• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Quinn signs bill limiting employment credit checks

Bad credit is a risk factor to an employer. People with bad credit are statistically more prone to theft of material goods, or deceptive character. It is not to say that everyone that has bad credit will steal, nor is it to suggest that people with bad credit are always deceptive, but it does correlate statistically.


Tim-

You sir, are denying ME of a job. I am the BEST employee you could EVER have... yet you look at my PERSONAL information and determine something OTHER? And BY THE WAY..... your statistics come from a 2003 survey. And even THAT isnt accurate!!!!!! :2mad:
 
Last edited:
You sir, are denying ME of a job. I am the BEST employee you could EVER have... yet you look at my PERSONAL information and determine something OTHER? And BY THE WAY..... your statistics come from a 2003 survey. And even THAT isnt accurate!!!!!! :2mad:

Nobody determines anything. You lack reading skills. Read what I wrote. I went out of my way to iterate that the correaltion does not mean all will do this, or all will do that, only that many will. As many enough to cause a risk factor to the company. Think of it this way. If you as the employer are in demand of employees, and there are a vast number of applicants, and you use any number of deciding criteria between one employee over the next. One of them might be the correlation between those with bad credit score, and those without. All else being equal between the two candidates, you analyze their bad credit scores. You as the employer are free to decide from there.

What would you decide?


Tim-
 
Nobody determines anything. You lack reading skills. Read what I wrote. I went out of my way to iterate that the correaltion does not mean all will do this, or all will do that, only that many will. As many enough to cause a risk factor to the company. Think of it this way. If you as the employer are in demand of employees, and there are a vast number of applicants, and you use any number of deciding criteria between one employee over the next. One of them might be the correlation between those with bad credit score, and those without. All else being equal between the two candidates, you analyze their bad credit scores. You as the employer are free to decide from there.

What would you decide?


Tim-

Youre lacking a brain! And your mother is a watermellon!
 
You sir, are denying ME of a job.
You are not entitled to any particular job. I don't care who you work for except, if you can't pass our background check, you would not work for our company.

I am the BEST employee you could EVER have...
That might be your opinion but, guess what, the employer get to decide who is best qualified for the job they need done.


yet you look at my PERSONAL information and determine something OTHER? And BY THE WAY
..... :2mad:
The employer gets to decide the qualifications they require, as long as they don't desciminate against a protested class.

Deadbeats are not yet a protected class..... except in IL.

.
 
Sure, you can ask.

.
I didnt ask if I could ask. I asked if you'd care to share what you usually hire people to do and what business you work for or run
 
I didnt ask if I could ask. I asked if you'd care to share what you usually hire people to do and what business you work for or run

It's irrelvant? What is the relevance?

Tim-
 
It's irrelvant? What is the relevance?
It makes a difference. If you are running credit checks on your janitors or mailroom clerks, that I would consider a bit excessive and a form of economic discrimination as neither party is in a position where their job brings them into situations where poor spending habits or personal financial irresponsibility (if that is the cause of their low credit) would be a problem.

However if you're hiring for something like a director of operations or a financial accounts manager, I could see the argument for wanting to do credit checks.
 
I didnt ask if I could ask. I asked if you'd care to share what you usually hire people to do and what business you work for or run
Just for you, Sweetie.

We provide proprietary technical products and services. Almost all of our people have degrees, mostly engineering. A significant portion have advanced degrees.


.
 
Just for you, Sweetie.

We provide proprietary technical products and services. Almost all of our people have degrees, mostly engineering. A significant portion have advanced degrees.
For that line of work and pay grade, I'm more inclined to agree that credit checks should be allowed but I still think someone should be able to refuse the credit check and not have it impact their employment status.
 
The employer gets to decide the qualifications they require, as long as they don't desciminate against a protested class.

Deadbeats are not yet a protected class..... except in IL.

.

:shock: Strong is ignorance is with this one. :roll:
 
Bad credit is a risk factor to an employer. People with bad credit are statistically more prone to theft of material goods, or deceptive character. It is not to say that everyone that has bad credit will steal, nor is it to suggest that people with bad credit are always deceptive, but it does correlate statistically.


Tim-

Good point!

I would like to point out that working in law enforcement, you have to have good credit in order to get a job. Those with bad credit or other serious financial problems are more prone to accepting bribes, or stealing items from a store that has already been broken into before you contact the owners to determine if any theft has occurred.

