The Giant Noodle
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2010
- Messages
- 7,332
- Reaction score
- 2,011
- Location
- Northern Illinois
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Criminal background checks, but only for certain jobs.
This is unbelievable!Not this topic AGAIN. :roll:
Employers should have NO right to check ANYTHING. All they should be concerned about is if the employee does the job as asked. If not then fire them. PERIOD. If they break the law... they go to jail AND they are fired.
Regarding criminal checks.... if they aren't in jail then they should not be discriminated against.
You going to NOT hire Charlie Sheen or Keifer Sutherland or Robert Downey because of their criminal past?
You COULD based on their misdemeanors and felonys. But you would be a jackass.
Although.... I did vote for the sax acts :2razz: *giggle*
What should be legal for an employer to have an employee or potential employee submit to?
1. Drug tests
2. Credit checks
3. microchip implants
4. perform sexual acts for job and or promotion
5. Criminal background checks
6. DNA tests
7. wiretapping of employee's personal phones or other communication devices
8. ankle bracelets on 24 hours a day to track where the employee goes.
9. A search of personal property of the employee's home.
10. other
Most people would agree that some of these options have nothing to do with the job. For example you own a bank then you do not want a former bank robber to work there,unless as a consultant. If you run a daycare then you do not want chester the child molester to work there. If you own a business where employees will be handling dangerous equipment you may not want a junkie. Some would argue that its their business they should be able to make an employee or applicant do what ever they want.
What do you do if all the places you wanted jobs at did this? Say you have a choice to not accept these conditions and go work for walm-mart or go on welfare to sponge off tax payers?Any 'test' they see fit. You have the option as a potential employee, not to submit to what they request and forfeit the job opportunity. Naturally I think some of these are way over the top - but then again - if I'd applied for a job and part of the offer of hire process included a search of my private property, then I would opt out and flip them the bird.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if all these businesses started doing this then you would not have a choice, unless you considered not working and mooching off of tax payers to be a choice.Their choice is to have potential employees submit to certain tests, it's up to you whether or not you choose to submit to these tests.
This isn't rocket science
What do you do if all the places you wanted jobs at did this? Say you have a choice to not accept these conditions and go work for walm-mart or go on welfare to sponge off tax payers?
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if all these businesses started doing this then you would not have a choice, unless you considered not working and mooching off of tax payers to be a choice.
then i guess i would have to weigh whether i wanted to go through the process more or less than whether i wanted to work there. for my current job in the military they asked (and i answered) all sorts of questions; which they had the right to do because i wanted this job. if i didnt' want them to do a background check on me, i was free to go get civilian work.
and it doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if most businesses were doing this, one business could perhaps establish an advantage in hiring by not doing this, just as it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that most businesses seek to ruthlessly reduce unnecessary overhead, which means that any research that wouldn't impact the individuals' job performance would be a waste of resources. It also doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that such a program is more likely to lead to a greater allocation of labor relations (which increases wealth for the entire economy), any more than it takes a rocket scientist to realize that it's no right of the government to tell me what i must ask or not ask of those whom i choose to give jobs to.
no one is coerced to answer anything they don't want to; this is hardly a libertarian realm, except inasmuch as restrictions on employers in this regard serve as limitations to property rights.
You obviously have zero grasp on how things are done in a medium to large company. :roll: Human Resources really wants to continue to be viable. They attend training confrences... they go to conventions... they go through training and evaluations... they belong to forums on the internet..... and a lot of their position is to reduce 'liability' (whether real or PERCIEVED) on their company. They want to keep their jobs and tell the companies upper management how they can save them money VIA background checks. They make it a 'MUST HAVE' topic and if not the respective company will be in utter chaos if management doesnt listen to their mystical background checking ways.
Anyhow they are like a little Union inside a company that USUALLY knows that their background checking on individuals are not an accurate representation of a good or bad employee. In fact it makes little to no difference how a background check reflects on REAL WORLD performace! How do I know this? I actually had friends in the company I was working for that was in the HR department. (in fact if youre single I highly suggest dating women from HR. They are kinky!)
What do you do if all the places you wanted jobs at did this? Say you have a choice to not accept these conditions and go work for walm-mart or go on welfare to sponge off tax payers?
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if all these businesses started doing this then you would not have a choice, unless you considered not working and mooching off of tax payers to be a choice.
All of those should be legal for the employer to require. Although I would say that some of them, such as the sexual acts one, should be occupation specific.
Ultimately, if an employer asks for these things, it is up to the potential employee to decide if they are willing to submit to them.
All of those should be legal for the employer to require. Although I would say that some of them, such as the sexual acts one, should be occupation specific.
Ultimately, if an employer asks for these things, it is up to the potential employee to decide if they are willing to submit to them.
I completely disagree. If enough people are willing to submit to it, then those who DON'T will be at a serious disadvantage for employment. Eventually, it would just become a cultural norm where people EXPECT to be subjected to violations of their privacy as a condition for employment. We need regulations to prevent employers from abusing their employees just because they can. There is no reason to believe that the free market would produce the socially optimal outcome (i.e. employers who don't ask for anything beyond what is job-relevant).
Thats is a HUGE mistake to think that way. All a company needs to worry about is what you are hired for.... a JOB. If I can do the job that is IT! They need know nothing else. My PERSONAL life is just that. To give up YOUR right to privacy because a company has you over the barrel is not right. The more a company will get away with, they will. And you are letting us slide down the slippery slope of a company mixing THEIR business into MY life. I dont think so!
Dont you DARE sell us down the river like that! Any personal information MUST be made illegal to check. (Except for sensitive Gov't jobs and caring for kids)
If enough people are willing to subit to it, it is the socially optimal outcome and those who refuse to submit to it are SOOL.
It's easy as pie to keep them out of your personal life. They aren't obligated to hire you. You aren't obligated to work for them. You want them out of your perosnal life, then stay away from their business life.
It's easy as pie to keep them out of your personal life. They aren't obligated to hire you. You aren't obligated to work for them. You want them out of your perosnal life, then stay away from their business life.
Wrong. That mindset is derived from the idea that whatever The Market wants is good. The Market is not some benevolent deity. The free market can (and often does) produce suboptimal outcomes for society.
Even if enough people are willing to submit to it, it doesn't mean they're happy about it.
The nation is better off when the government regulates what employers are allowed to ask their employees about.
Except as you said, "if enough people submit to it, those who don't are SOOL." Meaning that eventually people won't have a choice, as it becomes customary for employers to ask for those things and for employees to submit to those invasions of their privacy.
10 people said sexual favors would be permissible to get promoted? Man that's just plain wrong! :shock:
I think that should only occur if the chick is hot because I would feel sorry for the boss if she's a dog! :lol:
lol.
Actually, there is one job I can think of where the employer is completely justified in having their employees or potential employees submit to performing sex acts for the job and/or for promotions.
A fake Kewpie doll to whoever guesses which job I'm thinking about.
Go play with your strawman elsewhere. I said nothing about "good" and nothing about the "Market". Society dictates what is optimal. If society (meaning the people) determine that submission to these tests are optimal, then they are optimal.
Tucker Case said:You seem to be confusing my thoughts on perosnal choice with "good" and "bad".
Tucker Case said:If they are unhappy, it's there own fault.
lol.
Actually, there is one job I can think of where the employer is completely justified in having their employees or potential employees submit to performing sex acts for the job and/or for promotions.
A fake Kewpie doll to whoever guesses which job I'm thinking about.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?