wrote in message
...
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:32:51 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 20:28:30 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:44:32 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 05:52:37 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 02:21:14 -0500, wrote:




OK, but if you have 1000 applicants and one finalist to make an
offer,
you only need that one number, not all the others that will be
sitting
in a file drawer for a long time.

Nobody is going to get to the application phase for 1000 prospective
employees to fill one job. You would not even look at that many
resumes. Usually they seldom even consider more than a few, enough to
call them back.

My point is though, you don't need the SS# on the application. Does
not matter if it is 2, 10, 100 or 10,000. Until you have a viable
candidate for the job, you have no need for the SS.

You must not live in a place where they have a lot of immigrants.

Around here, a job application with a SSN left blank would just be
tossed in the trash.
Around here there are immigrants from everywhere immaginable. Chine,
eastern Europe, Korea, the middle east, Africa, Central America, South
America,Western Europe, Great Britain, the south Pacific and even the
USA,

The SSN (SIN here in Canada) is not required untill the offer of
employment is made and accepted. The number is then mandatory -

You may not have all the government red tape an employer has here.

Most employers would look at a blank SSN as a person trying to hide
something and with the typical stack of applications they will get for
any job, why even go any farther. Chuck it and look at the next one.

Why don't you stop claiming that you are speaking for "most employers"
You are not

...and you are?

But I never made or implied it like you have done repeatedly



You are really *FUNNY*. What a moron.

And you are just sad and stupid and pathetic and.
Well why go on ?
You're not even smart enough to avoid writing "beck pedaling" while doing a
spell flame on an innocuous typo

That's how much a moron you are.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 17:54:26 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 14:30:02 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:55:01 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 03:49:46 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:28:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 12:56:42 -0500, wrote:




Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the application
in the trash.

Responsible employers don't ask for personal information they do not
need. They don't take on the risk of keeping it on file. Some states
have privacy laws that require such information to be kept double
locked for security.

Wrong. They invariably ask for this information on the application
for employment.

Wrong, many applications do not even has a space for it these days.

*EVERY* one I filled out last year required my SSN, including ones
online before the interview.


LOL
Are we surprised that you had to fill out a whole slew of job applications
?
NOT !

You really are a clueless ****.


Mmm..
Let's see..
Your words
" *EVERY* one I filled out last year required my SSN..."

More than two, less that two hundred. Every one.

Apparently I'm less "clueless than you are..

Because I changed jobs last year. You really are clueless. Are you
really Bob F?


But good luck finding something
Even you should be able to find some kind of work

Terminally stupid, clueless ****.

I'll take that as an admission that you've just been bitch-slapped

Now it all makes sense! You're a bitch. ...in heat, apparently.



http://www.bbb.org/blog/2011/09/shou...b-application/
Remember: Until someone is about to hire you, they have no need for
your social security number. If they say they need it for a background
check, the job offer can be made contingent on a clean report.

Perhaps you don't think they have a need but they do. You're looking,
they're hiring. Ask yourself, "do I want to **** of the HR droid?".


If that's what it takes to **** off a HR droid
It's a pretty low-level droid..

There aren't another kind, moron.

I haven't had to deal with one of those since...
um
1971. When I applied for a summer job with IBM just before I started
Engineering School.

Admission: You're a clueless bitch.


The BBB suggests that the safest option for job-seeking consumers is
this: Never provide your SSN on a job application until you have a
verifiable job offer from a company you trust.

Good luck with that anymore.


Well not everyone is busy filling fields on the terminals at Walmart like
you.

It's OK. Loser lefties always look down their nose at those who work
for a living.

BTW, I'm an EE. I was out of work for three months *last* year. I
probably filled out a dozen job applications and all required full
personal information. One, a state university job required it online
before any interview at all.


No comment, I see.

BTW, dumbass, I retired from IBM six years ago.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 18:01:31 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:07:33 -0500, George
wrote:

On 12/6/2012 9:22 AM, wrote:
On Dec 6, 8:46 am, George wrote:
On 12/5/2012 12:56 PM, wrote:





On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:57:07 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:16:50 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

stuff snipped

Right, but they don't need that until a job offer is made and
accepted.

Exactly... which is why I tell my daughters when taking an
interview,
they will supply their SS # upon employment.

Good idea. A smart employer should realize that an applicant smart
enough
to care about securing their own personal data might care enough to
protect
company data as well.

Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the application
in the trash.

A big box or megacorp definitely would because they are looking for
bodies to meld into their system at the cheapest price. A smart small
business might appreciate that the person has a brain.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So then you have to ask yourself. How lucky to you feel today?
Is it worth having the prospective employer throw the application
in the trash because you didn't supply the SS#? With unemployment
at 8% I know what my answer would be. But on the other hand
when you can collect unemployment for 2 years, food stamps,
free healthcare, I guess that changes the equation. In fact, maybe
leaving it off is a good idea. One way to go on those job interviews
and make sure you don't get the job.


Like all things in life it isn't a black and white scenario that you
rely on.

After all this is nothing but a business transaction. You are offering
something for sale and someone may want to buy it. Terms and conditions
are a moving target.


It is *exactly* a business transaction. One person has a product to
sell and another has money to buy. Just like a retail transaction,
there are agents in the middle who operate with a set of rules that
they usually have no power to change. If you don't follow the rules,
you lose.


If say it is a position at the big box mart chances are you are going
nowhere if you don't absolutely comply with whatever procedures are in
place. But say it is a skilled or professional position. Then you have
bargaining room. The employer makes an offer and you make a counter
offer. Everytime I accepted a position there was a period of negotiation
with offers and counter offers leading into it. If we agreed the usual
deal on the first day was a request to "stop by HR and give them
information so they can enter you into the payroll system".

Complete nonsense.

Just because YOU never had that experience does NOT mean it's not true or
"complete nonsense".

You don't read any better than you write, moron.

All you are demonstrating with such comments, is that you have spent your
life working at the low end of the food chain.

I had one job offer that went.
"We have heard good things about you
We would like to hire you to work X hours a week at $YY.00 (as per
union Contract) per hour.
All you need to do is come fully prepared to do A,B.C. those X
hours."
We will provide all administrative support.
nterested ?"

Did that for 10 years on the side of my regular consulting job
I could have done nothing else but just those X hours a week, and lived
very comfortably of that income.

You don't think any better than you read.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 18:03:43 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:15:10 -0500, George
wrote:

On 12/6/2012 9:02 AM, Attila Iskander wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:15:11 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:26:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:08:22 -0800, Oren wrote:




Would you work for a company that you could not trust with your
SSN?

Would yo work for a company that wants your personal information for
no good reason?

They have good reason, so they ask.

The Stasi had "good reason" for going "Papieren" whenever they felt
like it
too.

Silly moral relativity answer, not to mention a Godwin call.


So what is the sound of an argument entering in one ear, exiting out the
other, and never slowing down in between..
As to your "Godwin call", where did I make any mention of nazis ??
Apparently you're not even up to speed on Godwin..



