Ouch, but if you were a business owner hiring a new employee and saw they had a toxic lending history, wouldn't you question their character?

Or do people think fiscal responsibility is something people shouldn't strive for?

Isn't company is legally required to provide him with name of the credit agency that the company used? And he is allowed to get free reports?

That said it looks like the guy wanted a job at an "investment company" which means money and is a little more related to credit than say managing a tire distribution warehouse.

I can't imagine that the whole idea of running people's credit for everything under the sun will last too long with the current state of consumer credit. What happens when these recruiters find out a year from know when most peoples credit scores are low? Even people with good credit histories are getting lines of credit closed and scores affected.

I'm glad that a lot of automobile insurance companies are shying away from using credit scores. To me, that's an easy way for insurance companies to fleece the poor.

It might have had to do with the type of job he was applying for. A desperate person might also steal money or do other unscrupulous things as well.

"Seems odd to reject people just because they have bad credit."

I'm not defending the practice, but I think the reason usually given is that if someone can't manage their own finances/household, then how can they be trusted to perform their job duties? (Or something along those lines.)

I think the reasoning is entirely B.S. in most cases. I'm sure some people just can't handle any responsibility (whether at work or at home), but I don't think those people would have made it far enough in any ordinary interview process that you would need to use a credit report to weed them out.

There's no clear correlation between credit history and job performance, according to a 2003 study by Eastern Kentucky University.

I think that pretty much answers the question right there.

@TCama: Yes, because we should all take one study as the god's honest truth in the matter...

It is actually against federal law to not hire someone because they have filed for bankruptcy protection; but with that being said the employer will probably just claim they did not hire him because of his overall credit report and not the bankruptcy in particular.

@dreamsneverend:
well,I can tell you my husband is personally a financial mess. I handle all our money. However, he is an ace at work and has a long and positive work history. I, on the other hand, am very responsible with our household money and yet I suck at keeping jobs. I think it's complete bunk to check an applicant's credit report unless perhaps they are directly handling money. PERHAPS. I just don't think there's much correlation.

Due to a couple of minor emergencies, coupled with a furlough and some admittedly poor financial choices in the last 6 months my credit ration is pretty gruesome. Now I'm looking for a job and quite worried

@dreamsneverend: financial responsibility is definitely something to strive for but i'd hate to think of my character largely being asses by my credit

@econobiker: Consumerist really needs to start including key facts like this. For most positions, this would be a blemish that they might overlook and possibly even agree with Denton that he would be more likely to hold on to the job. It really only cuts the other way when the employee is going to handle large sums of money. Even then, given layoffs and horrid job markets, I would think less employers would look down on this.

@steveliv: Well, one side has a study. The other side has prejudice and untested, unproven assumptions.

Because we should all take prejudice and assumptions as the god's honest truth in the matter ...

@puddinhead: keep in mind, that not everyone has someone else to handle the finances. the recruiters don't know that, perhaps that topic should be brought up during the interview...

The federal government runs extensive personal and financial checks on people. It's part of the process of employment if you want to work for government. They want to make sure that no one can approach you on the street and say, "I know you're about to lose your house. I can help you out," in exchange for information. We're not perfect - even very moral people, faced with desperate situations, may resort to desperate acts.

If you are doing something related to government, security, finances, etc. then it makes sense for companies to run credit checks and reject you based on perceived liability.

But the issue here is that they have to get permission and they have to inform you that they have rejected you precisely because of your credit report. If they don't do either, it's shady.

@Matt Von Tungeln:

This scares the hell out of me. I filed alone (long story; I went on a manic spending spree while very mentally ill before a hospitalization and medication brought me back to sanity) and it would be horrible if my husband (who has a MBA and 15 years experience) was turned down for a good job because of the mistakes I made. His credit is excellent.

@dreamsneverend: I think the issue here is not people who have been blatantly irresponsible...but people who are victims of a poor economy, who have been hit hard by poor home prices and worsening markets and have been laid off. No paychecks means you depend more and more on savings or credit to get by.

