Commuting - Must have a car to get the job

How many of you have encountered what I have, that to get a job you have to have a car. You don't use the car in the job, and the hours are set, but you must have a car. There's a dependable bus system, it's close enough to bike or even walk if you really have to, but you must have a car. I've seen a ton of this myself.

here we go again

Oops, was this thread done before? I know I ran into this long ago, I worked as a security guard, and not having a car really hurt my chances - only one company would hire me. And people would yell "COP!" at me when I was riding to/from work with the stupid uniform on and that stupid badge.

Oops, was this thread done before? I know I ran into this long ago, I worked as a security guard, and not having a car really hurt my chances - only one company would hire me. And people would yell "COP!" at me when I was riding to/from work with the stupid uniform on and that stupid badge.

Unfortunatly, security guards get about zero respect regardless of the mode of transportation. But in answer to your original question, are you asking if having a car is part of the job requirements? Even if the car is not used during work hours?

I am just going to guess here, but maybe prospective employers think you will miss a lot of time or be late a lot if you don't have a car.

If I were at a job interview for a job that did not require a car during work hours, I would answer 'yes' if they asked me if I had a car, and then just ride my bike to the job after I was hired. With regard to being mocked while riding to work in uniform, you could always stash your uniforms at work and ride in street/bike cloths and change when you get there.

Or if you want to be really honest you can buy one of those bikes with car names. That way when they ask if you have a car you can say, "I have a PT Cruiser" or "I have a Jeep Cherokee". Or if you don't want to buy one of those crappy bikes get an old Peugot. That way you are telling them the truth but they assume you are talking about a car.

Or if you want to be really honest you can buy one of those bikes with car names. That way when they ask if you have a car you can say, "I have a PT Cruiser" or "I have a Jeep Cherokee". Or if you don't want to buy one of those crappy bikes get an old Peugot. That way you are telling them the truth but they assume you are talking about a car.

LOL love this idea...

I had one job that required me to have a car. It was 2 miles from home, and I walked, biked and skated sometimes anyway. I don't know why they would require a car for employment at a record store! There was a little check box on the application: do you have a car? Yes or no.

Too bad this can't be challenged in court...If not needed for the job...It is cars that are more likely to not be reliable.Yes, security at my plant have this same rule to abide by...None of their business...Minimum wage and they think they own your soul.

Sure. I had a job when I lived in LA and they said a car is a must. I didn't have one, but I lied and told them I did. Then I rode the bus or took my bike and told them I parked down the street. :D

Koffee

I gave up a job because the guy wanted me to have a car. Screw that!

I think "do you have a car?" really means, "do you have a personal vehicle, suitable for commuting, or do you have to use public transportation?" In the past, I have had employees who had to take long bus/subway/whatever connections to work, and there were problems with frequent late arrivals.

I can't imagine getting fired for not having a car, unless the car is really required for job performance.

Maybe in Amsterdam, the equivalent question is "do you have a bicycle?" :)

Paul

. . .
I can't imagine getting fired for not having a car, unless the car is really required for job performance.

. . .

Paul

I can imagine not getting hired for not having a car though. Around my neighborhood everyone thinks you are nuts if you want to use yer bike for errands or to commute.

Years ago, I interviewed a woman at the company and disqualified her because she didn't have a car! Yes... I hate myself today for doing that even though I used to take the bus most of the time. It was a warehouse located about a mile from public transportation in a bad section of town and I figured a woman would not want to leave at 12 midnight walking in that neighborhood. I did it all the time and nothing ever happend to me.

The original poster is not a high paid employee (security guard) yet he must spend a significant portion of his income on motorized transportation to secure employment. I consider this a very sad comentary on life.

I call it "transportational descrimination".

Keep Cycling,

I just ask them to call my previous employers and ask about how they felt about my timeliness. My record stands for itself, and if they choose to not hire me based on not having a car, well at that point it's pretty much discrimination. What they should be asking is "do you have reliable personal transportation", not "do you have a car".