That they have good reason (in their minds) does not necessarily make
it
good reason for you or justify their asking

Bull****. Their job. You want it, or not? Your call.

My experience and expertise,
You want it or not ?
Your call

Unlike you, I was and still am in high enough demand, that It's a
sellers' market for me.
Hell, I don't even discuss $$$ and benies unless they have clearly
stated that here is a job on the table.

But then, unlike you, I'm not an easily replaceable drone..
'


Seems like an "expert" may not know how hiring for responsible job
positions work. The "want it or not" thing is what someone might expect
from the big box mart but responsible jobs involve negotiations.

You obviously don't know how hiring is done in large organizations.
The word is "clueless".

You're really not paying attention are you ?

I'm paying attention. You're not reading or thinking.

We have all admitted that what you describe is quite true for a large
organization hiring LOW-skill employees.

But that is NOT true for either small or large corporations hiring
higher-skill employees who can just as easily sell their expertise down the
street at the company next door.

You're clearly wrong. It's also my experience. ...but you can't read
or think, so no matter what's said, it won't sink in to your granite-
encased, lonely, neuron.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 16:58:27 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 14:30:25 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:47:22 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 03:50:13 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:26:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:08:22 -0800, Oren wrote:




Would you work for a company that you could not trust with your SSN?

Would yo work for a company that wants your personal information for
no good reason?

They have good reason, so they ask.

They don't have a good reason until they offer employment.

Your (worthless) opinion.

No different in value from yours

Moron, neither my opinion, Ed's, nor yours matters. What matters is
the opinion of the hiring entity. It's important for *THEM*. Your
sorry ass loses (to be expected for a loser).

Funny how over the last 30+ years, I had people coming to Me with offers and
not the other way
around.
Must suck to be so part of the herd that you actually need to make an
effort to distinguish yourself

Now you're lying. You just said you haven't been through the hiring
process since 1971.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 18:04:49 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
news
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:22:59 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Dec 6, 12:44 am, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:28:07 -0600, " Attila Iskander"





wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:03:43 -0500, "Meanie" wrote:

"IGot2P" wrote in message
...
On 12/4/2012 8:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Dec 4, 8:27 pm, 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 is a prospective employer supposed to do
any kind of background checks without even a
SS #? It's typically asked for when applying for a
loan, credit card, apartment rental, hospital visit,
etc. So, I don't see the issue as being unique
or unreasonable in regard to employment.

Financial institutes, leasing agencies, medical facilities, etc.
all
require
financial payment for services and/or goods. They require the need
to
check
credit history to ensure they deal with a financially responsible
person
so
they can get paid. An employer does not and simply pays the
employee
to
do a
job. If anything, the applicant should check the history of the
employer
to
ensure they've never had problems with payroll. There is no need
for
an
employer to seek SSN....period.

I am retired now but one of the first things that we did when
someone
applied for employment was to run their SS# against the ones that
were
already on file for current employees. You might find it surprising
but
several times that SS# was already being used by one of our
employees.
We
then had to find out if the current employee was the actual owner
of
that
SS# or if the applicant was or neither of them was.

Now that opens a new light and I can see the reason. BUT, I still
can't
see
why they cannot wait to do that if/after they hire the person. Yes,
it
may
avoid a minor hassle of hiring and paperwork, but it isn't difficult,
IMO,
to simply move on to the runner up applicant.

Because they're not going to do a pre-employment background check
*after* they hire. sheesh!

Your right

I even took a few English courses in grade school.

Instead they'll do a post-conditional-offer employment check with the
final offer conditional on the results
See how simple that is

No, they won't. They'll pass on your sorry ass for someone who will
follow instructions.

What some people seem to forget

...that they want a job? You probably have forgotten that.- Hide quoted
text -


snip of repetitions

You have already asked the question in a slightly different form
Are you stupid enough to imagine that repeating it multiple times will
somehow make your very limited scenario more right ?
Clearly you operate at the warm body level of the hiring scale
And clearly that requirement is applicable at that low level

Let's hope that you don't get promoted to hire people operating at a
higher
level
You would fail miserably at the job

It's clear you can't even write (or post) coherently.

I'll consider that ad hom as an admission of having lost the argument

[..../]
IRONY

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 22:55:42 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
wrote:

wrote in :

Most employers would look at a blank SSN as a person trying to hide
something and with the typical stack of applications they will get for
any job, why even go any farther. Chuck it and look at the next one.

Most employers don't ask for the SSN on a job application.

That's why the ones that do are viewed with suspicion.

As I said, every one I applied to last year, did. Many I never got to
the application phase because it wasn't a match, for whatever reason,
but every one wanted the SSN on the application.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 23:40:53 -0600, "NotMe" wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:25:49 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
wrote:

wrote in :

BTW, you don't think a SSN is needed for tax reasons? boggle

Not at the time a person is *applying* for a job, no, it's not needed
for
tax reasons.

Applicatoins also have the information needed to do any background
checks for employment. Why would you want to work for a company that
you can't trust with your SSN? Considering the number of people who
have your SSN, isn't this a little silly?

A lot of information is needed to complete the employment process
including
personal and professional references. I don't and won't supply those
unless
and until there is a determination of a skill set and other match for the
position.

Fair enough but note that you *will* be excluded from consideration by
many employers. I refused to supply this information, once, before
even a phone interview. That was the last I heard from the company.


It's unreasonable for an employer to expect that data at the get go.

It doesn't matter what *you* think is reasonable.

The name of the game is protecting your information. I have had
experience
where someone else used my data obtained from a contract recruiter to pose
as me including signing my name and professional license number to federal
documents.

You've already lost. That horse is *long* gone. Do yourself a favor
and don't **** off prospective employers for no reason.

Some folk you're better to hand them a $20 shake their hand and send them
down the road.

Like I said at one time I did as you recommend and provided the data up
front. Spent a long time and a lot of money clearing my name and
professional reputation. For several years my security clearance was toast.

Anyone that requires/ask for that data too soon in the process gets a polite
explanation. If that's not sufficient then they get a handshake and the
offer of a $20. Odd part regardless of the house you road in on, the hiring
parties seem to understand my concerns.

One once told me that 'we need people who are as cautious as you'.

On 6 Dec 2012 18:00:12 GMT, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:55:01 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 03:49:46 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:28:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 12:56:42 -0500, wrote:




Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the application
in the trash.

Responsible employers don't ask for personal information they do not
need. They don't take on the risk of keeping it on file. Some states
have privacy laws that require such information to be kept double
locked for security.

Wrong. They invariably ask for this information on the application
for employment.

Wrong, many applications do not even has a space for it these days.

*EVERY* one I filled out last year required my SSN, including ones
online before the interview.

http://www.bbb.org/blog/2011/09/shou...b-application/
Remember: Until someone is about to hire you, they have no need for
your social security number. If they say they need it for a background
check, the job offer can be made contingent on a clean report.

