# Non-D info, opting out of Equifax salary share

**URL:** https://forum.fudiabetes.org/t/non-d-info-opting-out-of-equifax-salary-share/11555
**Category:** Share
**Created:** [July 1, 2021, 10:31pm UTC](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/t/non-d-info-opting-out-of-equifax-salary-share/11555 "2021-07-01T22:31:50Z")
**Posts on this page:** 2
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![MarkP](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b3f665/32.png) [@MarkP](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/u/MarkP)
#### Post date: [July 1, 2021, 10:31pm UTC](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/t/non-d-info-opting-out-of-equifax-salary-share/11555/1 "2021-07-01T22:31:50Z")

</div>

Hi All,

Wanted to make a non-Diabetic post. Currently, Equifax is selling your employment and salary data to new employers (and others) which prevents salary negotiation.

[https://theworknumber.com/](https://theworknumber.com/)

Here is how you opt out:

[https://theworknumber.com/employee-data-freeze/](https://theworknumber.com/employee-data-freeze/)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![jbowler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e274bd/32.png) [@jbowler](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/u/jbowler)
#### Post date: [July 3, 2021, 1:56am UTC](https://forum.fudiabetes.org/t/non-d-info-opting-out-of-equifax-salary-share/11555/2 "2021-07-03T01:56:23Z")

</div>

I believe it is a feature of the [FCRA](https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/statutes/fair-credit-reporting-act), which dates back to 1996 and is probably the first time the federal government (of the US) attempted to limit the actions of the three credit reporting agencies. It’s quite a good act; it’s based on the simple concept of “NO”; only the most arrogant of officials can fail to understand what that means… The exception in this case is:

> **§ 604. Permissible purposes of consumer reports**  
> **[15 U.S.C. § 1681b]**
> 
> (a) _In general_. Subject to subsection (c), any consumer reporting agency may  
> furnish a consumer report under the following circumstances **and no other** :
> 
> [\* \* \*]
> 
> (3) To a person which it has reason to believe  
> (B) intends to use the information for employment purposes;

Emphasis added to “and no other” - that’s where the magic word “NO” occurs 😉 I don’t think you will find many, maybe any, recent US acts of congress that actually use the word no; much too dangerous.

So it has been since, I think, 1996 and the last time I was employed (and then only barely) was 2001. Yet I was also employed in California, no credit checks allowed there, state law.

I moved to Oregon in 2001 and I’ve never been employed here nor employed anyone (as an employee). Nevertheless the situation in Oregon seems to be the same as California since 2010, well, perhaps with additional bells as is our Oregonian way.