People at work kept joking about how I was going to be late until the day they saw me blowing past one of those "your speed is" signs while it was reading "25". That and how I have only been late two times, and both were for forgetting my access badge, shows that my bike is not the limiting factor :)

OK just to stir the pot here, some clarification:

I mean companies requiring you to have a car even though it's not used at the job, just to get to/from the job.

And, this in cases where you're close enough to easily bus or bike, or walk if need be.

And, in light of my own experiences, when I was biking to work I was a better employee, more cheerful, less goofing off, less "I don't feel like going to work today".

And, my own conclusion is that this is more of the unspoken class-ism in our supposedly classless, class-bound society. There's a sharp class distinction in the US between those who have a car and those who don't - those who don't are almost considered not people. The US class system is not sure what to do about voluntary bikers, generally if you look like a DUIcyclist you're treated like ****e, and if you're riding something expensive and have plenty of kit, whether commuter, roadie, or something kit, then you're considered to be ok.

My last couple jobs it's been "reliable transportation" questions-whatever that may be. Of course, I don't think I'd ever mention cycling as a mode of transport, I'd just do it. I was told that I'd have to shave my goatee for a job I applied for once. Moustache was okay, just no beard action. For $7/hr I turned that one down. It was close enough that I could have easily rode my bike, tho.

Are you required to drive to work? Tell them you have a car, just don't ever bother to drive it.

Yep lying is the best way to go, they just need the right thing to put in their form.

I always told them I parked down the street. They figured it out halfway through my job, but by that time, what could they do? Besides, I was always on time.

Koffee

Yep lying is the best way to go, they just need the right thing to put in their form.

If they find out, that would be grounds for termination.

Buy a $50 dollar junker. Then you can honestly say you have a car! All B.S aside it mostly comes from the fact that people without cars are seen as more likely to have attendance issues. In my experience, it's been true. I must clarify though, of the problem employees I've encountered, none actually rode a bike to work. All of them caught rides with mom, girlfriend, boyfriend, etc. Usually they did not make the 90 day mark. When I interview prospective employees I ask about "reliable transportation". To me a bike is fine. But, the person should tell me that up front.

Actually, asking about transportation to work shouldn't be asked, as it is prejudicial based on ecomonic background. (stole that tidbit from my workplace)

Bandit...I understand and appreciate your fairness in regards to 'reliable transportation.' but, the majority of companies are not that reasonable..to me, this is as stated 'transportational discrimination.' when the car is not needed for the job..it is none of their business...they are not reliable the employee will suffer one way or another...if a company discriminates in such a manner, than as far as i am concerned, that company should be required by law to compensate by being forced to pay an extra bonus of a $5000 transportation bonus..
the nature of companies..what they expect for minimum wage..labor laws in the US, most countries - the public would be in a hanging mood..mobs in the streets.. companies think cars are so dam reliable, yet our roads are in such a chaotic state of grid lock..

Usually they don't ask the nice PC "reliable" question, they ask do you have a CAR? So, if you're not spending more on Halliburton et. al. than on yourself, you can't get this job!

I posted last week..Took me 3 1/4 hours to travel 64 miles...when are cars considered reliable.

I posted last week..Took me 3 1/4 hours to travel 64 miles...when are cars considered reliable.

That is 19.7 mph. I did 60 miles this weekend and it took me 4 hours (15mph). You are much faster than me.

[Edit: I think I just realized you are saying it took you that long in your car. Nevermind.]


As to the car question: In some states it is illegal to ask the question unless it is used in the course of the job. It is fair to ask: "do you have reliable transportation that will allow you to work late when needed?" This is the only question I've been asked about a car. If the question is stated just as "do you have a car?" then so long as you have a matchbox car, you can answer yes. If they ask "do you have an operational car that is registered with the state and insured?" (this is the question I saw on an application where the car would be used for the job) then you shouldn't lie.

Actually, asking about transportation to work shouldn't be asked, as it is prejudicial based on ecomonic background. (stole that tidbit from my workplace)

Actually asking about "reliable transportation" is fine. Employers have a right to know if the employee can get to work reliably or not. However, asking if a potential employee has a car is considered discriminatory based on SocioEconomic Status. At my company as long as an employee can be at work reliably I don't care if they drive, ride, walk or fly. BUT, if you are going to ride a bike or walk everyday I don't want to hear how your late because of rain, cold, lightning or whatever.

