25 years old and deep in debt

[merithyn]

Consumer advocates say that there is little evidence for the industry's claims of a connection between a credit report and an employee's trustworthiness. One study published in 2008 in the International Journal of Selection and Assessment suggested a correlation between a person's financial history and workplace theft. But a 2011 study in the Journal of Applied Psychology found no link between a person's credit score and what it called "deviant" behavior like workplace theft. (It did, however, find a correlation between a low credit score and an agreeable personality.)

Critics also have the testimony of the TransUnion official who told the Oregon Legislature in 2010, "We don't have any research to show any statistical correlation between what's in somebody's credit report and their job performance or their likelihood to commit fraud."

"As a researcher, I'd like to think that if about half of all employers are doing this, they must have some real evidence that it's valuable," said Ms. Traub of Demos. "But in this case that evidence is really lacking."

Evidence is lacking that this is indicative of negative traits in the individual, and yet it's keeping hundreds of people out of work. How do companies justify this?

[CountDeMoney]

Evidence is lacking that this is indicative of negative traits in the individual, and yet it's keeping hundreds of people out of work. How do companies justify this?

Pretty easily.

[HVC]

A company can hire who they want and credit worthiness (or lack thereof) isn't a protected class.

Although I do highly agree that it sucks. If you're unemployed long enough eventually your credit is going to take a hit. It's another filter that hits those who have been unemployed the longest. Not only do you have a resume gap you have to explain now you have to hope no one checks your credit score. 

[Berkut]

Employers discriminate against employees for a variety of reasons that there isn't any verifiable evidence that there is any link to the category and their job performance.

Hell, we've made fun of applicants on Languish who check their cell phone messages in interviews, or don't know hot to tie a tie properly. Is there some peer reviewed journal article somewhere linking tie tying ability to job performance?

You don't need "evidence" of that manner to draw conclusions about people. You may not draw accurate conclusions, but that happens all the time. If companies want to hire good people, they will try their best to make rational evaluations about them.

Personally, I could imagine using someone's credit score as a data point in how they manage their finances and such. Not really definitive, of course, and it would depend on the job.

But there isn't anything especially egregious about this "soft" variable in the hiring process compared to many others.

[CountDeMoney]

When I went to get my auto loan a couple years ago, the finance guy at the dealership said I had no beacon score when he ran my report.  Nothing.  Nada.
He said the only people he sees in that situation are either people from the NSA, or people who've been serving time in prison. 

Nothing at all, simply because I don't play the revolving debt game.  I've got my mortgage and my car payment, and that's it.  It's not that I have bad credit, I simply have no real credit metrics on my report at all.
Ergo, my credit report rating suffers accordingly.

[merithyn]

Nothing at all, simply because I don't play the revolving debt game.  I've got my mortgage and my car payment, and that's it.  It's not that I have bad credit, I simply have no real credit metrics on my report at all.
Ergo, my credit report rating suffers accordingly.

I got my first credit card in 15 years a few months ago. I hate the damn things, but I needed something to offset the medical bills on my credit report. Now, we have a car payment, too, something we've also avoided for the past 10 years by paying cash.

Whatever you do, don't get sick when you're unemployed. You'll never get another job again.

[merithyn]

Employers discriminate against employees for a variety of reasons that there isn't any verifiable evidence that there is any link to the category and their job performance.

Hell, we've made fun of applicants on Languish who check their cell phone messages in interviews, or don't know hot to tie a tie properly. Is there some peer reviewed journal article somewhere linking tie tying ability to job performance?

You don't need "evidence" of that manner to draw conclusions about people. You may not draw accurate conclusions, but that happens all the time. If companies want to hire good people, they will try their best to make rational evaluations about them.

Personally, I could imagine using someone's credit score as a data point in how they manage their finances and such. Not really definitive, of course, and it would depend on the job.

But there isn't anything especially egregious about this "soft" variable in the hiring process compared to many others.

I think it's a quick way to "weed" through people, which hurts those who need the job the most. Ultimately, I would guess that those who need the job the most are going to be your best employees because, well fuck, they don't want to be back out there again.

But whatever.

[HVC]

Get a CC with a relatively high limit, buy a dinky purchase one a month, pay it off on time, and since you'll have a bunch of unused credit you'll inflate your credit score in no time. Game the system

[CountDeMoney]

Get a CC with a relatively high limit, buy a dinky purchase one a month, pay it off on time, and since you'll have a bunch of unused credit you'll inflate your credit score in no time. Game the system

No.

[Berkut]

Employers discriminate against employees for a variety of reasons that there isn't any verifiable evidence that there is any link to the category and their job performance.

Hell, we've made fun of applicants on Languish who check their cell phone messages in interviews, or don't know hot to tie a tie properly. Is there some peer reviewed journal article somewhere linking tie tying ability to job performance?

You don't need "evidence" of that manner to draw conclusions about people. You may not draw accurate conclusions, but that happens all the time. If companies want to hire good people, they will try their best to make rational evaluations about them.

Personally, I could imagine using someone's credit score as a data point in how they manage their finances and such. Not really definitive, of course, and it would depend on the job.

But there isn't anything especially egregious about this "soft" variable in the hiring process compared to many others.

I think it's a quick way to "weed" through people, which hurts those who need the job the most. Ultimately, I would guess that those who need the job the most are going to be your best employees because, well fuck, they don't want to be back out there again.

But whatever.

ACtually, I bet statistically people who "need the job the most" are not your best employees. People who need the job the most are probably people who have trouble keeping a job. And those are most definitely NOT your best employees, for the most part.

In fact, the best employees, as a group, are probably those who don't need THIS job at all, because they already have a job.

[CountDeMoney]

Whatever you do, don't get sick when you're unemployed. You'll never get another job again.

Oh, I know...my doctor wanted me to consider going on medical disability last year.  I said there was no way in hell I was going to do that.  God Bless America.

[HVC]

Get a CC with a relatively high limit, buy a dinky purchase one a month, pay it off on time, and since you'll have a bunch of unused credit you'll inflate your credit score in no time. Game the system

No.

you're so contrarian

[CountDeMoney]

It's not a matter of being contrarian;  I simply see no reason why I should join the debt game and I will not pay to use someone else's money any more than I already am for a mortgage and a car payment.
Aquinas and Aristotle certainly wouldn't have credit cards today, either.  What with them being dead and all, but still.

[Berkut]

You don't have to pay a cent for using someone else's money.

You can see "no reason" even after you mentioned that you have no credit rating and this has been a problem?

Sounds a lot like being contrarian to me.

[CountDeMoney]

OK, so maybe it's a wee bit contrarian. By I have my reasons, and they are valid.

And I have a credit rating.  It's in the "Fair" category.