wrote in message
...
On Dec 6, 11:20 am, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Dec 5, 2:06 pm, chaniarts wrote:



On 12/5/2012 6:53 AM, wrote:

On Dec 5, 8:39 am, Peter wrote:
On 12/4/2012 8:45 PM, Oren wrote:

On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 20:27:55 -0500, Metspitzer
wrote:

I was talking on the phone with my cousin today. She has worked as
a substitute teacher in several schools. She is between jobs. One
of the things she mentioned was that they require her to furnish
her SSN on job applications. Since the wrong person could do some
serious damage with your SSN, I really think it is a bad idea to
have to furnish them for a job application.

How would she get SS credits, otherwise?

The OP was only applying for the job, she hadn't been hired yet. I
agree that there's no need for the SSN on the application as long as
the
employer is satisfied that the applicant is legally in the country

How exactly does an employer do that easily without a
SSN?

and
meets the relevant employment criteria.

My employment criteria includes not being a fugitive,
having outstanding warrants, being convicted of
embezlement, etc. How does an employer do that
without a SSN? Throw away the application from
everyone with the same name that comes back with
a background check hit?

all the job offers i've gotten say: we're offering you this job subject
to passing the following checks: background, fingerprint, citizenship,
etc....

they can make an offer contingent on things, so they don't have to have
the ssn for the application. it just makes it easier (and perhaps
cheaper) on them to do the weeding before the checks, rather than
after.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

#
# Did you see my post where I asked this? You're the
# hiring guy. Which scenario would you prefer? A guy
# comes in, fills out the application with his SS#. You use it
# to run a background check and it turns out he's a member
# of the Cripts, convicted of multiple drive-bys. You
# tell him you filled the position internally and thanks for
# applying.

that would depend on the type of job being filled
If it's for a warm body with little skill requirement, your argument may
hold
If it's for expertise that they need badly with few available bodies for
the
job, your argument fails
#
# Attila, someone has hijacked your PC and is using it to make
# stupid posts. How may Cripts members or similar criminals
# do you think apply for legitimate jobs where their expertise is
# badly needed?

Trader, someone stole your brain and is using it for a football
I'll leave you to your stupid strawman




#
# Scenario two. You don't get the SS# until you've
# extended your contingent job offer. Now you have to
# call him and tell him he's not getting the job you offered
# him 2 days ago and why.

So you're hiring guy is a lazy chicken ?
Is that a good thing in your book ?
#
# Now you've shown that you;re even further removed from
# reality. I would not say wanting to not have to call a member
of the cripts that you offered a job two days ago to and
# telling them they now can't have it after you've obtained there
# SS# and found out their background isn't being chicken.
# Especially when there is no need to when you can get
# their SS# when they apply, do the check, and not have
# to pull back the offer.

yawn
Your strawman.
You feed it


The hiring guys job is to fill the post with the best choice at the least
cost

Which, of course, is yet another thing that has nothing to
do with the issue.



But in some cases "least cost" is NOT "minimum wage" by a long shot.
What do you imagine the strategy should be for someone you really want and
need to fill a specific post that has few available candidates who are in
great demand by the competition ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You're really wandering in the wilderness here.