You can use background info to help decide who to hire. Most companies feel character counts. the laws governing background info in the hiring process are strictly defined. allegations from newspapers are not valid reasons for denying unemployment. convictions are. how would you like it if someone accused you wrongly of spousal abuse and you were no longer allowed to hold any job other than a cook at McDonalds? after all, character counts. You sound like a law student who seems to know the basics, but companies don't have to tell you why you aren't hired. They just choose the other candidate. Most jobs create numerous applicants and it is very easy to screen out those you aren't comfortable with. Yup. I was going to say the Cubs could go that route, but the whole debate arose from people saying we shouldn't acquire players like Bradley, who have haven't been convicted of a crime. If Chicago didn't want to hire Bradley, they wouldn't even have to show an interest, much less give a reason for passing him up. I was just saying that, legally, you can't deny someone employment based on allegations alone (this would obviously have to be provable in any legal action), since posters seemed to be unfairly labeling Mr. Bradley as a spouse abuser. It would be easy for Chicago to get rid of Bradley should he become a problem. I don't see the logic in avoiding him b/c of a "moral stance" on spouse abuse. It doesn't improve the world one bit denying him a spot in Wrigley. He's going to make his money somewhere and is going to abuse his spouse (worst case scenario) wherever he lives. He does have injury concerns and that is a very valid reason not to want him in Wrigley. I don't think it is moral (lol) to punish someone for alleged misconduct.