DBS check, is it needed?

marlot

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

...
Slightly off topic - I have recently toyed with the idea of volunteering at the local food bank. I'm guessing you even need a DBS check for that mundane task. Can anyone reassure me that such stupidity is not the case?

I do the DBSs for our local foodbank. Most of our roles do not need a DBS.


Our foodbank is a little unusual in that adults with special needs and under 18s are on the teams, so we've had to be clear who is responsible for them, how they work etc.



Safeguarding is mostly not about DBSs though - it also includes our working practices - so we make sure that (as much as we can) everyone is safe.

[Deleted User]

You have to remember too that there are various levels of DBS and also the vulnerable adults and children’s barred lists.

Not every role is justified in conducting a standard or enhanced or enhanced with barred lists check. The role has to be relevant.

There are lists on the DBS website.

As already mentioned there is more to safeguarding than a DBS check.

w06

for the sake of £60 for an enhanced check plus £13 per annum to keep it updated (which largely solves the issue f only being of any value the day it's produced) and a few days it's not worth debating really.

I just had one done and it took less than 2 days for the certificate to be issued

[Deleted User]

peachyprice wrote: »

I think the parents of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman would agree that's a good idea.

Totally meaningless comparison. Huntley was a caretaker employed by the school, not an outside contractor doing work where there would not normally be contact with children. His girlfriend was a teaching assistant. The school DIDN'T check his references, and he applied for the job under a different name, which wasn't picked up in the police check, due to carelessness.


I walked down the high street earlier this morning, passing numerous children on their way to school. You'll be telling me next that I should have a DBS check!

motorguy

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

Totally meaningless comparison. Huntley was a caretaker employed by the school, not an outside contractor doing work where there would not normally be contact with children. His girlfriend was a teaching assistant. The school DIDN'T check his references, and he applied for the job under a different name, which wasn't picked up in the police check, due to carelessness.


I walked down the high street earlier this morning, passing numerous children on their way to school. You'll be telling me next that I should have a DBS check!

Would you say you're happy then that there would be a loophole that would mean that those with an unhealthy interest in children could work for a contractor and still get to be around the kids on school grounds?

phill99

A DBS Just means they haven't been caught doing anything.

[Deleted User]

motorguy wrote: »

Would you say you're happy then that there would be a loophole that would mean that those with an unhealthy interest in children could work for a contractor and still get to be around the kids on school grounds?

That's not the point, and it's nothing to do with loopholes. The contractors mow the grass when the children are inside the school buildings. They have no access to the inside of the buildings and the children aren't allowed out when the grounds are being mowed - if indeed the children are actually on the premises at the time, which sometimes they aren't. Regardless, the bureaucrats who formulate stupid rules seem to have decreed that "a school has children, so anyone that has anything to do with a school must be DBS checked, even if they have no contact with the children." Of course a line has to be drawn somewhere, but in this particular case it's been drawn in an inappropriate place.

marlot

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

That's not the point, and it's nothing to do with loopholes. The contractors mow the grass when the children are inside the school buildings. ...

Whether you like it or not, a school is defined as a 'specifed place', and anyone who works there regularly needs to be checked.


Outside of 'specified places', the DBS system is more granular and the check depends on what the person will be doing.

[Deleted User]

marlot wrote: »

Whether you like it or not, a school is defined as a 'specifed place', and anyone who works there regularly needs to be checked.


Outside of 'specified places', the DBS system is more granular and the check depends on what the person will be doing.

I neither like it, nor dislike it; I'm disinterested in the matter. I merely point out an example of institutional stupidity.

Kim_kim

johnsmith1890 wrote: »

I've don't know. I'm a layman when it comes to the issue. However, my wife works in a school and from what I hear the whole thing has got out of hand. Even the contractors mowing the grass on the playing fields now need a DBS check!

Is that overkill? Or ensuring that people who work in the school aren’t sex offended...