5 ms·
If you're hiring someone who would have access to valuable information that could be sold, who would have information before the market, or who could potentiall
by kingbirdy 8y ago
If you're hiring someone who would have access to valuable information that could be sold, who would have information before the market, or who could potentially be paid to sabotage the company, it's important to ensure the candidate has good credit so they're less likely to do those things, since they at least wouldn't feel a financial pressure to do so and would only do it out of greed.
- aaomidi 8y agoIs there direct evidence this is true or is it just a "common sense" thing that makes sense but might very well be false?
- Kalium 8y agoBefore I or others go looking for such, what would you consider an acceptable standard of direct evidence?
- aaomidi 8y agoI honestly don't have an opinion on it. It just seems something that's repeated and accepted often and I'm being skeptical is all. I will probably look into it myself too! So whatever you can add to the discussion is great :)
- kingbirdy 8y agoDo you mean evidence as to whether people with lower credit are likely to do such things against the company's interest? If so, I'm not sure. I just know it's something that is considered for govt purposes re: security clearances and that logic seems to carry over to private sector.
- taormina 8y agoI feel like "compensate them appropriately" should be the actual solution to this problem.....
- munk-a 8y agoThere are real enforceable legal salves you can take for these purposes included targeted NDAs (as opposed to the less enforceable "Don't talk about our stuff") that makes it really easy to prove wrong doings - additionally there are forms of business insurance out there to cover the short term sudden costs of corporate espionage/sabotage. Basically, trusting in the person to be trustworthy because equifax is giving you a big thumbs up with a stupid grin on their face is a stupid idea. Just set up protections for your company, properly utilize the practice of minimum access and call it a day.
- modernthumb 8y agoCredit scores aren't an indicator for morals. Do you really have so much faith in the current credit system that you'd be willing to turn someone from a job they're otherwise qualified. The argument could be totally flipped on it's head. It's important to hire someone with a bad credit score (using it as a measure of wealth apparently) because they will value their job more and not do anything to risk losing it.
- kingbirdy 8y agoI didn't say credit scores are an indicator for morals or wealth, or that they're a system I support. But bad debt is a possible incentive to act against your employer's interest that can be controlled against by using credit score as proxy for knowing their exact financials. I'm not saying that's fair, or good, just that that's the thought process behind it.