CRB checks and employment

[martinkay]

Hi guys,

 

I have applied for a job within the financial sector, and they company have said that they wish to carry out a CRB check.

 

I know that I DO have previous convictions. My question is would they bar me from employment? (The convictions are not related to theft or dishonesty, so i see no reason why they should be a problem with me being employed within finance.)

 

Can someone please give me some clarification on this ?

 

Thanks

[kelbag]

Hi Martinkay,

 

To be honest it all depends on what the company policy is and what they are looking for, some places are ok as long as you own up to everything on your file (including parking fines) others are looking for certain types of offences i.e. fraud for financial, sex offences for schools etc.

 

Most of them take into account the types of offences and the length of time since they were committed. It they weren't serious and were a while ago then they should class them as spent or not relevant.

 

Hope that helps, I'm CRB and SC cleared myself so know the process a little bit.

[martinkay]

Hi thanks.

 

Okay, so I shall have to own up to it then because I was convicted only 2 years ago of indecent exposure, which is classed as a sexual offence even though I was only caught peeing on the side of the road.

[godpikachu]

yeah, you will need to inform them of any convictions, both spent or unspent.

im sure if you explain to them what happenned they will understand.

 

mind you, a conviction for having a wee is a bit steep isnt it?, i thought they usually issue a fixed penalty notice for it?.

[martinkay]

Erm yeah, but it wasnt the first time.

Lets just say that in my old job i worked outside a lot and leave it at that.

 

Its an embarrasing one though to put down but guess ill have to. no doubt they will all have a laugh and a giggle about it and i probably wont get the job :S

 

Either that or if by some miracle I DO get the job even though i have a conviction then i can see them replacing my office chair with a commode for a laugh or something.

[kelbag]

I wouldn't worry too much about it, is there a section where you can put exactly what the offense was for rather than the offence code? (It's been a while since I filled mine in)

 

I know doormen who have been convicted of assault and violent affray yet still managed to get SIA licenses.

[martinkay]

Hi thanks,

 

Okay, I shall try not to worry too much about it then. To be honest I think the law needs to be changed.

 

Instead of these companies seeing what convictions you have in all their nitty gritty detail they should instead the CRB for "advice on employment which is relevant to them" for instance if you were convicted of fraud or dishonesty then it should be the companies reponsibility to let the CRB agency know that the person is applying for a job within the financial sector. And then depending on the relevance of the conviction the CRB should only be there to dispense advice with a simple letter saying something like:

 

Cleared to work in finance: No or Yes

 

Like wise if the comapny was an educational establishment or an elderly peoples home then the CRB check should read:

 

Cleared to work with vulnerable people: No or Yes

 

That to me would be a much better system because despite my conviction it would read "Cleared to work in finance: Yes" - because my conviction bears no relevance on the job.

[godpikachu]

thing is though if they did it like that then it wouldnt show up other potentially worrying crimes.

 

for example a serial flasher might get a job working in a bank where he is in close proximty with women.

his CRB says hes ok to work in finance because he has never been convicted of theft or fraud, but whos to say he isnt going to get his john thomas out at work one day or grope someone up?.

[martinkay]

I hear what you are saying but there are women everywhere. so does that mean he would never be allowed to work again?

 

thats really ridiculous, because then if he cant find work ever because of the studpid system that we ALREADY have then it is every tax payer in the country that has to foot the bill - through paying him unemployment benefits.

[godpikachu]

why is it a stupid system?, are you saying that a pervert has the right to molest women (or whatever their chosen fetish) at will?.

 

 

the reason that the CRB system was introduced was so that employers could assess the employees they were taking on for any crimes relating to their chosen profession, plus other crimes that were liable to cause problems, for example somebody who has never been convicted for theft may apply for a job working in a busy shop, but said person has had several convictions for anti social behavior or assault, he may not steal anything but he might end up punching someone.

 

The CRB system is fine as it is, if you have nothingto hide, then you are given plenty of opportunity to come clean and explain your actions beforehand.

