Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 85 posts

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#51

Post by numbsafari »

mschuster91 wrote: post #38

This kind of company deserves to die, and the public record laws for highly personal data also. The obsession with "background checks" is a really huge part of why the US has extremely high recidivism rate. When people can't find a job even flipping burgers or distributing newspapers, they have no choice other than to go back to the criminal life. edit: as I got private feedback: it is not my intention to disrespect…

I work with hospitals and receive access to incredibly private information, as well as access to and knowledge of pharmacy data for highly controlled substances. Some of the hospitals I work with are research institutions, whose researchers are subject to death threats on a regular basis.

I find it perfectly reasonable that they would want a third-party verification of my legal history, drug use, and financial situation.

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#52

Post by gringoDan »

mschuster91 wrote: post #38

This kind of company deserves to die, and the public record laws for highly personal data also. The obsession with "background checks" is a really huge part of why the US has extremely high recidivism rate. When people can't find a job even flipping burgers or distributing newspapers, they have no choice other than to go back to the criminal life. edit: as I got private feedback: it is not my intention to disrespect…

I 95% agree with you. We have a huge problem in the US with recidivism and once someone has paid their debt to society, their past shouldn't be held against them.

However, Checkr is the result of a strong demand for this type of service, not the cause of it. If Checkr didn't exist then companies would use someone else to conduct their background checks.

Sadly, I don't think we'll see a change in this mentality & practice until there is legislation against it. Background checks are just too easy of a way to filter applicants (from an effort perspective), especially for minimum-wage/high turnover jobs.

Also, just to play devil's advocate - would you get into an Uber if you knew the driver had 5 previous DUIs? What happens if/when this person drives drunk again and kills a passenger or a pedestrian?

The ethical decision becomes more nuanced, Uber has a responsibility to do everything it can to ensure the safety of its passengers. You have to draw a line somewhere.

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#53

Post by jaredhansen »

greatamerican wrote: post #40

This company exists solely to extend the punishment of people who have ALREADY BEEN PUNISHED BY THE COURT SYSTEM. If there is any justice in the world, this company will go out of business.

First, that's completely the wrong framing. Maybe checkr doesn't "care enough" about the people who have been punished, but it's not like the company exists out of spite. It exists to serve the legitimate business interests of people who are scared of the impact that a person with a prior record of doing bad things may have on their business, if hired. (Including: our customers are in enterprise/gov/edu and require us to commit to background checks on everyone we hire).

Secondly:

I don't understand all the hatred here. Who, exactly, is this going to prevent from getting a job? People who were honest in their application when asked about prior convictions/etc, or people who lied?

Why should businesses be forced to hire people who lie about past misdeeds? There's a perfectly reasonable way for people who have done bad things, and been "PUNISHED BY THE COURT SYSTEM") to handle it: you tell the employer "x years ago I was convicted of X bad thing. I was guilty, but I learned from the experience and changed. Here are three character references who have known me both before and after, and I'm happy to tell you more about this if you want to know".

If you are honest in your application, a background check will only corroborate your truthfulness. And if you're not, why should we as a society object to someone taking that into account when considering whether to trust you?

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#54

Post by mywittyname »

hangonhn wrote: post #36
gringoDan wrote: post #6

Checkr is minting money. I doubt they needed this cash infusion, but it could make sense to drive even more growth. Almost all of the on-demand companies (Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, etc.) use the service to screen independent contractors. The kicker is that independent contractors often sign up for many of these services, so Checkr can turn around and sell the same data that they pull for 1 individual to 3+ companies at ~…

"I doubt they needed this cash infusion, but it could make sense to drive even more growth." I doubt that's the case. If it is, then their management just made a huge mistake. Raising money always has a cost attached. Raise enough money and your exit strategy becomes very constrained -- i.e. fewer companies have the capital to acquire a company with higher valuations. Eventually IPO becomes your only option. Your inv…

It's a smart business move to get investors on-board who are also investors in the company's potential clients. The obvious benefit being that they can push/suggest that management use your product, the less obvious benefit is they are less likely to start a competing business.