@edwardso: ha! assessed

@steveliv: Somehow, I think they'll feel less desperate when hired. Just a guess.

Its fairly obvious from the recent Wells Fargo fiasco that there is a core belief that there are racial connotations that can be inferred by ones credit report. By extension, the "credit check" for a potential employee might be construed as a way of weeding out certain races from the applicant pool. As wrong as it is, 5 gets you 10, that is what is happening frequently, and disgustingly.

@dreamsneverend:

I don't think I want to work anywhere where my credit history is linked to my employment in any way.

The majority of bankruptcies in the country are tied to medical expenses, so that doesn't seem to be a reasonable basis to discriminate on hiring - especially since access to healthcare it not available to all in our country.

And as others have noted, your credit score can decline through no actions of your own, so basically American Express has the ability to prevent you from getting a job (we're going to cut your limit to below your current balance, charge you overlimit fees and jack your interest rate and monthly payment. Your credit utilization will skyrocket so your credit score will plummet).

The new credit card bill will only partly remedy this.

@TCama: i think it is a bit disingenuous to say that because a side or opinion doesn't have a study that automatically makes it based on prejudice and assumptions.

It might make him desperate to hang onto the job, but it might also make him desperate for money in general, which puts things like bribery into the realm of possibility.

i really REALLY want to do some research on correlations to credit scores and taking bribes or stealing from your workplace (i'm not talking about a stapler or pens here).. because from the outside.. it seems like a lot of the people in jail for white collar crimes.. were pretty rich

I really think this practice should be abolished. It's an invasion of privacy, and while I think some connection can be made between really bad credit and poor responsibility, it still seems like too much of a stretch to rely on something like this as a predictive tool for how someone's going to do on the job.

I mean, I'm sure Bernie Madoff's credit was fantastic.

@dreamsneverend: It's easy to talk about being fiscally responsible. But when you've been unemployed for months then what would you expect your credit score to look like?

@steveliv: So what does it have?

@HRHKingFridayXX: "you're clearly in a tough financial situation. Sorry we can't hire you, you need the money too badly"

@HRHKingFridayXX: It all depends, no? If you still couldn't pay the bills even with the job, I'd think it'd make you more desperate.

The most common reason secuirty clearances are rejected is because the applicant has poor credit. It has nothing to do with their job performance, they're just more likely to sell info.

@steveliv: Yeah, an important detail was left out. From the article: "Recruiters from a St. Louis-based investment company recently rescinded an offer after looking at his credit history"

Investment company=handling money. For that type of job, this comes as no surprise.

@thebluepill: it is possible that could be happening, but it the credit report wouldn't be a really good source of determining race. it's more likely the job application or interview would be where it was occurring.

@TCama: As many have said, its not about performance its about security. Who is more likely to steal or sell company, or worse national security, information, the guy with zero debt or the guy with $100k in credit card debt?

@Knippschild: He was applying for a job at an investment firm too-that makes this perfectly reasonable to me.

I agree that an unemployed job applicant might be hungrier/more motivated but that's any unemployed applicant as well-especially if everything else checks out . But there are alot of employers out in good times an bad that only want to hire someone coming from another job .

I think all these HR types are trying to profile potential employees in order to find the idea candidate-yeah in your dreams . I've seen too many companies where they are offering nothing more than a JOB but they are treating it like a career oppurtunity . What puzzles me is that they leave the opening for months on end looking of rhe ideal candidate .

As far as talking about someone's credit history and/or finances THAT's another story . I think many feel that a person in desperate financial need might be someone open to stealing , lying or simply hopping to the next higher paying job they can get . It still all comes back to profiling applicants for the ideal candidate .

I must say though if I was hiring a for a handle money and/or budget related position I would give someone with a bad credit history a second look . I wouldn't expect a perfect score but I don't think I would hire a CFO if their credit score was 500 .

