Volunteer in school made my life hell 3 years ago.. advice.

Savvy_Sue

Sallylizzie wrote: »

So is, if you're doing a college course that'll involve placments with children, its the college who ensure their students are CRB checked?

Generally, yes. Given that students will normally do several placements, and may not be assigned their placement until the last minute, and may not get on in one placement and ask to be moved, it's the only sane way to do it! The college can apply for CRB checks as soon as students start (or possibly as part of the application process) and these should be completed before placements start.

Certainly if we had to carry out CRB checks on students doing placements with us, we couldn't take them so readily. We'd have to check the student's ID (which can be a right pain in the rear end!), we'd have to pay because it was part of their training rather than true volunteering, and we'd have to wait for the check to come through before the placement could start.

However, I don't think you'd get any more information out of the college than from the head. I can't stress how serious a breach of confidentiality it would be for anyone who isn't directly involved in decisions about recruitment (of staff or volunteers) to be told what's on someone's CRB check!

andyrules

Sally, neither the head nor college will give you any details about any information/opinions they have - not only are they strictly bound by regulation but also professionalism. That doesn't mean the staff will not have formed an opinion, however, it does sound like she is keeping her nose clean there. But if this behaviour manifests itself in her job in the future, she will find herself in trouble.

I do feel for you as I would not be happy in your shoes. I can only say, if your children are to remain there, let the woman and staff be aware that you are watching closely. If there are any more of the 'street' incidences I wouldn't hesitate to go back to the police. It may even be that your obvious presence around the school could spark off an abusive remark/action from her which would add weight to your complaint.

If you truly believe this woman should not be responsible for looking after children professionally, then you could speak to the course leader at the college in confidence. I've said this 3 times now - you may not be the first - and more than one complaint will warrant some attention. As Savvy and I have reiterated - don't expect any feedback by way of details, but the head and college will note the complaint.

Good luck

choccymoose

Sorry not sure how to quote

about CRB's

The employer does not recieve a copy of any individuals CRB checks. They recieve acknowledgement that one has been carried out but not the form.

Will now finish going on about CRB's as this thread has gone completly off topic lol

and yes I do work in the area! :-)

Savvy_Sue

choccymoose wrote: »

The employer does not recieve a copy of any individuals CRB checks. They recieve acknowledgement that one has been carried out but not the form.

I am beginning to think it must depend on the employer, and the arrangements they have with the Umbrella Body. Because we most certainly DO see each individual's forms: they are forwarded to a named individual in our organisation from our Umbrella Body. We make a judgement on the person's suitability, and then destroy them, noting that we've seen it but not the contents.

choccymoose wrote: »

Will now finish going on about CRB's as this thread has gone completly off topic lol

Well, not completely, although your post and my post probably have ...

choccymoose wrote: »

and yes I do work in the area! :-)

Yup, me too! These days all I do is check disclosure requests, but I am aware of what happens in our organisation, and I have in the past been an Authorised Signatory and received Disclosures myself.

andyrules

Savvy, you are correct about different organisations - I think the difference in our experiences on here stems from the fact that the individual receives one copy and the other can either remain with Capita (who will inform the organisation/umbrella) or go to the organisation. Data Protection rules apply whichever body receives it.

I think this has all been relevant to the OP as there has been some question about whether the complaints would/should/should not appear on it, and who would see it.

choccy, to quote a post, instead of clicking 'reply', click 'quote'. You can then delete/highlight parts to suit your point.

choccymoose

Savvy, you are correct about different organisations - I think the difference in our experiences on here stems from the fact that the individual receives one copy and the other can either remain with Capita (who will inform the organisation/umbrella) or go to the organisation. Data Protection rules apply whichever body receives it.

