ECHR, criminal record checks, employment
 

listening to a report today about a man who when 11 years old was caught stealing 2 bikes - got (chargedor a caution) not sure - but now at 21 when trying to get a job employers that do CRC, dismiss him immediately irrespective of his ability(or not) to do the job.
there was a comment on the risk driven society, and why employers dont even consider those with criminal history.
there was a suggestion the "slate" should be wiped clean - or not freely available to employers - obviously excluding certain sectors, child care, security, policing ect.
what would SN think - ive got a hunch, lol.

but i continually here about projects trying to reduce re-offending, -allocating ex prisoners with a mentor ect, to try change behaviour - and become a contributor - but ive often thought how the fck can they - there essentially un-employable for the rest of there lives, unless they get involved in charities or groups linked to offenders.
one guy was charged with being a passanger in a stolen vehicle when young, and cant get a job.
so should employers be able to access this info - if yes, how can released prisoners make a legit living?

Sounds like there may be more to it than the report is saying.
First off, crimes at 11 years old are usually written off as childish, unless VERY serious, (Sexual assault, murder etc).

Second, most crimes alike that would be spent.

So unless he's applying for a sensitive job, (government) it sounds fishy.

Quite surprised by this, I thought even adult convictions were "spent" after 10 years.

(Edit: posted before I'd seen Alcazar's reply)

yeah im just repeating what i caught - likely more to it.

but i do know some sectors flatly refuse to employ those with a record, spent or not.

ill assume the SN readers realise im not talking about rapes, murders, ect ect - more petty offences that could result in an official caution. maybe as a youngster, but equally as an adult.
caught with a joint, or 2. ending up in a fight in on a night out - where you caused bodily harm, maybe defending a friend or partner - or you stole somthing - any number of scenarios where the crime is relatively tame - but still ends up affecting your employment chances.
if you get a custodial sentance of any length - then what are your chances of ever gaining employment again?

and to employers, is this info used. say small buinesses? ok you dont want a persistant theif on your books - but would a minor offence put you off, do you even use CRC's?

In my industry you'd be very lucky to get a job with any conviction, especially for theft, which some might see as the ultimate irony. But on the whole i agree with that philosophy. Leopard, spots etc.

I thought when you turned 18 it started again unless serious or constant offender.

A few points that come to mind here:
Spent convictions won't be known to a potential employer, unless they do a CRB check, and they can only do one of those with the applicant's consent/knowledge
It's hard to see how an employer could justify doing a CRB check, unless the job involves working with kids, dealing with personally sensitive data, handling large quantities of money, etc
If someone has unspent convictions on their record, well, they only have one person to blame for that, don't they?

but increasing amounts of employers are using this data - and as a candidtate for a job not disclosing anything makes you a liar and not likely to get the job.
i know there are different agencies north/south, and different levels of checks, eg working with kids ect may show all and any convivctions - or a basic check may not show some, im not sure.
increasing number of employers seek applicants consent to use CRB data - if you say no, hten - no job!
if i was a buisness ownwer and had say ten candidates - 3 of which were employable - if one had a conviction it would likely eliminate them tbh. - obv depending on circumstances.
its driven by the ever growing liability claims tbh - reducing the risk of any event is the main aim, esp if you are a large employer. if that person that has a recorded offence, however minor turns out to damage the buisness in any way then the blame could end up on your shoulders.

as for the comment of if get convicted - your to blame, end of. ridiculous tbh. can anyone name a single person that has never breeched a law, but just didnt get caught? what about young people, on the path to adult hood, akes a few bad decisions in a drunken moment -then is unemployable for ever mre?

another fact not helping, is the rule against people visiting prisoners are only allowed in if they have no criminal record themselves - i dont know the degree of checking is, or even how they check - but apparantly access is refused (presumably in fear of making relationships with prisoners which are not of a positive nature)
some organisations say if you let ex/turned-convicts talk to those imprisoned that have been through simialr experiences - then its the most productive way to appeal to the criminal.

that i can totally relate to tbh-i think i would be quite good at talking and discussinissues with prisoners due for release and could have an impact on behaviour when released - but with no convictions or criminal history i may not receve the respect of others that "have walked the walk" so to speak.

i just think that coming out of prison or even having a criminal record, esp of spent convivtions veiwable to emloyers would result in more crime as the net result - agree? disagree?

