is this fair

imasmartie22_2

i have tried to relay the following for a friend as best i can.
:jlady gose for an interveiw, as a cleaner, in local health centre, the company interveiwing are in birmingham, a 5.00 train ride away, still the company is an agency [she didnt know] they offered her the job, she said yes. filled in all paper had photo i d done, [which she still has].
now prior to all the above she talked to the recrewtment manger, and explained she didnt want to waste any ones time she declared the fact some 13 years ago, she gone done for benifit fraud,[the reasons are her own and not open to disscussion as thats not the question.]
they said not a problum, you can start on monday which ment she had to give her other job up [she didnt thankfully]
that was for xmass, shes had too phone calls from the company saying there just an agency we can only put you forward for the job, her in direct employer would have been SOUTH STAFFS COUNCIL. the agncy has stated its the council thats causing the problum, not you.
MORE LIKE THEY WONT EMPLOY PEOPLE WITH CRIMINAL RECORDS.
its un fair, is it right, though??:mad:

Madjock

I would say yes it is fair, as she is possibly going to come into contact with vulnerable adults and minors, and would be a risk for further fraud.

gibson123

It is only fair if the post is exempt from the rehabilitation of offenders act. She should ask the company about their policy reference rehabilitation of offenders. It would be highly unusual for fraud to be an issue for a cleaning post. The employer even an agency could be breaking the law just by asking. get your friend to get advice from Apex

http://www.apextrust.com/staticpage.asp?recID=3

Madjock

She is going to be working in a health centre with access to medical records. I would imagine they will require at least a standard CRB.

heretolearn_2

No one wants a cleaner who isn't honest/is easily tempted/has poor judgement as there are too many opportunities for theft- they are often around when no one else is there, they have access to all areas, they go round/under people's desks etc in a way that other co-workers don't.

19lottie82

Surely after 13 years, this conviction would have been "spent" and there was no need for her to declare it?

agrinnall

Depends on the type of CRB that is required, some have all convinctions declared, even if they are spent.

KiKi

Right or not - it's not unfair in law. I don't see why the council are 'causing a problem' - perhaps they don't want to employ someone they consider isn't trustworthy.

Perhaps it's nothing to do with her declaration and they just don't have the work anymore, and the agency are lying to her.

Regardless, she has no redress, so it's good she still has her other job.

KiKi

want-it-all

imasmartie22 wrote: »

i have tried to relay the following for a friend as best i can.
:j lady gose for an interveiw, as a cleaner, in local health centre, the company interveiwing are in birmingham, a 5.00 train ride away, still the company is an agency [she didnt know] they offered her the job, she said yes. filled in all paper had photo i d done, [which she still has].
now prior to all the above she talked to the recrewtment manger, and explained she didnt want to waste any ones time she declared the fact some 13 years ago, she gone done for benifit fraud,[the reasons are her own and not open to disscussion as thats not the question.]
they said not a problum, you can start on monday which ment she had to give her other job up [she didnt thankfully]
that was for xmass, shes had too phone calls from the company saying there just an agency we can only put you forward for the job, her in direct employer would have been SOUTH STAFFS COUNCIL. the agncy has stated its the council thats causing the problum, not you.
MORE LIKE THEY WONT EMPLOY PEOPLE WITH CRIMINAL RECORDS.
its un fair, is it right, though??:mad:

I know somebody who got 'done' for the very same offence 6-7 years ago, and is employed in a much more 'responsible' job, with regular and unsupervised access to some very vulnerable people, and involving regular enhanced disclosure CRB applications.

The offence in itself was foolish and (obviously) criminal, but she's taken a number of steps every since to turn her life around. In her line of work, her conviction will follow her everywhere, but it's never presented a real problem, including with employment with local authorities (though not South Staffs).

So, there may be another reason. Convcition aside, the employers just might not have been very impressed with her overall, and the situation could've turned out just the same for an unconvicted applicant.

One possibility is that the agency has promised her something they just couldn't deliver, which has been known!

imasmartie22_2

the job requires an advanced crb she has never claimed any money off the state since the covition [which feelings aside she got rid of the problum that caused the trouble to start with] i understand peoples opions about being honest her current post involves locking up premises and setting alarms at a well appointed set of offices, her job puts temptation in the way all the time she has never looked back, just seems un-fair that she is tranised with the same brush all the time.
im not sure about the agency thing, but trust me she has a photo i.d and all health and saftey stuff job critria etc which came with that job
if she had given her job up would have not been fair, this job offered slighty higher wage [we talking 20p]
still she cant get rid of the crb check.
just out of interest, she applied a while back to be come a taxie driver told them about convition [again ss]
each case judged on mertits, and there really shouldnt be a problum you have less chance if you have re offened she was also told that forgien drivers have to go through the same cheeks but there crb is a waste of time?

want-it-all

imasmartie22 wrote: »

the job requires an advanced crb she has never claimed any money off the state since the covition [which feelings aside she got rid of the problum that caused the trouble to start with] i understand peoples opions about being honest her current post involves locking up premises and setting alarms at a well appointed set of offices, her job puts temptation in the way all the time she has never looked back, just seems un-fair that she is tranised with the same brush all the time.
im not sure about the agency thing, but trust me she has a photo i.d and all health and saftey stuff job critria etc which came with that job
if she had given her job up would have not been fair, this job offered slighty higher wage [we talking 20p]
still she cant get rid of the crb check.
just out of interest, she applied a while back to be come a taxie driver told them about convition [again ss]
each case judged on mertits, and there really shouldnt be a problum you have less chance if you have re offened she was also told that forgien drivers have to go through the same cheeks but there crb is a waste of time?

I understand what you're saying, but:

a) this is a public forum. Everybody will have an opinion on benefit fraud, positive or negative. Not everybody will be 'right' in their opinion, but you have to take the 'bad' with the 'good'. Don't take any such comments to heart

b) as above, it may not (or may!) have anything to do with her conviction. We don't know, you don't know, and your friend is probably unlikely to ever know

c) you're quite interested in 'fairness', it would seem. Yet nothing you've posted seems unfair, as far as employment law and so on.

d) in the nicest possible way, get over it? It appears as though there's nothing that can be done. If you/your friend suspect it is something to do with the conviction (which as stated, may or may not be the case), then her past can't be undone. She just needs to be upfront about it at all times, demonstrate how she's changed, and try to move on from it, because it just won't disappear.

PS:

http://www.sstaffs.gov.uk/PDF/CRB%20%20Recruitment%20of%20Ex-offenders%20August%202007.pdf

See the very last paragraph: "Having a criminal record will not necessarily bar you from working with us. This will depend on the nature of the position and the circumstances and background of your offences."