But here's what some people don't get - without employees, there are no business owners! I know "a poor man never wrote a paycheck" well guess what, the rich man probably his money with the help of a whole lot of poor people.

 

Cause it sure as hell ain't the stuffed suit in the fancy office full of football memorabilia that gets the work done

 

 

 

Thank you, well said.

 

the problem with that mentality is you are completely ignoring the work that it takes to start the business.. NO business owner will tell you his staff is useless... NO business owner will tell you that he could do everything himself.. that is not the point.. the point is supply and demand.. if YOU don't want to submit to a credit check.. there are a hundred guys behind you willing to.. look at the current economic climate... who is holding the upper hand? the guy giving the jobs out.. or the guy looking.. fair is fair.. he built the business.... he took the risk.. he should be able to hire whoever the hell he wants.. that is part of molding YOUR business to be what YOU want it to be.. these are the people that represent YOU..

[FFDP82 4]

the point is supply and demand.. if YOU don't want to submit to a credit check.. there are a hundred guys behind you willing to.. l

 

Not if the government makes that practice illegal

 

the problem with that mentality is you are completely ignoring the work that it takes to start the business..

 

yeah, kudos to him. It's really hard to start a business and I'm glad he did and succeeded. Especially since without him I wouldn't have a job. But like I said, let's be honest here. Once he's got the business started, who's getting the work done? The two dozen guys driving the trucks or the dude sitting back in his office playing fantasy football? It's a mutual relationship, you see. He needs his employees as much as they need him.

 

The working man generates the revenue and gets paid like crap (the average CEO salary is 531x the base level employee, compared to 231x base level employee in 1980) and there is really no justification for that. If he's gonna reap the rewards of huge salary versus his "peons" then it's all well and good they at least secure basic benefits like pensions, health insurance, ethical hiring/firing, etc.

 

And since he probably isn't gonna play nice and do all that out of the goodness of his heart....well, that's where democracy comes in handy.

[GoNRA 12]

I guess I don't like change, cause credit checks were never around a while ago. Hell for the most part I think it was unheard of, for a business to butt into your life. A company I worked for asked that I sign something when they requested I do something in my own home, I denied to sign it, and I will never mix work with my personal life. I may work for you, but you ain't telling me what I can and can't do while not working.

[Maksim 1,504]

I am really enjoying this thread, a lively discussion.

 

Chris, no one is saying anything about what the employees do in their downtime.

 

FF, lets not assume... the whole "company is run by truck drivers, and the managers sit and play poker online" thing is completely biased and worthless. There is as much corporate waste everywhere, from the Verizon drivers who go learn to reload on the job, , to people doing personal shopping online on the clock. There are good employees and bad employees. Much like bosses and owners who appreciate good employees and those that dont.... and bad employers will often lose great employees to competition.

 

For me, this is not even an issue of employee's personal credit worthiness, but more to the point that the government is intruding more and more into business. the same blindfolds the feds had on when forcing banks to give mortgages to folks that would not qualify, now they want us to hire people with less and less evaluation of the employees. Then, they keep increasing taxes on top of it all. In the near point, it will soon be better to be an employee than an employer... or better yet, become unemployed and collect unemployment.

[flank 12]

Workplace Democracy! All employees will have equal ownership/rights of the company. Then all useless board members and all other pointless big boys and whoever else has like 30x avg employee salary are no longer needed, that way all employee's will have a chance to decide what is best for the company and share profits equally rather than have big fat-cats doing whatever is necessary(lay offs/increasing employee's expected work without a raise) just to get themselves another pay raise/bonus.

[vladtepes 1,060]

Workplace Democracy communism! All employees will have equal ownership/rights of the company. Then all useless board members and all other pointless big boys and whoever else has like 30x avg employee salary are no longer needed, that way all employee's will have a chance to decide what is best for the company and share profits equally rather than have big fat-cats doing whatever is necessary(lay offs/increasing employee's expected work without a raise) just to get themselves another pay raise/bonus.

 

 

if YOU want to run a business like that.. go for it... the people who work for me could not possibly make the same decisions I do.. not because they are stupid, but because they lack experience.... but hey.. if YOU want to build a business where the guy doing all the buying is making the same as the guy sweeping the parking lot you most certainly can.. hmm... everyone working different jobs.. but reaping the same benefits.. hmmmm.. sounds familiar... almost like the way they try to run some of those "other" countries..

 

getting big money at the top rewards those who work hard... if I can sweep the hospital floor but make the same as the guy doing the heart transplant.. WHY THE HELL would I bother exerting ANY effort..

 

equal rewards for those working not as hard removes the drive to succeed..