 

besides, many jobs dont require a CRB check anyway.

[martinkay]

it IS a stupid system.

 

If someone wants to molest women then they are going to do it anyway regardless of whether they are working or not. I think they are more likely to molest women down some dark alley or in the park than they are at their desk! - which to me proves that the system is stupid.

 

And a serial women molesterer for instance is going to have a hell of a lot more time on their hands to carry out their fetishes if they cannot find employment.......

 

......The old addage "The devil makes light work for idle hands" !!

[patdavies]

Hi thanks,

 

Okay, I shall try not to worry too much about it then. To be honest I think the law needs to be changed.

 

Instead of these companies seeing what convictions you have in all their nitty gritty detail they should instead the CRB for "advice on employment which is relevant to them" for instance if you were convicted of fraud or dishonesty then it should be the companies reponsibility to let the CRB agency know that the person is applying for a job within the financial sector. And then depending on the relevance of the conviction the CRB should only be there to dispense advice with a simple letter saying something like:

 

Cleared to work in finance: No or Yes

 

Like wise if the comapny was an educational establishment or an elderly peoples home then the CRB check should read:

 

Cleared to work with vulnerable people: No or Yes

 

That to me would be a much better system because despite my conviction it would read "Cleared to work in finance: Yes" - because my conviction bears no relevance on the job.

 

This is effectively what's happening from this Autumn for working with vulnerable adults/children. Google "Vetting & Barring Scheme"

[martinkay]

Well, good! and about time !!!!

 

So maybe now when I apply for any jobs in the future my human right to confidentiality is protected whilst at the same time safeguarding our more vulnerable members of society. About time !!!

[patdavies]

Well, good! and about time !!!!

 

So maybe now when I apply for any jobs in the future my human right to confidentiality is protected whilst at the same time safeguarding our more vulnerable members of society. About time !!!

 

You may think that, but I prefer not to be permanently monitored by the state - especially so given their propensity for screw-ups with data.

 

I am a long-serving school governor in two schools. I have nothing to hide - my CRB disclosures are clear - but when ISA takes over, I am seriously thinking of quitting for good.

 

Government departments and agencies have too much personal data slopping around and they are careless with it.

[martinkay]

Why though? Hopefully ISA will be a lot more closely monitored. I can see where you are coming from BUT..........

 

......In the past 5 years 11,500 people have been wrongly branded as criminals by the CRB, - these innocent people have had their lives and liveliehood ruined by a crappy and inefficient service. BUT..............and this is what the article i read DOESNT mention............

 

.....If 11,500 people have been wrongly branded as criminals then we would also be right to assume that means that 11,500 criminals have also got through the system and are now working with children or the elderly.

 

I have decided to turn down that job offer on the basis of what I have read about the CRB.

[patdavies]

Why though? Hopefully ISA will be a lot more closely monitored. I can see where you are coming from BUT..........

 

......In the past 5 years 11,500 people have been wrongly branded as criminals by the CRB, - these innocent people have had their lives and liveliehood ruined by a crappy and inefficient service. BUT..............and this is what the article i read DOESNT mention............

 

.....If 11,500 people have been wrongly branded as criminals then we would also be right to assume that means that 11,500 criminals have also got through the system and are now working with children or the elderly.

 

I have decided to turn down that job offer on the basis of what I have read about the CRB.

 

But the ISA's baseline information is still from CRB..

[martinkay]

Oh right. Well then its pointless then.

[jackieandwayne]

I agree the CRB is a must, to protect vulnerable people/children. However, is it really necessary to inform a current employer that when a 44 year old man was 16 he got done for riding a moped without a tax disc? And for the employer to then call him in for an explanation with a threat hanging over him about losing his job for not telling them on his application? That is truly big brother gone mad, Unison stepped in and slapped the employer, but the grief this man went through for over a month because of this enhanced CRB and for something he could barely remember doing anyway as he was a child at the time is out of all proportion.

 

Maybe one day they will get it right!