Perhaps you don't think they have a need but they do. You're looking,
they're hiring. Ask yourself, "do I want to **** of the HR droid?".

The BBB suggests that the safest option for job-seeking consumers is
this: Never provide your SSN on a job application until you have a
verifiable job offer from a company you trust.

Good luck with that anymore.


redundant bull**** snipped
I've done hiring in my day and NEVER asked for the SSN/SIN before
offering the job.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:07:33 -0500, George
wrote:

On 12/6/2012 9:22 AM, wrote:
On Dec 6, 8:46 am, George wrote:
On 12/5/2012 12:56 PM, wrote:





On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:57:07 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:16:50 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

stuff snipped

Right, but they don't need that until a job offer is made and
accepted.

Exactly... which is why I tell my daughters when taking an interview,
they will supply their SS # upon employment.

Good idea. A smart employer should realize that an applicant smart enough
to care about securing their own personal data might care enough to protect
company data as well.

Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the application
in the trash.

A big box or megacorp definitely would because they are looking for
bodies to meld into their system at the cheapest price. A smart small
business might appreciate that the person has a brain.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So then you have to ask yourself. How lucky to you feel today?
Is it worth having the prospective employer throw the application
in the trash because you didn't supply the SS#? With unemployment
at 8% I know what my answer would be. But on the other hand
when you can collect unemployment for 2 years, food stamps,
free healthcare, I guess that changes the equation. In fact, maybe
leaving it off is a good idea. One way to go on those job interviews
and make sure you don't get the job.


Like all things in life it isn't a black and white scenario that you
rely on.

After all this is nothing but a business transaction. You are offering
something for sale and someone may want to buy it. Terms and conditions
are a moving target.

If say it is a position at the big box mart chances are you are going
nowhere if you don't absolutely comply with whatever procedures are in
place. But say it is a skilled or professional position. Then you have
bargaining room. The employer makes an offer and you make a counter
offer. Everytime I accepted a position there was a period of negotiation
with offers and counter offers leading into it. If we agreed the usual
deal on the first day was a request to "stop by HR and give them
information so they can enter you into the payroll system".
That's how it's always been for me - both as employee and employer.

On 6 Dec 2012 22:42:36 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 23:40:53 -0600, "NotMe" wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:25:49 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
wrote:

wrote in :

BTW, you don't think a SSN is needed for tax reasons? boggle

Not at the time a person is *applying* for a job, no, it's not needed for
tax reasons.

Applicatoins also have the information needed to do any background
checks for employment. Why would you want to work for a company that
you can't trust with your SSN? Considering the number of people who
have your SSN, isn't this a little silly?

A lot of information is needed to complete the employment process including
personal and professional references. I don't and won't supply those unless
and until there is a determination of a skill set and other match for the
position.

Fair enough but note that you *will* be excluded from consideration by
many employers. I refused to supply this information, once, before
even a phone interview. That was the last I heard from the company.


It's unreasonable for an employer to expect that data at the get go.

It doesn't matter what *you* think is reasonable.

The name of the game is protecting your information. I have had experience
where someone else used my data obtained from a contract recruiter to pose
as me including signing my name and professional license number to federal
documents.

You've already lost. That horse is *long* gone. Do yourself a favor
and don't **** off prospective employers for no reason.

Rother **** them off and not have to work for idiots than to cave and
end up working for them - wishing you had not - be better off spending
your time looking for a job with a decent company - in MANY cases.

On 6 Dec 2012 22:51:16 GMT, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 12:51:29 -0500, wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 05:44:45 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:28:07 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:03:43 -0500, "Meanie" wrote:


"IGot2P" wrote in message
...
On 12/4/2012 8:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Dec 4, 8:27 pm, 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 is a prospective employer supposed to do
any kind of background checks without even a
SS #? It's typically asked for when applying for a
loan, credit card, apartment rental, hospital visit,
etc. So, I don't see the issue as being unique
or unreasonable in regard to employment.

Financial institutes, leasing agencies, medical facilities, etc. all
require
financial payment for services and/or goods. They require the need to
check
credit history to ensure they deal with a financially responsible
person
so
they can get paid. An employer does not and simply pays the employee to
do a
job. If anything, the applicant should check the history of the
employer
to
ensure they've never had problems with payroll. There is no need for an
employer to seek SSN....period.


I am retired now but one of the first things that we did when someone
applied for employment was to run their SS# against the ones that were
already on file for current employees. You might find it surprising but
several times that SS# was already being used by one of our employees.
We
then had to find out if the current employee was the actual owner of
that
SS# or if the applicant was or neither of them was.

Now that opens a new light and I can see the reason. BUT, I still can't
see
why they cannot wait to do that if/after they hire the person. Yes, it may
avoid a minor hassle of hiring and paperwork, but it isn't difficult, IMO,
to simply move on to the runner up applicant.

Because they're not going to do a pre-employment background check
*after* they hire. sheesh!

Your right

I even took a few English courses in grade school.

Instead they'll do a post-conditional-offer employment check with the
final offer conditional on the results
See how simple that is

No, they won't. They'll pass on your sorry ass for someone who will
follow instructions.

What some people seem to forget

...that they want a job? You probably have forgotten that.
There ARE employers ( and others) out there who will ask for
information they A) don't need and B) have no legal authority to ask
for and will be pricks when told politely they are not getting it.

They clearly believe they have the need for the information. They
also have the legal authority to ask for the information, so your
argument is just as stupid as...

Actually, in Canada they do NOT have the right to ask for it.

There are people who will give it to them.

Those who want the job, yes.

They deserve each other.

Those who want to hire and those who want to be hired, yes, but that's
the only thing you've said that makes sense, if only by accident.

There are also those who will ask for it, and when told, politely,
that they do not need it at this point and will not get it until they
DO need it, will agree and continue on.

...and the employer will indeed move one. No problem.

When they hire the person who protected themselves, they get a good
employee/customer/whatever.

Absurd (but not surprising).

With today's privacy issues and litigation situation, ANYONE who has
custody of sensitive information without good reason is exposing
themself to way more serious risk than is warranted.

Nonsense. That horse is long gone.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 16:58:27 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 14:30:25 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:47:22 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 03:50:13 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:26:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:08:22 -0800, Oren wrote:




Would you work for a company that you could not trust with your SSN?

Would yo work for a company that wants your personal information for
no good reason?

They have good reason, so they ask.

They don't have a good reason until they offer employment.

Your (worthless) opinion.

No different in value from yours

Moron, neither my opinion, Ed's, nor yours matters. What matters is
the opinion of the hiring entity. It's important for *THEM*. Your
sorry ass loses (to be expected for a loser).

Funny how over the last 30+ years, I had people coming to Me with offers and
not the other way
around.
Must suck to be so part of the herd that you actually need to make an
effort to distinguish yourself
Actually, I think I have applied for ONE job in my life - and didn't
get it. Actuallly it was offered and I turned it down.