I think this has all been relevant to the OP as there has been some question about whether the complaints would/should/should not appear on it, and who would see it.

choccy, to quote a post, instead of clicking 'reply', click 'quote'. You can then delete/highlight parts to suit your point.[/quote]

Thanks Andy,
I suspect both you and SS are right with regards to differnet organisations. Capita is indeed the one used across our authority,

vaio

devils_advocate wrote: »

……………Don’t get me wrong. The current system is better than none, in the case of criminal convictions, and possibly even not guilty verdicts in criminal courts for certain offences. It’s the disclosure of unsubstantiated allegations which I find unacceptable, as it is unfair to the person against whom the allegation is made, as they cannot defend themselves. It’s also unfair on those who have to make decisions, as the professionals are effectively saying “with all our specialist detailed knowledge and experience, we can’t make a decision, so we’re leaving it up to you, who may have had no training or experience in this area, to get it right.”……….

It’s to do with levels, for the police to convict it must be “beyond reasonable doubt” they did whatever they are accused of.

However when deciding whether to allow someone to work with children I’d suggest the proof works the other way and it must be “beyond reasonable doubt” that they didn’t do whatever they have been accused of.

The police do the sifting and should only add accusations that had some substance although not solid enough to convict.

I’d say that if a conviction for a particular crime would bar someone then an accusation for the same crime should bar them too. No need to investigate any further, just decline to employ and don’t give a reason

devils_advocate

vaio wrote: »

It’s to do with levels, for the police to convict it must be “beyond reasonable doubt” they did whatever they are accused of.

However when deciding whether to allow someone to work with children I’d suggest the proof works the other way and it must be “beyond reasonable doubt” that they didn’t do whatever they have been accused of.

The police do the sifting and should only add accusations that had some substance although not solid enough to convict.

I’d say that if a conviction for a particular crime would bar someone then an accusation for the same crime should bar them too. No need to investigate any further, just decline to employ and don’t give a reason

Vaio, There are so many arguments as to why what you propose is wrong in a civilised society, that if I chose to refute them I'd bore the readers of this even more. However, I will confine myself to one. What you are proposing is to transfer the responsibility for deciding who commits criminal acts away from the courts and putting it in to the hands of the police. And once a policeman has decided, on the grounds of suspicion, rather than proof, there is no opportunity for that person to speak in their own defence, and there is no right of appeal against that policeman's decision.

I'm all for protecting children against abuse, but there must be some other way of doing it without then subjecting them to the greater abuse of living in a dictatorial fascist society when they become adults.

skintstudentnurse

choccymoose wrote: »

Employers do not recieve the CRB, it is the propery of the employee/ volunteer, they just have to show the origional document recieved from the CRB company and the employer takes a copy of the serial number. The CRB is the property of the employee/volunteer. If she is a student her she would have shown her CRB to the college



Both the employer or the college in this case and the student/employee will receive a copy of the CRB, they are sent to both parties at the same time. The employer/ college will receive a copy because they have sent the application on the student/employees behalf and will have had to countersign to agree that they have seen suitable forms of ID to process the CRB application.

Sallylizzie, this is an awful situation to be in, I hope it's resolved for you.

milliebear00001

devils_advocate wrote: »

Vaio, There are so many arguments as to why what you propose is wrong in a civilised society, that if I chose to refute them I'd bore the readers of this even more. However, I will confine myself to one. What you are proposing is to transfer the responsibility for deciding who commits criminal acts away from the courts and putting it in to the hands of the police. And once a policeman has decided, on the grounds of suspicion, rather than proof, there is no opportunity for that person to speak in their own defence, and there is no right of appeal against that policeman's decision.

I'm all for protecting children against abuse, but there must be some other way of doing it without then subjecting them to the greater abuse of living in a dictatorial fascist society when they become adults.

I completely see what you're saying, but I do think there is a difference between allowing a policeman to decide somebody's guilt (and then sending them to prison for example) and a policeman deciding something is worthy of note on a criminal records file. The policeman doesn't make the choice whether to employ - the employer does - and there is right of redress if they are refused employment - the individual concerned may argue their case and any extenuating circumstances. Employers make decisions on who to hire for many reasons, some legal, some not, it is a terrible situation to be in to be refused a job because of a malicious report, but nobody as yet has come up with a better solution.

Unfortunately, very many sexual and physical abusers of children go completely undetected. Clearly, this group is the most threatening to children (in that category) but there are some who have been flagged up by children brave enough to complain. Their accusation needs to be recorded somewhere even if it is not possible for the complaint to be pursued at the time.