Checks performed after employment start

algray

So further advice needed, I'm being asked to supply all manner of documentation. My degree (I graduated 20-some years ago) certificate, utility bills, passport (this one I get - eligibility to work in the UK), mother's maiden name, address history, employment history including payslips.

Am I being irrational to find this intrusive and overbearing? 

Marcon

algray said:

So further advice needed, I'm being asked to supply all manner of documentation. My degree (I graduated 20-some years ago) certificate, utility bills, passport (this one I get - eligibility to work in the UK), mother's maiden name, address history, employment history including payslips.

Am I being irrational to find this intrusive and overbearing? 

I think 'irrational' is the wrong word - the nature of background checks, if done correctly, is that they are by their very nature intrusive, so I don't think 'overbearing' is quite the right term either. 'Pain in the neck', possibly!

Have you asked why this is being done, and specifically why now?

algray

"To fully meet our duty of care as an employer, it is equally important that we hold background check records for all active employees. As such, I will initiate this process starting in the next couple of days. The background check will include an identity verification, criminal, employment history, and education searches." 

74jax

Would a DBS help in this instance, is there cause for one? You could then provide that information direct rather than to your employer.  I wouldn't hand my mother's maiden name over as I don't believe they would get rid of it once they had finished with whatever they are doing. 

Reginald74

prowla said:

I think it would be reasonable to do periodic checks on people who work in education and come into contact with children.

Of course, the checking criteria should be against information relevant to the job, as opposed to just plain snooping (eg. Someone having been declared bankrupt could be critical in a financial environment, but completely irrelevant in an educational role).

An alternative approach an employer could take is to have a contractual requirement that their workers have a current CRB/DBS check (I've had that in a contract before).

There is no such thing as a 'Current DBS Check'. The Check is only valid at the point it is done and someone could easily have entries the day or week after it the Check was undertaken.  Some employers set an arbitrary time for when they consider the DBS sufficient evidence of suitability; for example three years. Then they may ask you to renew it.  But that time period is made up by them as part of their risk management, it is not a feature of the DBS Check itself, nor the police, nor the Vetting and Barring Agency.

General_Grant

Reginald74 said:

prowla said:

I think it would be reasonable to do periodic checks on people who work in education and come into contact with children.

Of course, the checking criteria should be against information relevant to the job, as opposed to just plain snooping (eg. Someone having been declared bankrupt could be critical in a financial environment, but completely irrelevant in an educational role).

An alternative approach an employer could take is to have a contractual requirement that their workers have a current CRB/DBS check (I've had that in a contract before).

There is no such thing as a 'Current DBS Check'. The Check is only valid at the point it is done and someone could easily have entries the day or week after it the Check was undertaken.  Some employers set an arbitrary time for when they consider the DBS sufficient evidence of suitability; for example three years. Then they may ask you to renew it.  But that time period is made up by them as part of their risk management, it is not a feature of the DBS Check itself, nor the police, nor the Vetting and Barring Agency.

But a DBS check could be done at any time if the subject has signed up for the updating service - that would qualify as a "current DBS Check" - it can be accessed any time.

Reginald74

General_Grant said:

Reginald74 said:

prowla said:

I think it would be reasonable to do periodic checks on people who work in education and come into contact with children.

Of course, the checking criteria should be against information relevant to the job, as opposed to just plain snooping (eg. Someone having been declared bankrupt could be critical in a financial environment, but completely irrelevant in an educational role).

An alternative approach an employer could take is to have a contractual requirement that their workers have a current CRB/DBS check (I've had that in a contract before).

There is no such thing as a 'Current DBS Check'. The Check is only valid at the point it is done and someone could easily have entries the day or week after it the Check was undertaken.  Some employers set an arbitrary time for when they consider the DBS sufficient evidence of suitability; for example three years. Then they may ask you to renew it.  But that time period is made up by them as part of their risk management, it is not a feature of the DBS Check itself, nor the police, nor the Vetting and Barring Agency.

But a DBS check could be done at any time if the subject has signed up for the updating service - that would qualify as a "current DBS Check" - it can be accessed any time.

Nope. That is just a series of DBS checks that are undertaken more easily than without the update service.  Its very unusual for employers to require the update service as well. 

A person could get a DBS update on Monday, get caught doing something on Tuesday and prosecuted a few weeks later, immediately rendering the DBS out of date.

The only way a DBS would be 'current' is if it were to proactively flag to an employer Amy new entry, which it does not. The update service is passive and very much in the control of the employee.

As stated: there is no current DBS check as a concept. The check is simply reporting the status at a moment in time, whether or not the update service is used.

General_Grant

Reginald74 said:

General_Grant said:

Reginald74 said:

prowla said:

I think it would be reasonable to do periodic checks on people who work in education and come into contact with children.

Of course, the checking criteria should be against information relevant to the job, as opposed to just plain snooping (eg. Someone having been declared bankrupt could be critical in a financial environment, but completely irrelevant in an educational role).

An alternative approach an employer could take is to have a contractual requirement that their workers have a current CRB/DBS check (I've had that in a contract before).

There is no such thing as a 'Current DBS Check'. The Check is only valid at the point it is done and someone could easily have entries the day or week after it the Check was undertaken.  Some employers set an arbitrary time for when they consider the DBS sufficient evidence of suitability; for example three years. Then they may ask you to renew it.  But that time period is made up by them as part of their risk management, it is not a feature of the DBS Check itself, nor the police, nor the Vetting and Barring Agency.

But a DBS check could be done at any time if the subject has signed up for the updating service - that would qualify as a "current DBS Check" - it can be accessed any time.

Nope. That is just a series of DBS checks that are undertaken more easily than without the update service.  Its very unusual for employers to require the update service as well. 

A person could get a DBS update on Monday, get caught doing something on Tuesday and prosecuted a few weeks later, immediately rendering the DBS out of date.

The only way a DBS would be 'current' is if it were to proactively flag to an employer Amy new entry, which it does not. The update service is passive and very much in the control of the employee.

As stated: there is no current DBS check as a concept. The check is simply reporting the status at a moment in time, whether or not the update service is used.

The DBS check is as current as the data uploaded to it.

Your example of a check on Monday and a prosecution a few weeks later doesn't make the DBS check non-current until the outcome of the prosecution (if found guilty) is submitted.  And the employer can check every day if they want to and the employee has given them the permission so to check.

Reginald74

There is no 'Current DBS'. That's a fallacy, and a potentially serious one.

Reginald74

Jillanddy said:

I think that we are massively missing the point.  We have no idea - and apparently neither does the OP - why the employer thinks they need checks of such a magnitude.  But the checks are valid in the right circumstances,  even after employment begins.  So it isn't up to us to suggest alternative checks.  The employer has decided on the checks they want/ need. The OP has two choices, assuming they have no union representative to raise advice or issues. They can comply.  Or not. If they choose the latter then they may lose their job,  and go to a tribunal.  They might win. Or not.  

Agreed.