Criminal Records Checks - Are They Lawful?

[samsmoot]

Just wondering if anyone knows anything about when employers are allowed to ask for a criminal records check.

 

As far as I'm aware, CRB checks - Standard and Enhanced Disclosures, can only be issued in certain circumstances. This would include, for example, those working with children and vulnerable adults, foster carers, particular professions such as accountancy etc.

 

Thing is, and it's not the first time, I see an organisation insisting on a CRB check (this time the AA) for employees.

 

I have been through the categories (on the CRB's website) of those kinds of position which allow for a CRB check to be done, yet can find no indication that a car breakdown call centre operator can be lawfully checked via disclosure of their criminal record.

 

What's the position, then? Is the above scenario lawful? And if not, what remedy is available if a disclosure is unlawfully issued?

 

I have had dealings with the CRB, and know what they are like (pretty bad), but it seems there is a lot of blatant law flouting going on. Am I wrong about something here, or are employers and the CRB routinely breaking the law?

Edited May 13, 2010 by samsmoot

[Guest Old_andrew2018]

I believe that an employer can state that job applicants will have CRB checks, it does however make a mockery of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.

[samsmoot]

Yes, it does seem to, and that's my point.

[Philip23]

Only people working or having regular contact with children or the vulnerable need to be CRB checked, and any old offences which could be considered a risk (fraud, sex offences, drugs etc) would be listed, and quite rightly in my view.

 

However if organisations are doing CRB checks which are not necessary, then this is wrong. All the CRB forms ask the reason for the check - e.g. are you working with children or vulnerable adults, which suggests that this is relevant to needing the check.

[samsmoot]

I just found out that there is something called a 'Police Check', which costs a tenner - perhaps this is what they mean.

 

I know from personal experience that the CRB have issued Disclosures that were unlawful to obtain (they were not reall to blame for sending them out in the first place, but were wrong in the way they handled the one complaint so far made), and after seeing what looked like more potential breaches of the law happening a couple of times recently my interest in this subject was resurrected.

 

I think I should see if the AA, to start with, has anything on this for potential employees. Deary me, what a busybody I am...

[jack1966]

perhaps a CRB check is required for a job with the AA as an employee may have to meet people - example - an AA person meets up with lone female to fix car

 

just a thought

[samsmoot]

perhaps a CRB check is required for a job with the AA as an employee may have to meet people - example - an AA person meets up with lone female to fix car

 

just a thought

 

Yes, jack1966 - maybe they would like it done for this reason, but that wouldn't fit into any of the job categories on the CRB website for which an exempted question can be asked - i.e. about convictions now spent.

 

I emailed the AA, BTW, as they mention on their online job application form about spent convictions, so I asked them to clear it up.

[samsmoot]

...and they said, "We will run a credit check and a Basic standard disclosure."

 

Am awaiting email for clarification - a Basic Disclosure is allowed, as it wouldn't mention spent convictions, and the information contained in it is in the public domain anyway. A Standard Disclosure does identify spent convictions, and the AA shouldn't be able to obtain one.

[Uncertain]

Although I share your concerns both a child (i.e 17 year old) and a vulnerable adult can drive cars and be members of the AA!

[jack1966]

standard disclosures do not show spent convictions

[my-spirit-soars-free]

Although I share your concerns both a child (i.e 17 year old) and a vulnerable adult can drive cars and be members of the AA!

 

 

16 year olds are in the workplace, so any job could involve access to "kids" of that sort of age. I cannot believe that it is therefore ok to check every employee. I would also argue that people classified as "vulnerable adults" can also be in work.

[mazbck]

Arnold Clark also advertise jobs that need a Disclosure Check and I wondered why?

 

Sales Support Administrator Job, Aberdeen - s1jobs.com

[andydd]

I've become more and more concerned about the number of jobs that require a CRB check, I work in IT support yet there are numerous jobs where I have applied and need to agree to a CRB check.

 

i had an interview at a school recently and this required one which is not surprising but how about a hospital ?, an insurance compony ?. Its all getting a bit strange.

 

Andy

[samsmoot]

standard disclosures do not show spent convictions

 

Have to correct you there, jack:

 

'Standard Disclosures contain details of all spent and unspent convictions on record, plus details of any cautions, reprimands or warnings.'

 

Source: CRB Frequently Asked Questions.

[samsmoot]

Arnold Clark also advertise jobs that need a Disclosure Check and I wondered why?

 

Sales Support Administrator Job, Aberdeen - s1jobs.com

 

I have asked them what type of disclosure would be needed.

 

As I mentioned, if it's just a Basic Disclosure they are after then no worries.

[jack1966]

samsmoot, i find it a bit odd that you say that standard disclosures contain details of spent convictions, as i have had many, (CRB checks that is) and the standard disclosure does not show my misspent youth criminal activity of stealing a bar of chocolate (yes i was charged), yet on my enhanced CRB's it does.

 

and boy does it look bad, although it was a only a bar of fruit and nut, (yes i realise the implications - now) it doesn't say that, it only shows the law act that i was charged with and that looks a million times worse.

 

and i was an 'adult' aged 18 and knew everything

Edited May 18, 2010 by jack1966
additions

[samsmoot]

AA said it's a Basic Disclosure.

 

I could be barking up the wrong tree, as things have changed since I last had dealings with the CRB. Until recently there was just a Standard or Enhanced disclosure, the Basic check being brought in around 2009, I believe.

 

It may seem I am a bit too ready to think the worst, but when you know that in the past Enhanced Disclosures have been unlawfully obtained, and that the CRB were less than bothered about it, you tend to feel a little outraged when you see signs of more possible misdemeanours.

 

Probably nothing to worry about after all.

[Hanny2104]

As far as I am aware any employer can ask the question from any applicant.

 

 

The problem is that people get worried and admit things they are not legally obliged to, which almost always results in them being unsuccessful with the application.

 

 

What I am unclear about is whether the employer is actually able to get the actual CRB check from the authorities.

 

 

If the offence committed bares no relation to any element of the job role

why is it being used to deselect applicants who have committed an offence (possibly a very minor crime, many years ago)

The real issue is "Who polices the police"

 

They can ask the question but they should not be able to obtain the actual Disclosure document.

 

The jobs they have are not in the list of job categories allowed that type of acces to an individuals confidential information.

Its so wrong

[dx100uk]

thread is 6yrs old!

 

 

dx

[goodatresearch]

perhaps a CRB check is required for a job with the AA as an employee may have to meet people - example - an AA person meets up with lone female to fix car

 

just a thought

 

Yep your right. A few years ago a woman rang her breakdown service, he came and made some pretext to go and get something. Returned wearing a mask and attacked and raped her. I think the AA are right to ask for. A CRB check. I personally don't want a rapist, rehabilitated or not, attending my car when I'm alone. I'm funny like that.