There are reasons for these sorts of things.
 
Good point!

I would like to point out that working in law enforcement, you have to have good credit in order to get a job. Those with bad credit or other serious financial problems are more prone to accepting bribes, or stealing items from a store that has already been broken into before you contact the owners to determine if any theft has occurred.

There are reasons for these sorts of things.

Just like Muslims are more prone to blowing **** up. But you shouldnt discriminate in either case. Dog people are more likely to have anger management problems. :roll: Should they be able to ask what pets you have because of most likely, flawed statistics???? HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Good point!

I would like to point out that working in law enforcement, you have to have good credit in order to get a job. Those with bad credit or other serious financial problems are more prone to accepting bribes, or stealing items from a store that has already been broken into before you contact the owners to determine if any theft has occurred.

There are reasons for these sorts of things.
That doesnt seem like a good reason to deny someone employment as a police officer and sounds like discrimination based on economic situation. Your credit rating is not a reflection of your moral character.

If you want to use an arbitrary rating of how the market feels regarding your spending habits, you could also say that someone with a good credit rating would be a bad police officer because they'd be too unwilling to take risks necessary to do their job well.

If it sounds ridiculous flipped around then chances are good it's pretty ridiculous no matter what angle you come at it.

Credit ratings are NOT to be confused with the morality system of a Bioware game
 
:shock: Strong is ignorance is with this one. :roll:

Merriam-Webster said:
Main Entry: dead·beat
Pronunciation: \ˈded-ˌbēt\
Function: noun
Date: 1863
1 : loafer
2 : one who persistently fails to pay personal debts or expenses

Seems ignorance is strong in the Noodle. If the shoe fits, wear it. :doh

.
 
Seems ignorance is strong in the Noodle. If the shoe fits, wear it. :doh

.
Unless the shoe is hastily cast.

A low credit score does not necessarily indicate someone is irresponsible or shirks financial responsibility
 
That doesnt seem like a good reason to deny someone employment as a police officer and sounds like discrimination based on economic situation. Your credit rating is not a reflection of your moral character.

If you want to use an arbitrary rating of how the market feels regarding your spending habits, you could also say that someone with a good credit rating would be a bad police officer because they'd be too unwilling to take risks necessary to do their job well.

If it sounds ridiculous flipped around then chances are good it's pretty ridiculous no matter what angle you come at it.

Credit ratings are NOT to be confused with the morality system of a Bioware game

You don't have to take personal financial risks in order to be a police officer. Its not a good comparison your trying to use.

However, one can use their position as an officer to fix their personal financial problems.
 
Unless the shoe is hastily cast.

A low credit score does not necessarily indicate someone is irresponsible or shirks financial responsibility
It is a very good indicator.

Should banks or mortgage companies not be able to check credit before loaning money? I would never want to hire someone that was not worthy of a loan.

.
 
Just like Muslims are more prone to blowing **** up. But you shouldnt discriminate in either case. Dog people are more likely to have anger management problems. :roll: Should they be able to ask what pets you have because of most likely, flawed statistics???? HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So let me get this straight....

The public both wants cities employing police officers to do thorough background checks and make damn certain that they do not hire someone into a position of authority that will abuse said position or act irresponsibly...
But...
At the same time, we can't discriminate against someone who has a very bad financial record as an indicator that said person might be more inclined to abuse their power for their own financial gain.

I don't get "the public" I seriously don't......
 
First I just got to say TOJ WAY TO GO. You seem like the kind of guy that loves ****ting on people. I can relate.

Anyways, they should just make this an national law.
 
First I just got to say TOJ WAY TO GO. You seem like the kind of guy that loves ****ting on people. I can relate.

Anyways, they should just make this an national law.

National Law? Centrist? I think not.

We need less government not more.

States aren't going to matter anymore if people keep thinking like you do.
 
National Law? Centrist? I think not.

We need less government not more.

States aren't going to matter anymore if people keep thinking like you do.

Good contribution to the discussion.
 
Moderator's Warning:
The Giant Noodle is now banned from this thread. Any future posts by him here will result in increased infraction points for each post.
 
Banning the original thread starter...that's pretty brutal.
 
Back
Top Bottom