I can't believe I'm going to tie this to my Facebook account:

I was denied seasonal employment by Radioshack - RADIOSHACK - due to my credit score. I subsequently filed for Chapter 7 sometime later when I had no other choice. It makes me extremely mad that I can ACE an interview and be considered a nice seasonal pick-up by the hiring managers and essentially be given a schedule only to find out days later that I'm not fit for the job because I was behind on bills.

Being financially stressed motivated me to want to work as many hours as I possibly could, not steal and do 5-10 for theft. Where would that leave my family?

@pecan 3.14159265:

I've known some people who have had background checks and interviews for positions with the FBI/CIA and this is exactly what they look for. They don't care, necessarily, about whether you go out at night dressed as a transvestite and deep throat wifflebats for entertainment. They care if it's something hidden that you could possibly expose yourself to blackmail over. It's just like why they usually don't take closeted homoseuxals. There's notta wrong from their POV for someone who's gay and out, but gay and in the closet could be used as blackmail.

I have no problem with this, in fact I've seen worse. One of my coworkers was fired for fucking up our fantasy baseball auction. The thought process was, if you can't count to 260, you can't manage our IT department.

@dreamsneverend: Absolutely something to strive for. However, to simply pull the offer without giving Dan an opportunity to explain himself bothers me a bit. Also, I think you need to be a bit more lenient in these times. There are a lot of people who have been out of work for a while. Even fiscally responsible people are hurting.

@thebluepill:

I think there are easier ways to do that. Having an interview and looking at the person is a good start. Why the fuck would you depend on a credit report to figure out someone's race? You would want to interview anyway before hiring.

@HIV 2 Elway: I'd assume (because I haven't read the study) that security is part of job performance, considering the fact that selling company information is a pretty bad thing to do, job-wise.

I just don't see how you can jump from bad credit to selling company secrets or something along those lines. Bad credit can mean any number of things ... selling company secrets is not one of them.

I don't see anything wrong with this. Just like a criminal record tells you something about the person, so a horrible credit report is an indicator as to how a person generally manages their money.

If I employed people, I'd want to know things like this. In fact, I'd want to know about their family history, their character, their finances... anything and everything that could/would affect their performance on the job. Above all, I'd want to know if they are trustworthy. A credit report is just one small litmus test, and I would certainly use it.

@thebluepill: In the case of the Wells Fargo fiasco, people were given subprime loans regardless of their credit history. Affluent people were given subprime loans as well as poor people. It was a judgment based on race, assessed by the loan officer and Wells Fargo.

In a case such as running credit history for employment, I think it's the credit report that speaks for you personally, not your race. I don't think that Equal Opportunity Employment means everyone abides by it all the time, and it is naive to think that EOE means everyone gets a fair shot. But I don't think it means that all employers are only looking for X race.

@HRHKingFridayXX:

I dunno why The Consumerist does things like this either. Normally I'd just chalk it up to an oversight, but it happens too often. Most of the times the information is easily available too.

I mean, do they really think it's not relevant what sort of job the guy was applying for? Or maybe they figure it just looks better presented like this with information missing? Or maybe it is just a simple bit of oversight. I would hope that regardless of the reasons, once it's pointed out an edit could be made though.

@dreamsneverend: It depends. Does the job involve handling money or managing a budget? If so, then yes, I want my employee to have a decent credit history.

OTOH, are they painting murals? writing database code? installing cabinetry? pulling a rickshaw? Nope, don't care at all.

@econobiker: I doubt it. Yes.

It's generally financially-minded jobs that run credit reports on potential new hires. Desperation can lead one to hold onto a job more tightly, and can also lead one to steal/embezzle. If you're applying for this kind of job, it's expected that you'll be scrutinized differently than if you wanted a job where no money was involved except your paycheck.

@HIV 2 Elway: The answer to that question depends on multiple factors, including greed, thrill-seeking, desperation, mental health and probably a ton of other things that I can't think of.

@TCama: There is more of a temptation to sell secrets if one has mountains of debt. That's the thought process, if that is right or wrong is up to debate. As for me, I side with the US Government and think its a fair screen to use.