Service manager job. The last question he asked was how much I needed
to take the job. I said if I'm not worth $40,000 to him within 6
months, I'm not the man for the job. He said service mangers don't
make 40Gs - I told him he was talking to one who did, and earned every
cent. Then I told him to keep looking, and keep advertising for a new
service manager every 6 to 9 months like he had been for the last 3
years.

Most times it was more them applying to hire me.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:07:33 -0500, George
wrote:



Like all things in life it isn't a black and white scenario that you
rely on.

After all this is nothing but a business transaction. You are offering
something for sale and someone may want to buy it. Terms and conditions
are a moving target.

If say it is a position at the big box mart chances are you are going
nowhere if you don't absolutely comply with whatever procedures are in
place. But say it is a skilled or professional position. Then you have
bargaining room. The employer makes an offer and you make a counter
offer. Everytime I accepted a position there was a period of negotiation
with offers and counter offers leading into it. If we agreed the usual
deal on the first day was a request to "stop by HR and give them
information so they can enter you into the payroll system".

+1
Been a long time since I filled out an "application," and I can't
remember if they wanted SSN. In the "resume" world SSN isn't on the
resume, and isn't needed until you're on the payroll.
But my experience with that is a dozen years old, and
non-governmental, "non-security-check."
The way I see it the SSN isn't exactly "top-secret" anymore, so if I
was filling an application that had it, I would provide it.
Any Joe Shmoe car salesman asks for it to do a credit check.
Do we trust car salesmen?
HR departments vary widely too.
When I took a job running heavy presses and shears at IH in 1968 I was
called to HR after a couple weeks on the job. Stupidest thing I ever
saw.
On the application I had put 1 semester (6 months) of HS at CVS in
Chicago. Honestly saying I was a high school dropout. I also gave
them a GED from the Navy, and a DD-214 showing honorable discharge,
making that meaningless But these jokers called me off the shop floor
because they had found no record of me being a CVS dropout.
I told them my name was different then, and to check under that name,
and never heard from them again. Really lame.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 08:51:24 -0800, Smitty Two
wrote:




Drifting back towards topic, FWIW, out of the 100 or so people I've
hired and fired over the last 30 years, the one who's the best employee
I've ever had is a convicted felon.

I've got two of them One has been with us 15 years, the other about
5. They don't have to wear their ankle bracelets any more either.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 12:23:54 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:



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.

If he is the bad ass stated, he is probably using a stolen SS# anyway.
Either way, you're screwed.

On 6 Dec 2012 18:13:56 GMT, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:47:22 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 03:50:13 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:26:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:08:22 -0800, Oren wrote:




Would you work for a company that you could not trust with your SSN?

Would yo work for a company that wants your personal information for
no good reason?

They have good reason, so they ask.

They don't have a good reason until they offer employment.

Your (worthless) opinion.

I've been hiring people for the past 40 years. While it used to be
SOP to have the SS#, it has not been for years now. You?

On 6 Dec 2012 21:44:25 GMT, wrote:




Moron, neither my opinion, Ed's, nor yours matters. What matters is
the opinion of the hiring entity. It's important for *THEM*. Your
sorry ass loses (to be expected for a loser).


Having been the hiring entity for a number of years, my opinion
matters. I don't ask for the SS# up front.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 10:47:27 -0800, Oren wrote:




Is asking for a DOB, home phone contact number, emergency contact
number and name of a family member a _good reason_ for that "personal
information"?

Frankly I developed an allergy to work so I'm off the market for
employment :-\

Once you offer employment. Up to that time, it is against the law to
ask for DOB. You can ask if a person is over 18 or over 21 if the job
requires you be of that age.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 11:26:00 -0500, wrote:




Most employers would look at a blank SSN as a person trying to hide
something and with the typical stack of applications they will get for
any job, why even go any farther. Chuck it and look at the next one.

Yes, they are trying to hide something and should be commended for it.
That information is not needed up front.

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 18:26:10 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 14:27:13 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 08:02:12 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:15:11 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
news:arp2c8p3p0vejdd17hq42u598l60n00f6r@4ax .com...
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:26:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:08:22 -0800, Oren wrote:




Would you work for a company that you could not trust with your
SSN?

Would yo work for a company that wants your personal information for
no good reason?

They have good reason, so they ask.

The Stasi had "good reason" for going "Papieren" whenever they felt
like
it
too.

Silly moral relativity answer, not to mention a Godwin call.


So what is the sound of an argument entering in one ear, exiting out the
other, and never slowing down in between..

I don't know but you seem to be able to answer your own question.


Well in your case the answer is none, since there is no sound in a vacuum
of
any sort.

True, I guess I gave you too much credit for having a brain. I won't
make that mistake again.

And you are teh idiot claiming that I can't operate in English
Here you are dmonstrating that your reading skills can be graded with one
digit on a 3 digit scale

Gee, dumbass, how long did it take to come up with lame IKWYABWAI?

As to your "Godwin call", where did I make any mention of nazis ??
Apparently you're not even up to speed on Godwin..

Yes, in fact you did. The fact that you referenced the E. German
secret police instead of the SS is meaningless. Further, the fact
that you're now trying to back away from the reference is instructive.


1) Why should I back away from a reference that I did intentionally ?
Are you really this stupid ?

I don't know why you did. Perhaps you should ask yourself that
question.


I know why I did, dummy
Because it evokes a VERY clear image in the minds on most people who don't
operate on "knee-jerk" ignorance like you do.

Exactly the purpose of the Godwin. You really are lame.


2) Godwin is SPECIFALLY about calling someone a Nazi
Making a refenrence to the Stasi, does NOT qualify

Bull**** but nice back pedal. Your form is perfect. You must
practice it a lot.

sigh
Why do you insist on demonstrating that you're more ignorant than a 10
year-old noob ?

More projection.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
Godwin's law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's
Law of Nazi Analogies[1][2]) is an argument made by Mike Godwin in
1990[2][non-primary source needed] that has become an Internet adage. It
states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a
comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."[2][3] In other words,
Godwin observed that, given enough time, in any online discussion-regardless
of topic or scope-someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler and the
Nazis.

Actually, by raising Godwin's law falsely, YOU are the one guilty of
breaching it.

Keep back pedaling. You're looking more like harry every minute.


Hell even making a reference to the SS does NOT qualify in many
instances
Go back and get yourself educated on Godwin before you embarrass
yourself any further
Oh wait.
That might impossible.
3) And your false attempt to invoke Godwin is simply an admission that
you have been trumped and you're much too intellectually dishonest to
admit
it.

More beck pedaling. Nice job.



"beck (sic) pedaling"

Now look who's throwing around the lame tupos.

LOL
Is that supposed to be a weak imitation of a South African Accent ?

**** son, you can't even spell for ****.

True, I may type as well as you think.




That they have good reason (in their minds) does not necessarily make
it
good reason for you or justify their asking

Bull****. Their job. You want it, or not? Your call.

