Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're hiring someone who would have access to valuable information that could be sold, who would have information before the market, or who could potentially be paid to sabotage the company, it's important to ensure the candidate has good credit so they're less likely to do those things, since they at least wouldn't feel a financial pressure to do so and would only do it out of greed.
Credit scores aren't an indicator for morals. Do you really have so much faith in the current credit system that you'd be willing to turn someone from a job they're otherwise qualified. The argument could be totally flipped on it's head. It's important to hire someone with a bad credit score (using it as a measure of wealth apparently) because they will value their job more and not do anything to risk losing it.
Re: Facebook Accused by HUD of Housing Bias Over Use of Targeted Ads
#151I didn't say credit scores are an indicator for morals or wealth, or that they're a system I support. But bad debt is a possible incentive to act against your employer's interest that can be controlled against by using credit score as proxy for knowing their exact financials. I'm not saying that's fair, or good, just that that's the thought process behind it.