People argue about ID cards , DNA databases ,CCTV cameras that you can trust that the information they hold will not be misused. However it turns out that employers have discovered a useful tool , the CRB check.

They are making illegal criminal record checks on staff, learning about spent convictions that should not be disclosed.

Sensitive work, such as with children or vulnerable adults, is eligible for Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks.

But BBC Radio 4's Face the Facts has found requests to CRB for jobs such as train driver, gardener and bricklayer.

This is on a par with the fact that the Government sells DVLA info allows over 300000 civil servants access to the Children's national data base
[Rep]

BBC NEWS | UK | Illegal checks jeopardising jobs

Originally Posted by :
Illegal checks jeopardising jobs

Bosses in England and Wales are making illegal criminal record checks on staff, learning about spent convictions that should not be disclosed.

Sensitive work, such as with children or vulnerable adults, is eligible for Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks.

But BBC Radio 4's Face the Facts has found requests to CRB for jobs such as train driver, gardener and bricklayer.

CRB says employers know best whether a check is necessary, but charity Nacro says CRB should monitor applications.

The Criminal Records Bureau argues employers are best placed to know whether a check is necessary.

But the crime reduction charity Nacro believes the CRB should be monitoring the applications it receives to ensure it grants only lawful requests for information.

Under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, non-custodial offences and those involving a prison sentence of less than 30 months become spent after set periods of time free from any further convictions.

It means after that rehabilitation period has passed, reformed offenders no longer have to disclose those spent convictions when applying for most types of jobs.

The aim of the law was to help get ex-offenders back into work and break the cycle of crime, but Nacro believes unnecessary criminal records checks are now undermining that law and too often leading to workers being suspended or sacked.

The government estimates one in four adults of working age has some sort of criminal record.

'Second chance'

"Most of us know someone who has a criminal record," says Nacro's Ruth Parker. "I don't think any of us can say they no longer deserve a place in society. People deserve a second chance."

In 2006, Derek Howman took on a job as a gardener in Mobberley, Cheshire. But when a CRB check revealed to his employers that he had two spent convictions from a decade earlier - for drink-driving and theft of a lawnmower - he was dismissed.

"I thought, 'Here we go again'," says Mr Howman. "I try to get back on my feet and someone knocks you back down again. It was unbelievable."

His employers insist they did not break the law. They argue that because "vulnerable adults in receipt of care services" live on the estate where Mr Howman was working, they were right to request a CRB check.

'Vital role'

Anthony Scrivener QC, a former chair of the Bar, says the purpose of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act was to "take the onus away from people like employers". He thinks the law ought to be reviewed.

"You really can't rely on the goodwill of an employer if he's given this information. He may be entitled to have it but he should still exercise his discretion and say 'well if that was me would I want that disclosed. Is it really relevant?'"

There are no figures available on the number of illegal CRB checks that are requested each year.

The Home Office said: "CRB checks perform a vital role - having stopped more than 20,000 unsuitable people last year from gaining access to children and vulnerable adults."

Face the Facts : BBC Radio 4 : 12:30pm Friday 8th August; repeated 9pm Sunday 10th August.

[Rep]

Oh good. :-)
[Rep]

If I was an employer and had the chance to establish the criminal record if any of a prospective employee I would jump at the opportunity no matter what the job.
[Rep]

Certainly I dont blame the employer but as usual with Government data bases the facility is being misused because Government is incapable of managing anything legally and securely.
The danger in this example is that it is estimated 1 in 5 people has a criminal record so if all and sundry can get hold of this inforamtion going back over a person's lifetime it has to be highly dangerous for society.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by jim h:
Certainly I dont blame the employer but as usual with Government data bases the facility is being misused because Government is incapable of managing anything legally and securely.
The danger in this example is that it is estimated 1 in 5 people has a criminal record so if all and sundry can get hold of this inforamtion going back over a person's lifetime it has to be highly dangerous for society.

Knowing that what they do now will screw their future up could well make a few behave themselves.
[Rep]

But what about the idea of rehabilitation and spent offences ?

More and more this government is like Cpl "Don't panic"Jones - f*cking clueless and the bad news is the boy dave glee club is just as bad
[Rep]

Originally Posted by g hall:
But what about the idea of rehabilitation and spent offences ?

More and more this government is like Cpl "Don't panic"Jones - f*cking clueless and the bad news is the boy dave glee club is just as bad

In my opinion the idea of a “spent offence” is a nonsense.

An offence has been committed, the individual has shown a preparedness to turn to crime, he or increasingly she could quite possibly do so again, it needs to be a factor that should be taken into account if employment might put temptation in the way of that individual should circumstances ever occour when crime would in their view be one option.

Rehabilitation? At best that might change an individuals attitude to unacceptable behaviour but there will always be a doubt.

Sorry if this isn’t as nice as some might like but crime is crime and once committed it, just as a record of never having committed a crime, should be a thing that follows a person all their lives.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by The Bear:
In my opinion the idea of a “spent offence” is a nonsense.

But not what the government think

Originally Posted by :
An offence has been committed, the individual has shown a preparedness to turn to crime, he or increasingly she could quite possibly do so again, it needs to be a factor that should be taken into account if employment might put temptation in the way of that individual should circumstances ever occour when crime would in their view be one option.

Why has the individual turned to crime might also be considered

Originally Posted by :
Rehabilitation? At best that might change an individuals attitude to unacceptable behaviour but there will always be a doubt.

Sorry if this isn’t as nice as some might like but crime is crime and once committed it, just as a record of never having committed a crime, should be a thing that follows a person all their lives.

So as far as you are concerned once a crim always a crim
I wonder how many people are not because of "the grace of God"

and how many never got caught :-)

mind how you go
[Rep]

I speak as someone with a spent criminal conviction, I am fully aware that if I apply for certain jobs then a CRB check would reveal this, I understand that this could well affect my chances of getting the Job. the fault of this is mine and mine alone. My offence took place over ten years ago and I have not reoffended. It has no bearing on my current job but it is likely that I would not have got it or indeed many other job if I always was subject to a CRB check.

Perhaps the bear would rater I stayed unemployed or on benefits to make up any low paid work I could find until I am 65 at his and other taxpayers expense. Or perhaps it is better that I work in a full time Job that I enjoy and pay my taxes and dont rely so much on the state.

People make mistakes and deserve second chances, nobody has the right to keep punishing me. I would add that if I do comitt any criminal offence in the future I would expect the Judge to take the view that I had not taken the benfits of the second chance society has offered me and sentence me to a lengthy period of imprisonment.
[Rep]