4 ms·

Background checks are routine in the industry, and they often include a credit report. So it's not just Google, but at least all the big ones.

k1t 3y ago
There is a huge difference between an employer looking at your credit report and an employer reading your bank statements.
makeitdouble 3y ago
Wait, you could have a candidate refused because they have too much debt to repay ? That feels wild.
- compiler-guy 3y ago
  That is a big step from what I said. Google does a background check, which includes a credit report. But there is no evidence that I know of that too much debt would be a reason to be refused. Things that can cause refusal that I know of include lying about your degree.
  - makeitdouble 3y ago
    I understand you're not implying misuse by Google, I just have a hard time seeing what legit info a company that's supposed to pay you gets from a credit history check. Up until now I only ever heard of this kind of check for military and national security adjacent positions, not done as a routine for generic positions.
- PeterisP 3y ago
  It would mostly be impacted not by having a large mortgage, but by having missing payments or insolvency; and that is considered to imply that the person is 'more risky' in other ways as well.
  - withinboredom 3y ago
    Yep, getting into a hospital bed because someone ran a red-light, with bills you'll never be able to pay back (and probably made no payments on while you were out of work) is defacto 'more risky' than someone who doesn't have infinite medical bills. Been there, done that. Took 12 years to "fix".
    - PeterisP 3y ago
      Having medical bills you can't pay does sometimes motivate people to do desperate things that are not in the interests of their employer. There are exaggerated tropes in Hollywood like Breaking Bad, however, all kinds of real risks do rise if the employee has significant debts that they can't pay - issues ranging from motivation to internal fraud or being unable to focus on work because their car or house gets repossesed or even suicide - all these things are more likely if the employee has significant financial problems, and so it's in the best interests of a cynical employer to ensure that they don't hire candidates with financial problems, unless they intend to abuse their desperation to have horrible conditions since the employee can't afford to quit.
      - withinboredom 3y ago
        Do people really believe that? Maybe some people care about paying bills on time and will go balls-to-the-wall to make that happen. Not me, I learned to realize 'you get paid when I get paid, so fuck off.' Now, if we entered into a debt together, you know, with a contract. I always pay on time, but if you just show up saying I owe you money with the power to put it on my credit report ... fuck off. I don't think there is actually any science behind what you (or they) are saying, but I could be wrong (I didn't find anything definitive on Google Scholar, but I might be searching for the wrong thing) -- this smells like "it's the status-quo, so why question it."
- briHass 3y ago
  Pretty much a standard in Finance-related work. The thinking being that being in debt not only makes you more likely to commit fraud/theft, but also that it makes you easier to influence/corrupt/blackmail.

k1t 3y ago

There is a huge difference between an employer looking at your credit report and an employer reading your bank statements.

makeitdouble 3y ago

Wait, you could have a candidate refused because they have too much debt to repay ? That feels wild.

compiler-guy 3y ago
That is a big step from what I said. Google does a background check, which includes a credit report. But there is no evidence that I know of that too much debt would be a reason to be refused. Things that can cause refusal that I know of include lying about your degree.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  I understand you're not implying misuse by Google, I just have a hard time seeing what legit info a company that's supposed to pay you gets from a credit history check. Up until now I only ever heard of this kind of check for military and national security adjacent positions, not done as a routine for generic positions.
PeterisP 3y ago
It would mostly be impacted not by having a large mortgage, but by having missing payments or insolvency; and that is considered to imply that the person is 'more risky' in other ways as well.
- withinboredom 3y ago
  Yep, getting into a hospital bed because someone ran a red-light, with bills you'll never be able to pay back (and probably made no payments on while you were out of work) is defacto 'more risky' than someone who doesn't have infinite medical bills. Been there, done that. Took 12 years to "fix".
  - PeterisP 3y ago
    Having medical bills you can't pay does sometimes motivate people to do desperate things that are not in the interests of their employer. There are exaggerated tropes in Hollywood like Breaking Bad, however, all kinds of real risks do rise if the employee has significant debts that they can't pay - issues ranging from motivation to internal fraud or being unable to focus on work because their car or house gets repossesed or even suicide - all these things are more likely if the employee has significant financial problems, and so it's in the best interests of a cynical employer to ensure that they don't hire candidates with financial problems, unless they intend to abuse their desperation to have horrible conditions since the employee can't afford to quit.
    - withinboredom 3y ago
      Do people really believe that? Maybe some people care about paying bills on time and will go balls-to-the-wall to make that happen. Not me, I learned to realize 'you get paid when I get paid, so fuck off.' Now, if we entered into a debt together, you know, with a contract. I always pay on time, but if you just show up saying I owe you money with the power to put it on my credit report ... fuck off. I don't think there is actually any science behind what you (or they) are saying, but I could be wrong (I didn't find anything definitive on Google Scholar, but I might be searching for the wrong thing) -- this smells like "it's the status-quo, so why question it."
briHass 3y ago
Pretty much a standard in Finance-related work. The thinking being that being in debt not only makes you more likely to commit fraud/theft, but also that it makes you easier to influence/corrupt/blackmail.