There's no justification in the world for this ****e. Requiring a car to get a job should be as illegal as murder, free enterprise be damned!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[QUOTE=DogBoy]That is 19.7 mph. I did 60 miles this weekend and it took me 4 hours (15mph). You are much faster than me.

[Edit: I think I just realized you are saying it took you that long in your car. Nevermind.]


yeah Dog boy..I figured that out too...Be pretty good for cycling tho...
I hate it when your car's average speed is under 10 mph..that range...too fast for first gear and too slow for second...what a pain it was...
w/o the rain we experienced that day...on a good day, the average freeway speed might be boosted up to the 25-30 mph range on the I-15, as you enter San Diego for about 12 miles, between Escondido and Rancho Pansquitos... redicilious.

There's no justification in the world for this ****e. Requiring a car to get a job should be as illegal as murder, free enterprise be damned!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Getting a bit caught up in the hype?

If an employer asks if you have a car, he wants to know if you have a reliable way to get to work. People who have to rely on bumming rides off their friends tend to be late or miss work altogether. An employer needs to be able to count on employees showing up when they are scheduled to work.

If you bike to work, and can do so in all weather, then simply point that out in an interview. Be upfront about it and discuss the positive aspects like arriving alert and ready to work or reduced sickness because of the fitness you get cycling. Know how far your commute would be and a general route and estimated time to get to work by bike. Show a photo of your icebike in the snow if you live up north. Remember that most people don't think of bikes as transportation. Unless you point out otherwise, why would an employer think that you will be on time when it's pouring rain or the thermometer dips into single digits (or lower!).

If you not going to interview right away, then simply check 'yes' on the application so you won't be automatically disqualified. If you later get an interview, you can address the car issue then.

The US class system is not sure what to do about voluntary bikers, generally if you look like a DUIcyclist you're treated like ****e, and if you're riding something expensive and have plenty of kit, whether commuter, roadie, or something kit, then you're considered to be ok.
Did you mean DIY or DUI?

Supercom raises some valid points..none the less. to many cars are some kind of status thing...and that alone can be an irrational force...
we in the sun belt might forget about the role of bad weather and cycling..

Please tell me how i am to carry a laptop, and 8 boxes of deposition transcripts, 45 trial exhibits, 10 binders of discovery information, and a suit on my bike

In addition, try finding a bus that runs at 2:00am around my parts

Gotta have a car to get the job.

Gotta have the job to pay for the car.

Gotta pay for the car to keep the job.

Gotta keep the job to afford the car...

Please tell me how i am to carry a laptop, and 8 boxes of deposition transcripts, 45 trial exhibits, 10 binders of discovery information, and a suit on my bike

If ya really want--two words "bicycle trailer". . .

You asked!
:p

How many of you have encountered what I have, that to get a job you have to have a car. You don't use the car in the job, and the hours are set, but you must have a car. There's a dependable bus system, it's close enough to bike or even walk if you really have to, but you must have a car. I've seen a ton of this myself.


ups... of course our bus system sucks

US bus systems are supposed to suck, remember, "What's good for GM....." funny though, GM's tanking!

"Not owning a Car" is the new discrimination that the employer can get away with ease. Since most other discrimination(s) of the target population has probably been challenged by now. How can one beat this?

Please tell me how i am to carry a laptop, and 8 boxes of deposition transcripts, 45 trial exhibits, 10 binders of discovery information, and a suit on my bike


http://www.tonystrailers.com/cargo/

In addition, try finding a bus that runs at 2:00am around my parts

I did. There aren't any.

As others have said if you're simply asked if you own a car, well, a lot of things can be considered a car. A non-functioning heap of a junker. A Mattel Barbie(tm) battery operated cruiser. A toy car. A train car. An elevator car. Model cars.

If you don't have one of these, you can always get a high quality model for under $50, such as http://www.diecastmodelcars.com/newone.htm Then you can even say "I have a 2003 Ford GT" or whatever.

To the question "do you have a car", I'd be tempted to answer " I have a vehicle"