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#55

Post by Bjartr »

gringoDan wrote: post #52
mschuster91 wrote: post #38

This kind of company deserves to die, and the public record laws for highly personal data also. The obsession with "background checks" is a really huge part of why the US has extremely high recidivism rate. When people can't find a job even flipping burgers or distributing newspapers, they have no choice other than to go back to the criminal life. edit: as I got private feedback: it is not my intention to disrespect…

I 95% agree with you. We have a huge problem in the US with recidivism and once someone has paid their debt to society, their past shouldn't be held against them. However, Checkr is the result of a strong demand for this type of service, not the cause of it. If Checkr didn't exist then companies would use someone else to conduct their background checks. Sadly, I don't think we'll see a change in this mentality & prac…

> would you get into an Uber if you knew the driver had 5 previous DUIs?

Well they somehow convinced the state they should have a driver's license still. If they're that dangerous they shouldn't be on the road.

Further, simply having 5 DUIs on record is itself not a sufficient data point to determine if there is any increased risk today of that person doing so again. For instance, if a person turned to drinking out of grief at one point in their life but has had many stable years since, how would you identify that risk against the risk of someone who hasn't yet lived through such a situation but were it to occur they would drink to excess and make poor decisions too?

NOTE:

I'm not saying those DUIs aren't a problem, I'm just pointing out that it can be more complicated than it first appears to reach an internally consistent, much less fair, approach.

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#56

Post by throwaway2041 »

greatamerican wrote: post #44
Kalium wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've personally witnessed background checks used to catch people who flat-out lied in the hiring process. You're absolutely right. Those people had already been punished by the courts for their misdeeds against society. They were not going to suffer further at our hands. When they chose to lie to us during the hiring process, however, they committed a new misdeed that some might say justified additional reaction.

Do you understand why this is an indictment of your hiring process, rather than of those people?

Why? From the company's perspective it makes sense to ask if an applicant has a criminal record. Statistically someone with a prior conviction is much more likely to commit a future crime

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#57

Post by optimuspaul »

gringoDan wrote: post #52
mschuster91 wrote: post #38

This kind of company deserves to die, and the public record laws for highly personal data also. The obsession with "background checks" is a really huge part of why the US has extremely high recidivism rate. When people can't find a job even flipping burgers or distributing newspapers, they have no choice other than to go back to the criminal life. edit: as I got private feedback: it is not my intention to disrespect…

I 95% agree with you. We have a huge problem in the US with recidivism and once someone has paid their debt to society, their past shouldn't be held against them. However, Checkr is the result of a strong demand for this type of service, not the cause of it. If Checkr didn't exist then companies would use someone else to conduct their background checks. Sadly, I don't think we'll see a change in this mentality & prac…

> would you get into an Uber if you knew the driver had 5 previous DUIs?

Yes, unless they smelled of alcohol, but at that point the DUIs are moot anyway.

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#58

Post by optimuspaul »

jaredhansen wrote: post #53
greatamerican wrote: post #40

This company exists solely to extend the punishment of people who have ALREADY BEEN PUNISHED BY THE COURT SYSTEM. If there is any justice in the world, this company will go out of business.

First, that's completely the wrong framing. Maybe checkr doesn't "care enough" about the people who have been punished, but it's not like the company exists out of spite. It exists to serve the legitimate business interests of people who are scared of the impact that a person with a prior record of doing bad things may have on their business, if hired. (Including: our customers are in enterprise/gov/edu and require u…

I think the problem is the "bad" things I may or may not have done in the past is none of the potential employers business.

The problem though isn't that liars are getting jobs but also the honest people. Valuable skills are overlooked because a past mistake has sullied their appearance.

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#59

Post by jackweirdy »

rusbus wrote: post #13

Maybe now they can buy a vowel. I say this only half as a joke. I recently had to use checkr. The first thing they ask you for is your social security number. Typing your social into a box below a misspelled URL isn't a super comforting experience

The process is even more fun when you don't have an SSN yet and the form doesn't know how to deal with that.

Re: Background checks pay for Checkr, which just raised $100M

#60

Post by optimuspaul »

maaaats wrote: post #34

I find it quite scary that whether you can get employed or not is decided on the whim of some company. What if your record is wrong, and they won't fix it? And what value do you get of the screening? What can you find, that really would matter to a hiring decision, other than extreme cases?

I had to very recently correct my credit report because their happened to be another guy with my same name in another state. it didn't take long but was annoying. I also get a lot of that guys emails, he must have a similar gmail address to mine. super annoying. Sadly his insurance provider leaked a lot of his PII data to me through email. Which is probably still archived on gmail.
Post reply on HN