My experience and expertise,
You want it or not ?
Your call

"Do you really think you're that unique? Nope. I din't need a Prima
Dona."


That you generalize like an idiot is not my problem

I"m not mocking you, moron.


Hello ?
Anyone home ??

Who made ANY claim of being mocked

No brain, obviously.

Oh wait,
You're not having a conversation with me
You're responding to the voices in your head

There certainly is no activity in yours.

Unlike you, I was and still am in high enough demand, that It's a
sellers'
market for me.

Your attitude is also quite instructive. It's amazing that anyone
would put up with it.


Well, you're right, stupid little gits like you have a hard time with me,
since I'm often the guy who starts the process of getting them out the
door
to make things work better.

IKWYABWAI. Nice comeback after a Godwin moment.


No Godwin moment except in your stupid attempt to weasel away from being
spanked


I'll leave you to it. you stupid troll

Being wrong is one thing you're good at.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:56:46 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 21:44:25 GMT, wrote:




Moron, neither my opinion, Ed's, nor yours matters. What matters is
the opinion of the hiring entity. It's important for *THEM*. Your
sorry ass loses (to be expected for a loser).


Having been the hiring entity for a number of years, my opinion
matters. I don't ask for the SS# up front.

....and your point is? You don't have one.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:12:16 -0500, wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 22:42:36 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 23:40:53 -0600, "NotMe" wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:25:49 +0000 (UTC), Doug Miller
wrote:

wrote in :

BTW, you don't think a SSN is needed for tax reasons? boggle

Not at the time a person is *applying* for a job, no, it's not needed for
tax reasons.

Applicatoins also have the information needed to do any background
checks for employment. Why would you want to work for a company that
you can't trust with your SSN? Considering the number of people who
have your SSN, isn't this a little silly?

A lot of information is needed to complete the employment process including
personal and professional references. I don't and won't supply those unless
and until there is a determination of a skill set and other match for the
position.

Fair enough but note that you *will* be excluded from consideration by
many employers. I refused to supply this information, once, before
even a phone interview. That was the last I heard from the company.


It's unreasonable for an employer to expect that data at the get go.

It doesn't matter what *you* think is reasonable.

The name of the game is protecting your information. I have had experience
where someone else used my data obtained from a contract recruiter to pose
as me including signing my name and professional license number to federal
documents.

You've already lost. That horse is *long* gone. Do yourself a favor
and don't **** off prospective employers for no reason.

Rother **** them off and not have to work for idiots than to cave and
end up working for them - wishing you had not - be better off spending
your time looking for a job with a decent company - in MANY cases.

Utterly absurd.

wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:28:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 12:56:42 -0500, wrote:




Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the application
in the trash.

Responsible employers don't ask for personal information they do not
need. They don't take on the risk of keeping it on file. Some states
have privacy laws that require such information to be kept double
locked for security.

Wrong. They invariably ask for this information on the application
for employment.

Applications for employment sounds like something mcdonalds would do. I
don't think I ever filled out a job application, unless it was something
the post office related to taking vigorous testing. Also never had the
opportunity to negotiate terms, but I have turned down jobs. I liked it
when all job adds included pay scale, back in the day ! My resume does
include my social security number, of course I don't need it anymore, I
hope !!

Greg

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 18:31:48 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 08:06:24 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:28:07 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:03:43 -0500, "Meanie" wrote:


"IGot2P" wrote in message
...
On 12/4/2012 8:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Dec 4, 8:27 pm, 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 is a prospective employer supposed to do
any kind of background checks without even a
SS #? It's typically asked for when applying for a
loan, credit card, apartment rental, hospital visit,
etc. So, I don't see the issue as being unique
or unreasonable in regard to employment.

Financial institutes, leasing agencies, medical facilities, etc.
all
require
financial payment for services and/or goods. They require the need
to
check
credit history to ensure they deal with a financially responsible
person
so
they can get paid. An employer does not and simply pays the
employee
to
do a
job. If anything, the applicant should check the history of the
employer
to
ensure they've never had problems with payroll. There is no need
for
an
employer to seek SSN....period.


I am retired now but one of the first things that we did when
someone
applied for employment was to run their SS# against the ones that
were
already on file for current employees. You might find it surprising
but
several times that SS# was already being used by one of our
employees.
We
then had to find out if the current employee was the actual owner of
that
SS# or if the applicant was or neither of them was.

Now that opens a new light and I can see the reason. BUT, I still
can't
see
why they cannot wait to do that if/after they hire the person. Yes, it
may
avoid a minor hassle of hiring and paperwork, but it isn't difficult,
IMO,
to simply move on to the runner up applicant.

Because they're not going to do a pre-employment background check
*after* they hire. sheesh!

Your right

I even took a few English courses in grade school.



Oh dear.
A spell flame
Someone is getting desperate

No, dummy. You used the WRONG WORD. It shows a lower than claimed
intellect.


No stupid,

Yes, dummy. "Your" and "you're" are completely different words. You
used the wrong one, clearly showing your IQ.

It's a typo from not paying close enough attention to the spell-checker
But this from the idiot who writes

It is *not* a tupo.

"beck pedaling"
snicker

*That* is a tupo. You might want to learn something. ...if you can.


Idiots in glass house should not throw anyting
So drop whatever in in your hand, dummy

I'm sure your mother told you that the terminally stupid should shut
up and just be thought fools.

I didn't study Englsih or in English until High School.
And I'm willing to bet if it came to a showdown, that I have a larger
vocabulary and a beter grasp of grammar and syntax than you.

Obviously wrong. You already failed third grade.


From the idiot who starts a spell flame from a typo while writing
"beck pedaling"

[..../]
IRONY

snicker
You really are stupid


IKWYABWAI is your best line yet.

Instead they'll do a post-conditional-offer employment check with
the
final offer conditional on the results
See how simple that is

No, they won't. They'll pass on your sorry ass for someone who will
follow instructions.


You really should stop making stupid presumptions about others

You're providing the evidence. You've stated that you would not
follow instructions. End of argument. You lose.


What instructions are those dummy ?

Fork over the information when asked, dummy. Sheesh! You really
can't think!

What some people seem to forget

...that they want a job? You probably have forgotten that.

Indeed.
From age 25 on, I had people calling me to offer me work.
Nice when you can get it.

YOu really don't have a clue.


You're right,

Yes, at least you finally realize it.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:14:49 -0500, wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 22:51:16 GMT, wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 12:51:29 -0500, wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 05:44:45 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:28:07 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:03:43 -0500, "Meanie" wrote:


"IGot2P" wrote in message
...
On 12/4/2012 8:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Dec 4, 8:27 pm, 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 is a prospective employer supposed to do
any kind of background checks without even a
SS #? It's typically asked for when applying for a
loan, credit card, apartment rental, hospital visit,
etc. So, I don't see the issue as being unique
or unreasonable in regard to employment.

