On what grounds can an Employer ask for a CRB check on an Employee

CRBhelp

Hi all just wanted to post some responses to clear up some of the confusion, know the posts are old on here, but still seams to be a lot of uncertainty about CRB.

No an employer cannot do a CRB check on a person handling money, however they can ask the employee wit their consent to take part in a Basic level disclosure through disclosures Scotland, but I do stress this is with the applicant consent.

CRB disclosure applications can be carried out at a Standard level with individuals not working with children or vulnerable adults, for example people working in a company regulated by the Financial service Authority of Judicial appointments etc. I should point out however that Enhanced level disclosures may be asked for by individuals not working directly with children, but that may be in a position of trust i.e. Trustee of Childrens Charity, Childrens Chat room moderator, etc.

NHS trusts each set their own policy on who is CRB checked and who isn’t, however this was due to be revised in line with the Vetting and Barring scheme with regard to Controlled Activities and Sir Roger Singleton was reviewing this with the previous government in a public consultation, however this is now under review by the new coalition government.

With regard to self employed individuals if they are working in a care home or school etc on a regular basis then because the organisation is involved in the recruitment decision as to whether or not they work within the facility then it can be carried out by them. It is not currently possible for an individual that is self employed to CRB check themselves, however a lot of national associations do provide a service through membership, so therefore if you are a sports coach and recognised and endorsed through your national body then they can CRB check you.

An employer is not allowed to use a CRB check as barrier to entry to a job, they can only request a CRB check once they have offered a position to the individual, this is required because employers could turn away applicants that don’t have a CRB check already or give the job to the applicant who’s result came back the quickest which would be deemed unfair. It would also be an offence for an employer to ask for this information on someone they are not going to employ because they have no right to see this information.


Richardm1973 comment about the use of the information is exactly correct, an employer is only using the information to ensure that the individual is safe to work with children or vulnerable adults. Therefore employers should only really be looking at offences relating to Violent crimes, sexual offences, substance abuse etc. All of which could point towards an individual is potentially unstable or a direct risk to children and vulnerable people.

On the point you have provided information on about Controlled activity, this is currently under review so the guidlines are not set for this and may change.

On the final point you raised about ISA vetting and barring scheme I just wanted to clear up what the new list will do. The new register will be a list of those approved to work with children and vulnerable people and means new employers can run a check against you and express an interest if you have already registered onto the scheme then they can see you on it and pottentially start you work striaght away.

One of the checks incorporated into the enhanced CRB is the LPF check which is a check against Local Police Force data bases, so in essence this means each individual is checked against over 100 databases of local intelligence. This is done becauseinformation about child abuse, drugs, firearms, domestic abuse etc is not always held on the Police National Computer and therefore if an investigation is ongoing with the police or someone has been investigated on several occasions for an offence but never charged then is raises these issues and allows the ISA to make a risk assessment on the individual.

Ive also posted some sucess stories from the scheme below, these show what sort of info will not come up and help protect the vulnerable.

Hope this helps, Thanks


Success Stories

There have been many success stories to come out of the use of INI, below are just four:

• A 14 year old boy who had recently arrived in the country wanted to live with his uncle. Social Services requested a police check on the uncle. A Police National Computer check revealed no concerns but the INI showed that the uncle was currently under investigation for grooming young females for prostitution and sexual harassment. Social Services presented this information at the child's immigration hearing and have stopped the uncle having access to the child.
• As a result of a query received in a child abuse unit, a police check was completed on a registered sex offender who had just moved in with a woman and her two young daughters. The INI check revealed that not only was he now under investigation by another force for sexually abusing two young girls, the force that owned his record on the sex offenders register did not even know he had moved out of its area.
• A Child Abuse Investigation Unit carried out research on the INI concerning a family that was the focus of a case conference following their recent arrival in a new force area. A grandparent was to be given responsibility for the child rather than the mother due to a history of abuse by the latter.
  The INI identified, however, that another police force held information about the grandparent indicating that, whilst no convictions were recorded on the Police National Computer, that person had also been the subject of a child abuse investigation.
  This information would not otherwise have come to light and thus Social Services were alerted to the potential risk to the child and could take appropriate action to address it.

ned123_2

will look a bit dodgy if u refuse but u have to if u work with children

junkmayle

To all the CRB apologists and the ones who constantly justify them with the old chestnut 'A criminal record is not necessariliy a bar to employment', just read Glittermonkeys post at #20. Then factor in all the other employers who operate the same policy.

jimbms

In reality all an employer has to do is put in the advert that preference will be given to candidates who have had CRB or disclosure checks, that way they are not forcing you.

[Deleted User]

junkmayle wrote: »

To all the CRB apologists and the ones who constantly justify them with the old chestnut 'A criminal record is not necessariliy a bar to employment', just read Glittermonkeys post at #20. Then factor in all the other employers who operate the same policy.

YAWN..........

Are you still living it up on the dole then and only applying to jobs where you can refuse to have CRB done.

junkmayle

You have to be offered a job first shel before a CRB check is done. How many jobs have I applied for in the last 3 months, say. I'll tell you. 127. Of those 127, 56 have required a CRB check. Out of those 127, I have had 16 interviews. Out of those 16 interviews, none were from the ones requiring a CRB check.

I will apply for as many CRB checkable jobs as I like. As long as short-sighted employers refuse to even interview ex-offenders, YOU are going to have to fund my benefits. Im not 'living it up'. I can get by on JSA because I haven't run up massive debts on plastic or lived beyond my means when I was working.

Caroline73_2

jimbms wrote: »

In reality all an employer has to do is put in the advert that preference will be given to candidates who have had CRB or disclosure checks, that way they are not forcing you.

Don't you have to have a separate one for each employer? Therefore any candidate who already has one won't be at an advantage.

SarEl

Caroline73 wrote: »

Don't you have to have a separate one for each employer? Therefore any candidate who already has one won't be at an advantage.

Correct, you do. But there is some truth in this. If the advert states that a CRB check will be performed for the succesful candidate, anyone wanting to avoid that will not apply.

jimbms

Caroline73 wrote: »

Don't you have to have a separate one for each employer? Therefore any candidate who already has one won't be at an advantage.

Partialy true but the employer can ask if you have previously had one and give preference based on that. Also as is happening more often now it is easier for an employer to insist that anyone who is successful must obtain a check from disclosure Scotland, this not oly is faster but means the candidate is responsible for paying for it as well as doing it.

MrsManda

Caroline73 wrote: »

Don't you have to have a separate one for each employer? Therefore any candidate who already has one won't be at an advantage.

There are some occassions where a CRB check is portable but obviously there are risks involved to the employer if they do this. CRB Portability

There is a list of posts which are eligible for CRB checks on the home office website HERE