Minor driving offences aside, which most employers ignore anyhow, and youth offences, which are spent on turning 18, I would imagine by far and away the most common "crime" otherwise law-abiding people are likely to be guilty of these days is the consumption of illicit drugs. On that score, having had minor dabbles in my youth, I soon came to the conclusion that they did nothing for me, and more to the point, that you absolutely can't trust what other unwholesome crap they're mixed with due to the nature of the supply chain, so I'd never touch them now even if I knew I could "get away with it".

Put me down as an exceptional person if you must, but I've got nothing to hide when I apply for a job anywhere :thumb:

i do get what your saying - but wat if you were caught with a drug, just as youth experimenting - never to use agin.
then you apply for a job - with 10 or more other candidates - and none had any record of illegal activity - all else being equal, the employer may be inclined to immediately dismiss you as he has 9 others with equalling experience ect but no convictions?
say you have a job in a recruetment agency - with contracts to supply several city centre hotels should the need arise , and at short notice - you have details of applicants recorded criminal convictions - would you choose equally or be inclined to choose firstly those with no record? thus lessening the perceived risk of a "situation" developing with an employee - if you have no previous experience with any of the applicants?

further more having "nothing to hide" yourself means your not at risk of falling into this situation - having admitted the use of controlled drugs as a youngster - means you could easily be in this position though. (not trying to convict you lol, i agree the majority of breeches in youth relate to drug use, and could reneder even the most enthusiastic candidate "declined) and the fact a significant % of the youth experiment with drugs - but move on unaffected - but wiser,probably.
like me youve nothing to hide - but what about those that do, minor or spent charges gained in the innocence or rebelion of youth - yet carry the burden forever more - useful, important info for employers?

I don't do any hiring-and-firing as part of my job (I get asked for opinion/input sometimes on new recruits, but that's as far as it goes), but if I did, I'd look at it this way: a person's decision to indulge in minor risk-taking behaviour in their youth is all part and parcel of their wider psychological make-up, and it matters a lot more where they've allowed that make-up to take them later in life than on a few idle Saturday nights when they were 18 or 19. In short, I'd judge them on their fitness to do the job they're applying for now, which I'd expect them to be able to demonstrate by having done something with their lives in the time since they stopped spliffing-up and popping Es. If they can't do that, it might well prove that decision they took way back then really was the wrong one for them after all.

LOL at spliffing-up you must be old.

CRB checks are what they are, just pity those who have been convicted of crimes they are completely innocent of. One guy I know spent over a year in prison for a crime he did not commit and declaring that conviction made it very hard for him to get a decent job. A few years later he was then caught with a big bag of Skunk and the conviction got him community service, access to free training and he now has a job on the railways for reasonable money.

dont get me wrong id agree, but if you had joe x - up for an interveiw - hes been caught with 5 exstacty tabs the PF has been in a cnut of a mood or needs figures - resulting in joe x being charged with possesion of a class A drug with intent to supply. joe x argues it was just one each for me and my 3-4 mates - doesnt matter - he is a supplier and gets punished in accordance with uk law.
now you or me may be able to tell at an interveiw stage if joe x is reformed, and actually has the skills that suit the job - but company policy says no hiring of recruits with a record as it isnt action accepted in a risk reduction programme - joel x with no record gets the job.

its a fact many large employers use agencies to supply staff, and obligations mean certain things like convictions spent or not influence the decision making process - it shouldnt - but it does IMO

I hired a chap the other day who had spent in total, 9 years in jail for drug offences. He is one of best responsive layout web designers I've ever seen. So very creative.

He tells me he is off "all that". And I believe him. But he knows, I've told him, any hint he is back on that stuff, he is gone.

Everyone makes poor choices. But it's how you deal with them when they wake up that matters.

id agree you have hired the person, you beleive is best for the job - and most likely will see a return - its co-operations that use this info to immediately dismiss such applicant s that are wrong - or under pressure to provide suitable candidates - anda mark on a crb is a reason to reject an applicant irrespective of suitability

Didn't "Call me Dave" promise us a new British bill of human rights as part of his election campaign?

Les