Financial institutes, leasing agencies, medical facilities, etc. all
require
financial payment for services and/or goods. They require the need to
check
credit history to ensure they deal with a financially responsible
person
so
they can get paid. An employer does not and simply pays the employee to
do a
job. If anything, the applicant should check the history of the
employer
to
ensure they've never had problems with payroll. There is no need for an
employer to seek SSN....period.


I am retired now but one of the first things that we did when someone
applied for employment was to run their SS# against the ones that were
already on file for current employees. You might find it surprising but
several times that SS# was already being used by one of our employees.
We
then had to find out if the current employee was the actual owner of
that
SS# or if the applicant was or neither of them was.

Now that opens a new light and I can see the reason. BUT, I still can't
see
why they cannot wait to do that if/after they hire the person. Yes, it may
avoid a minor hassle of hiring and paperwork, but it isn't difficult, IMO,
to simply move on to the runner up applicant.

Because they're not going to do a pre-employment background check
*after* they hire. sheesh!

Your right

I even took a few English courses in grade school.

Instead they'll do a post-conditional-offer employment check with the
final offer conditional on the results
See how simple that is

No, they won't. They'll pass on your sorry ass for someone who will
follow instructions.

What some people seem to forget

...that they want a job? You probably have forgotten that.
There ARE employers ( and others) out there who will ask for
information they A) don't need and B) have no legal authority to ask
for and will be pricks when told politely they are not getting it.

They clearly believe they have the need for the information. They
also have the legal authority to ask for the information, so your
argument is just as stupid as...

Actually, in Canada they do NOT have the right to ask for it.

Who the **** cares about Canuckistan? You and HomoGay can have it.

...

On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 18:54:50 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:32:51 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 20:28:30 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:44:32 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 05:52:37 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 02:21:14 -0500, wrote:




OK, but if you have 1000 applicants and one finalist to make an
offer,
you only need that one number, not all the others that will be
sitting
in a file drawer for a long time.

Nobody is going to get to the application phase for 1000 prospective
employees to fill one job. You would not even look at that many
resumes. Usually they seldom even consider more than a few, enough to
call them back.

My point is though, you don't need the SS# on the application. Does
not matter if it is 2, 10, 100 or 10,000. Until you have a viable
candidate for the job, you have no need for the SS.

You must not live in a place where they have a lot of immigrants.

Around here, a job application with a SSN left blank would just be
tossed in the trash.
Around here there are immigrants from everywhere immaginable. Chine,
eastern Europe, Korea, the middle east, Africa, Central America, South
America,Western Europe, Great Britain, the south Pacific and even the
USA,

The SSN (SIN here in Canada) is not required untill the offer of
employment is made and accepted. The number is then mandatory -

You may not have all the government red tape an employer has here.

Most employers would look at a blank SSN as a person trying to hide
something and with the typical stack of applications they will get for
any job, why even go any farther. Chuck it and look at the next one.

Why don't you stop claiming that you are speaking for "most employers"
You are not

...and you are?

But I never made or implied it like you have done repeatedly

Good Lord, you're stupid. This discussion never revolved around a
vote. The *FACT* is that employers *DO* ask for this information
before offering a job. Not supplying the information has a big
potential downside (you aren't considered for the job). Supplying
information to a hiring corporation, that you've already given to
every Tom, Dick, and Harry, has little downside.

My bet is that your neuron still won't get it.

You are really *FUNNY*. What a moron.

And you are just sad and stupid and pathetic and.
Well why go on ?
You're not even smart enough to avoid writing "beck pedaling" while doing a
spell flame on an innocuous typo

That's how much a moron you are.

You really are a stupid ****.

In article ,
wrote:

The *fact* is that employers do
want this information

G' ahead and be a pussy and give them what they want, then. I'll
continue to defend my rights to freedom and privacy.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:12:16 -0500, wrote:


Rother **** them off and not have to work for idiots than to cave and
end up working for them - wishing you had not - be better off spending
your time looking for a job with a decent company - in MANY cases.

Utterly absurd.

LOL
Apparently some Idiots are more than happy to work for other idiots.
Must make them feel at home
And then those same idiots are back out looking for work sooner than later,
not realizing that their willingness to work for idiots is part of the
problem

On Dec 6, 11:35*pm, gregz wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:28:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 12:56:42 -0500, wrote:

Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the application
in the trash.

Responsible employers don't ask for personal information they do not
need. *They don't take on the risk of keeping it on file. Some states
have privacy laws that require such information to be kept double
locked for security.

Wrong. *They invariably ask for this information on the application
for employment.

Applications for employment sounds like something mcdonalds would do. I
don't think I ever filled out a job application, unless it was something
the post office related to taking vigorous testing. Also never had the
opportunity to negotiate terms, but I have turned down jobs. I liked it
when all job adds included pay scale, back in the day ! My resume does
include my social security number, of course I don't need it anymore, I
hope !!

Greg- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

An there you have another data point. A guy who not only
doesn't object to putting his SS# on an employment application,
he actually has it on his resume. I'm not sure that's such
a good idea, because presumably it results in wider
circulation of the #.

On Dec 6, 7:01*pm, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:07:33 -0500, George
wrote:

On 12/6/2012 9:22 AM, wrote:
On Dec 6, 8:46 am, George wrote:
On 12/5/2012 12:56 PM, wrote:

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:57:07 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:16:50 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

stuff snipped

Right, but they don't need that until a job offer is made and
accepted.

Exactly... which is why I tell my daughters when taking an
interview,
they will supply their SS # upon employment.

Good idea. *A smart employer should realize that an applicant smart
enough
to care about securing their own personal data might care enough to
protect
company data as well.

Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the application
in the trash.

A big box or megacorp definitely would because they are looking for
bodies to meld into their system at the cheapest price. A smart small
business might appreciate that the person has a brain.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So then you have to ask yourself. * How lucky to you feel today?
Is it worth having the prospective employer throw the application
in the trash because you didn't supply the SS#? * With unemployment
at 8% I know what my answer would be. * But on the other hand
when you can collect unemployment for 2 years, food stamps,
free healthcare, I guess that changes the equation. *In fact, maybe
leaving it off is a good idea. *One way to go on those job interviews
and make sure you don't get the job.

Like all things in life it isn't a black and white scenario that you
rely on.

After all this is nothing but a business transaction. You are offering
something for sale and someone may want to buy it. Terms and conditions
are a moving target.

It is *exactly* a business transaction. One person has a product to
sell and another has money to buy. *Just like a retail transaction,
there are agents in the middle who operate with a set of rules that
they usually have no power to change. *If you don't follow the rules,
you lose.

If say it is a position at the big box mart chances are you are going
nowhere if you don't absolutely comply with whatever procedures are in
place. But say it is a skilled or professional position. Then you have
bargaining room. The employer makes an offer and you make a counter
offer. Everytime I accepted a position there was a period of negotiation
with offers and counter offers leading into it. If we agreed the usual
deal on the first day was a request to "stop by HR and give them
information so they can enter you into the payroll system".

