Hacker News Reader

Comment by lp0_on_fire | Hacker News Reader

It's bad enough many companies want to run invasive background checks (up to and including pulling your credit) for milquetoast low-paying-entry-level jobs now they want people to take some bastardized version of Myers–Briggs which itself is pseudoscience?

I sorta understand a company wanting to do that for some C-level or upper management position, or for a finance person responsible for the books...but for a burger flipper???

View on HN

those with the least ability to say NO will be the targets at first. Similar case with PTSD veterans, incarcerated individuals, those alone at the end of their lives, some family law situations etc.. IMO there is literally no bottom to this, and it can and does require real legislation.

The weird thing about the credit checks is that I have horrible credit. Like about every 2 years a credit card gets sent to collections. Some old rent in collections. Etc. But its never, ever affected a hiring decision for $80-130k jobs.

So…why are they doing the credit checks??

If it’s credit / criminal the credit part is very cheap vs the criminal and much quicker. It can also help feed the criminal because the credit side has addresses if you do county searches. There is bad credit and then BAD credit

Depending on state, it is illegal for companies to do a credit check for employment. Perhaps they are using it sell your data to some shitservice they use but it can't legally be used in your location.

This is not intellectually rigorous. In locations where "it is illegal for companies to do a credit check for employment" they cannot perform one. Because they cannot perform one, they cannot be "using it [to] sell your data to some shitservice". More specific to my anecdote, I have always been in states where it was allowed to be used for employment purposes. But even if I wasn't, your speculative scenario is not internally consistent to itself.

Most companies I know don't really run credit or even criminal checks for jobs that pay that high. It's often a thing for low-paid. IME and YMMV of course.

It amazes me that the bean-counters are on board with this sort of silliness. The woo-woo test services aren't free, and I wouldn't be surprised if they have to throw a few extra bucks into the legal coffers if they backfire and accidentally-intentionally penalize a protected group.

And for what... a questionably-measurable improvement in quality for employees that already have like a 150% per-annum turnover?

It also feels like industry is trying to turn HR and recruitment into a science-- if they can put enough algorithms and skill tests in the path, they can automate the recruitment process. I'm amazed HR doesn't detect this as an existential threat and sabotage it from inside.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com