Comment by iav
5 months ago
I am an investor in equifax. Let me clear up a misconception on where the data comes from. Half the data comes from large enterprise customers, who “sell” the data in exchange for Equifax doing I-9 verification for free. The other half comes from 39 payroll companies. Every single payroll company except for Rippling and Gusto sell paystub data to Euifax. (Rippling will start next year). Those are exclusive revenue share deals. You cannot be a competitive payroll provider without the revenue share from Equifax. So before you blame your employer, they might not be selling it directly and even if they opted out, your payroll company will sell it anyway.
Do you have a sense of why, according to you Gusto will remain the only company that doesn't sell payroll data to Equifax?
Seems like something gusto can turn into a marketing point. Surely there’s a desire for a privacy respecting payroll/hr platform.
The actual buyers of payroll software don't care and if you think people are going to evaluate their potential employer based on what payroll solution they use, you are wrong.
2 replies →
This may not be correct. My current company uses Gusto for payroll. Pulling my data, I see everything. I am confirming with Gusto support its sourced from them.
Confirmed with Gusto. They send data to WorkNumber.
"...for the purpose of automating employment and income verifications. This feature helps streamline the process for employees who may need to provide proof of employment or income for loans, credit, or public aid."
Gusto is still pre-revenue?
Gusto is not pre-revenue, it has $500M+ in arr
https://techcrunch.com/2023/06/27/gusto-remote-deal-500m-rev...
Sounds like Gusto is the only acceptable option then. Thanks for the info!
> even if they opted out, your payroll company will sell it anyway
Surely that can't be legal?
As a Gusto admin for my company and user for another (well, my wife is the user), I am happy with our choice of payroll provider.
That's good to know. The company I work for currently uses Rippling; I will mention this upcoming change and suggest that we should consider switching to Gusto.
I hate the argument of "you cannot be a competitive company without being a scumbag."
It's a bad argument through and through.
Perhaps you would find it to be more palatable if it were phrased as: "You cannot be competitive as a company if you do not serve the wants and needs of the customer."?
But, of course, that says the same thing. These companies are scumbags because that's how the customer wants them to behave. In this case, because it makes executing payroll cheaper for the customer, which is a highly desirable trait to the customer.
The customer often does not have the luxury of making perfectly rational choices.
IBM for example waits to fly you out to orientation in Armonk before they show you the binding employment contract with dubious clauses.
These businesspeople know this. Introducing pressure and a sense of inevitability of poor conditions is part of the game. And they know that it's scummy. But Ayn Randians will defend them to the grave as they eschew the responsibility to build a stable enduring economy for one that disproportionately rewards them.
Framing it as the customer wants this level of strongarming is the same as saying they want bloody revolution when it inevitably follows. What customers actually want is for scumbags to be banned from leadership roles in the economy, and for toxic business strategies to be regulated out of relevance.
Can I opt out thru the payroll company?
No, but you can opt out at the Aggregator level. Currently, The Work Number is the largest salary aggregator, you may find this link, helpful:
https://employees.theworknumber.com/employee-data-freeze
Thanks
Maybe I'm missing something... If the data doesn't come from the employer, then how does the "payroll" company get it?
It is indirect instead. The employer tells the payroll company: pay employee $x (and handle deductions, retirement contributes etc ...) The payroll company then has this data and can resell it. I would expect the contract the employer has with the payroll company explicitly allows for the data sharing.
You make an excellent argument here for tight regulation of the industry.
… and the usage?
Most highly-paid people have no idea how much privilege this affords them.
You wonder why so many businesses are nice to you? It’s because they’ve already looked you up and know you’ve got a high income and are a millionaire.
Write a personal check for your next automobile? Sure thing, you can drive it off the lot a few minutes later. They won’t even bother cashing the check for a week or two.
Try doing something like that as an hourly worker, even if you’ve got the money in the bank.
You wonder why so many businesses are mean to you? It's because they've already looked you up and believe from the data that you won't be a good customer.
The dealership can also just call the bank to verify funds. Which would be reasonable and non-discriminatory all without needing a third party and wouldn't involve your salary at any level. Aside from this it's the financing company that cares, not the dealership, who only wants the car off their floor credit plan.
So what you're saying is it _shouldn't_ matter if you have money, because if you're a low income earner, you should be treated poorly, and you're happy to be personally invested in a system which creates this outcome.
It not only should be regulated but you should feel a little gross for saying any of this outloud.
3 replies →
This is also why certain homes get hit in high-end burglary crews. There are multiple crews hitting those who purchase precious metals with physical delivery (like gold American Eagle coins). It is not all positive. Considering how few victims even bother to report such crimes, it is terrifying.
From what I understand from my cousin, a career criminal, there are entire theft rings working off of databases such as these. He knew mostly of car-related theft rings, but I hear about safe-cracking burglaries quite often, usually stealing Rolex watches or precious metals.
6 replies →
No thank you. I value my privacy and my negotiating ability more than I value a 'service' I didn't even ask for.
3 replies →
That sounds like the most unappealing exchange imaginable. Yes, let me lose both bargaining power with new jobs while simultaneously painting a target on my back, all in exchange for companies being more willing to take my money.
Now this is some remarkable gymnastics. Are you also an investor in Equifax or have some other financial interest in similar services? If not, I'm very curious to hear how you tied yourself into this knot.
3 replies →
This is the view from a bubble I am not familiar with, and really don't care about.
> Write a personal check for your next automobile?
Personal check? What year is this?!? :-)
18 replies →
The finance companies are nice enough that it doesn't really matter.
Bought mine with cash but realized it was Sunday and I didn't have a way to get a cashier's check from a savings account.
They offered to put the down payment on a credit card and finance. Paid it off once I had access to the account.
Ended up being a wash, the points were worth a little more than the percentage charge.
If you get your personal data report, you'll see that it tells you who looked you up. It is not every business you've worked with. It is not even every background check that has been done on you.
I'm not saying that rich people do not have privilege - they do. But it isn't because your local car dealer looked up your earnings data.
Personal check? You can buy a car in full with a credit card if you pass the vibe check.
1 reply →
This is a great argument as to why we need stronger regulations to make these practices illegal.
Fuck that.
"Oh, aren't you happy we live in a world where the rich are explicitly treated better because they carry around a big sign saying 'I am rich' when interacting with corporations?" No. I am not.
2 replies →
I can almost smell the concentrated capitalism in this comment.