Complete nonsense.

Just because YOU never had that experience does NOT mean it's not true or
"complete nonsense".

What experience are you talking about? Finding every
employee at the big box mart irresponsible? You're right
that hasn't been my experience and what makes it nonsense
is that it just isn't true.



All you are demonstrating with such comments, is that you have spent your
life working at the low end of the food chain.

I'm a degreed EE and had a 17 year career in engineering and
marketing at Intel. So, you're wrong again, fool




I had one job offer that went.
* * "We have heard good things about you
* * * We would like to hire you to work X hours a week at $YY.00 (as per
union Contract) per hour.
* * * * All you need to do is come fully prepared to do A,B.C. those X
hours."
* * * * We will provide all administrative support.
* * * * nterested ?"

Did that for 10 years on the side of my regular consulting job
* * I could have done nothing else but just those X hours a week, and lived
very comfortably of that income.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's nice. But it has nothing to do with anything I
posted, anything being discussed here, and I couldn't
care less.....

On Dec 6, 10:55*pm, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 6 Dec 2012 18:13:56 GMT, wrote:





On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 05:47:22 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6 Dec 2012 03:50:13 GMT, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:26:18 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:08:22 -0800, Oren wrote:

Would you work for a company that you could not trust with your SSN?

Would yo work for a company that wants your personal information for
no good reason?

They have good reason, so they ask.

They don't have a good reason until they offer employment.

Your (worthless) opinion.

I've been hiring people for the past 40 years. *While it used to be
SOP to have the SS#, it has not been for years now. * *You? *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's interesting? You say it used to be asked for, but
hasn't now for years. What caused the change? And how
could you possibly know what all other employers are or
are not doing all over the country?

wrote in message
...
On Dec 6, 7:01 pm, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:07:33 -0500, George
wrote:

On 12/6/2012 9:22 AM, wrote:
On Dec 6, 8:46 am, George wrote:
On 12/5/2012 12:56 PM, wrote:

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:57:07 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:16:50 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

stuff snipped

Right, but they don't need that until a job offer is made and
accepted.

Exactly... which is why I tell my daughters when taking an
interview,
they will supply their SS # upon employment.

Good idea. A smart employer should realize that an applicant smart
enough
to care about securing their own personal data might care enough to
protect
company data as well.

Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he
is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the
application
in the trash.

A big box or megacorp definitely would because they are looking for
bodies to meld into their system at the cheapest price. A smart small
business might appreciate that the person has a brain.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So then you have to ask yourself. How lucky to you feel today?
Is it worth having the prospective employer throw the application
in the trash because you didn't supply the SS#? With unemployment
at 8% I know what my answer would be. But on the other hand
when you can collect unemployment for 2 years, food stamps,
free healthcare, I guess that changes the equation. In fact, maybe
leaving it off is a good idea. One way to go on those job interviews
and make sure you don't get the job.

Like all things in life it isn't a black and white scenario that you
rely on.

After all this is nothing but a business transaction. You are offering
something for sale and someone may want to buy it. Terms and conditions
are a moving target.

It is *exactly* a business transaction. One person has a product to
sell and another has money to buy. Just like a retail transaction,
there are agents in the middle who operate with a set of rules that
they usually have no power to change. If you don't follow the rules,
you lose.

If say it is a position at the big box mart chances are you are going
nowhere if you don't absolutely comply with whatever procedures are in
place. But say it is a skilled or professional position. Then you have
bargaining room. The employer makes an offer and you make a counter
offer. Everytime I accepted a position there was a period of negotiation
with offers and counter offers leading into it. If we agreed the usual
deal on the first day was a request to "stop by HR and give them
information so they can enter you into the payroll system".

Complete nonsense.

Just because YOU never had that experience does NOT mean it's not true or
"complete nonsense".
#
# What experience are you talking about? Finding every
# employee at the big box mart irresponsible? You're right
# that hasn't been my experience and what makes it nonsense
# is that it just isn't true.
#
All you are demonstrating with such comments, is that you have spent your
life working at the low end of the food chain.
#
# I'm a degreed EE and had a 17 year career in engineering and
# marketing at Intel. So, you're wrong again, fool


So are you claiming that you and are sockpuppets of the same
poster ?

If so, then I have no need to contimue
If not, they you need to brush up on your reading skills to identify (at the
top of the post) who is being addressed





I had one job offer that went.
"We have heard good things about you
We would like to hire you to work X hours a week at $YY.00 (as per
union Contract) per hour.
All you need to do is come fully prepared to do A,B.C. those X
hours."
We will provide all administrative support.
nterested ?"

Did that for 10 years on the side of my regular consulting job
I could have done nothing else but just those X hours a week, and lived
very comfortably of that income.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
#
# That's nice. But it has nothing to do with anything I
# posted, anything being discussed here, and I couldn't
# care less.....

See above
And come back to us when you've cleared that up.

On Dec 7, 7:55*am, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Dec 6, 7:01 pm, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:



wrote in message

.. .

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:07:33 -0500, George
wrote:

On 12/6/2012 9:22 AM, wrote:
On Dec 6, 8:46 am, George wrote:
On 12/5/2012 12:56 PM, wrote:

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:57:07 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:16:50 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

stuff snipped

Right, but they don't need that until a job offer is made and
accepted.

Exactly... which is why I tell my daughters when taking an
interview,
they will supply their SS # upon employment.

Good idea. A smart employer should realize that an applicant smart
enough
to care about securing their own personal data might care enough to
protect
company data as well.

Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he
is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the
application
in the trash.

A big box or megacorp definitely would because they are looking for
bodies to meld into their system at the cheapest price. A smart small
business might appreciate that the person has a brain.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So then you have to ask yourself. How lucky to you feel today?
Is it worth having the prospective employer throw the application
in the trash because you didn't supply the SS#? With unemployment
at 8% I know what my answer would be. But on the other hand
when you can collect unemployment for 2 years, food stamps,
free healthcare, I guess that changes the equation. In fact, maybe
leaving it off is a good idea. One way to go on those job interviews
and make sure you don't get the job.

Like all things in life it isn't a black and white scenario that you
rely on.

After all this is nothing but a business transaction. You are offering
something for sale and someone may want to buy it. Terms and conditions
are a moving target.

It is *exactly* a business transaction. One person has a product to
sell and another has money to buy. Just like a retail transaction,
there are agents in the middle who operate with a set of rules that
they usually have no power to change. If you don't follow the rules,
you lose.

If say it is a position at the big box mart chances are you are going
nowhere if you don't absolutely comply with whatever procedures are in
place. But say it is a skilled or professional position. Then you have
bargaining room. The employer makes an offer and you make a counter
offer. Everytime I accepted a position there was a period of negotiation
with offers and counter offers leading into it. If we agreed the usual
deal on the first day was a request to "stop by HR and give them
information so they can enter you into the payroll system".

Complete nonsense.

Just because YOU never had that experience does NOT mean it's not true or
"complete nonsense".

#
# What experience are you talking about? *Finding every
# employee at the big box mart irresponsible? * You're right
# that hasn't been my experience and what makes it nonsense
# is that it just isn't true.
# All you are demonstrating with such comments, is that you have spent your
life working at the low end of the food chain.

#
# I'm a degreed EE and had a 17 year career in engineering and
# marketing at Intel. *So, you're wrong again, fool

So are you claiming that you and are sockpuppets of the same
poster ?



No, I just misread the post. See, when I'm wrong, I'll admit
it. Actually, k and I don't get along all that well. But
we do agree on one thing. And that is that you're a nonsensical
jerk. I don't see anyone else here that has much use for you
either.

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 04:35:11 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 22:28:31 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 12:56:42 -0500, wrote:




Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the application
in the trash.

Responsible employers don't ask for personal information they do not
need. They don't take on the risk of keeping it on file. Some states
have privacy laws that require such information to be kept double
locked for security.

Wrong. They invariably ask for this information on the application
for employment.

Applications for employment sounds like something mcdonalds would do.

I'm sure they do. At least most employers large enough to have an HR
department use employment applications. A lot of information is
needed during the hiring process and the application is the way to
collect it all at once. Asking for it piece at a time is nuts.

I don't think I ever filled out a job application, unless it was something
the post office related to taking vigorous testing. Also never had the
opportunity to negotiate terms, but I have turned down jobs. I liked it
when all job adds included pay scale, back in the day ! My resume does
include my social security number, of course I don't need it anymore, I
hope !!

Assuming you've worked, it's hard to believe that you've never filled
out a job application. How did they collect all of your personal
information needed during the hiring process?

The salary has always been part of the employment negotiations, often
way ahead of any offer. It's usually discussed in broad terms
(minimums, expected ranges, etc.) at the first contact. As far as
posted pay scales, I've never had a job where this information was
public knowledge. I've never had any idea what my cow-orkers made,
nor they, mine.

I certainly wouldn't post my SSN on a resume. I don't even include my
address or any identifying information more than my name and an email
address. I guess my cell phone number is on there too.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 21:17:44 -0800, Smitty Two
wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

The *fact* is that employers do
want this information

G' ahead and be a pussy and give them what they want, then. I'll
continue to defend my rights to freedom and privacy.

Let me guess; you're unemployed.

Every now and again, one really takes off.

This is such a moment. I don't remember the
last one that took off like this. Was it WD-40
or political?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Larry W" wrote in message
...
The original troll must be marvelling at returns well beyond any
reasonable expectation from his post.

--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 06:55:50 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Dec 6, 7:01 pm, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:
wrote in message

...





On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:07:33 -0500, George
wrote:

On 12/6/2012 9:22 AM, wrote:
On Dec 6, 8:46 am, George wrote:
On 12/5/2012 12:56 PM, wrote:

On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:57:07 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

"Doug" wrote in message
On Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:16:50 -0500, Ed Pawlowski
wrote:

stuff snipped

Right, but they don't need that until a job offer is made and
accepted.

Exactly... which is why I tell my daughters when taking an
interview,
they will supply their SS # upon employment.

Good idea. A smart employer should realize that an applicant smart
enough
to care about securing their own personal data might care enough to
protect
company data as well.

Most employers would just think this guy is hiding something or he
is
going to be a pain in the ass employee and just throw the
application
in the trash.

A big box or megacorp definitely would because they are looking for
bodies to meld into their system at the cheapest price. A smart small
business might appreciate that the person has a brain.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

So then you have to ask yourself. How lucky to you feel today?
Is it worth having the prospective employer throw the application
in the trash because you didn't supply the SS#? With unemployment
at 8% I know what my answer would be. But on the other hand
when you can collect unemployment for 2 years, food stamps,
free healthcare, I guess that changes the equation. In fact, maybe
leaving it off is a good idea. One way to go on those job interviews
and make sure you don't get the job.

Like all things in life it isn't a black and white scenario that you
rely on.

After all this is nothing but a business transaction. You are offering
something for sale and someone may want to buy it. Terms and conditions
are a moving target.

It is *exactly* a business transaction. One person has a product to
sell and another has money to buy. Just like a retail transaction,
there are agents in the middle who operate with a set of rules that
they usually have no power to change. If you don't follow the rules,
you lose.

If say it is a position at the big box mart chances are you are going
nowhere if you don't absolutely comply with whatever procedures are in
place. But say it is a skilled or professional position. Then you have
bargaining room. The employer makes an offer and you make a counter
offer. Everytime I accepted a position there was a period of negotiation
with offers and counter offers leading into it. If we agreed the usual
deal on the first day was a request to "stop by HR and give them
information so they can enter you into the payroll system".

Complete nonsense.

Just because YOU never had that experience does NOT mean it's not true or
"complete nonsense".
#
# What experience are you talking about? Finding every
# employee at the big box mart irresponsible? You're right
# that hasn't been my experience and what makes it nonsense
# is that it just isn't true.
#
All you are demonstrating with such comments, is that you have spent your
life working at the low end of the food chain.
#
# I'm a degreed EE and had a 17 year career in engineering and
# marketing at Intel. So, you're wrong again, fool


So are you claiming that you and are sockpuppets of the same
poster ?

More proof of your incredible cluelessness.

If so, then I have no need to contimue
If not, they you need to brush up on your reading skills to identify (at the
top of the post) who is being addressed

Clueless.



I had one job offer that went.
"We have heard good things about you
We would like to hire you to work X hours a week at $YY.00 (as per
union Contract) per hour.
All you need to do is come fully prepared to do A,B.C. those X
hours."
We will provide all administrative support.
nterested ?"

Did that for 10 years on the side of my regular consulting job
I could have done nothing else but just those X hours a week, and lived
very comfortably of that income.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
#
# That's nice. But it has nothing to do with anything I
# posted, anything being discussed here, and I couldn't
# care less.....

See above
And come back to us when you've cleared that up.

"Cleared that up"? That your sorry life is of no consequence to anyone
else here? You really _are_ clueless.

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 04:57:48 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 22:12:16 -0500, wrote:


Rother **** them off and not have to work for idiots than to cave and
end up working for them - wishing you had not - be better off spending
your time looking for a job with a decent company - in MANY cases.

Utterly absurd.

LOL
Apparently some Idiots are more than happy to work for other idiots.
Must make them feel at home
And then those same idiots are back out looking for work sooner than later,
not realizing that their willingness to work for idiots is part of the
problem

It's amazing that you have the brains to breathe.

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 23:05:39 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2012 11:26:00 -0500, wrote:




Most employers would look at a blank SSN as a person trying to hide
something and with the typical stack of applications they will get for
any job, why even go any farther. Chuck it and look at the next one.

Yes, they are trying to hide something and should be commended for it.
That information is not needed up front.

Your worthless opinion.