"CRB checks are a breach of Human Rights"
I think the headline "schools open to paedos" is a bit hyperbolised, I doubt any past sex offenses would be hidden, and is it really fair that someone gets judged in their adult life for stealing a bike as a kid?
It is frustrating having to wait for CRBs to clear before I can do my work experience in schools, but it never occured to me it might breach any "Human Rights"; what about the parents' rights to know their children are in safe hands?
I think I read somewhere it's apparently a breach of "the right to have a family life", but then surely work is too?
Source
It is frustrating having to wait for CRBs to clear before I can do my work experience in schools, but it never occured to me it might breach any "Human Rights"; what about the parents' rights to know their children are in safe hands?
I think I read somewhere it's apparently a breach of "the right to have a family life", but then surely work is too?
Source
Scroll to see replies
But the Appeal Court ruled it was unlawful to make job applicants disclose minor offences to work with kids. Appalled child protection experts condemned the decision.
Fairly sure raping a child is not going to be covered as a minor offence. I really feel my IQ drop as I read articles in the Sun
Fairly sure raping a child is not going to be covered as a minor offence. I really feel my IQ drop as I read articles in the Sun
CRB checks should disclose everything in my opinion no matter how petty. It's up to for example schools to use a bit of common sense to realise that stealing some sweets when you were 13 doesn't mean you're a threat to children. CRBs are very very important but like I said we really should be using some common sense, taking into account when the crime was, how serious it was and the job they're applying for.
To be fair most of the comments on that article are fairly sensible, apparently Sun readers aren't quite as stupid as Sun journalists. There's a good reason for CRB checks but flagging up a decade old bike theft committed as a child isn't it.
Original post by MancStudent098
To be fair most of the comments on that article are fairly sensible, apparently Sun readers aren't quite as stupid as Sun journalists. There's a good reason for CRB checks but flagging up a decade old bike theft committed as a child isn't it.
An enhanced CRB check will show everything though. It's up to the employer to use the information sensibly. There are plenty of people who have gone into courses in healthcare with things like that on their CRB. Id rather this information was available to people when employing people to work with the vulnerable than not.
Original post by moonkatt
An enhanced CRB check will show everything though. It's up to the employer to use the information sensibly. There are plenty of people who have gone into courses in healthcare with things like that on their CRB. Id rather this information was available to people when employing people to work with the vulnerable than not.
Original post by Aj12
But the Appeal Court ruled it was unlawful to make job applicants disclose minor offences to work with kids. Appalled child protection experts condemned the decision.
Fairly sure raping a child is not going to be covered as a minor offence. I really feel my IQ drop as I read articles in the Sun
Fairly sure raping a child is not going to be covered as a minor offence. I really feel my IQ drop as I read articles in the Sun
Whilst I agree with you, and would have + repped you if I could, I think it worth pointing out the counter argument, that people who have committed minor offences are more likely to commit a worse offence. Remember that assault, fraud, animal cruelty, and owning child pornography are all minor offences.
However, what people making this argument miss is the system of sex offenders registry. Anyone on that registrar will never get a job in a school.
With that in mind, there's definitely legitimate cause for concern if somebody who is happy to torture an animal is able to work with kids. Numerous animal charities are pushing to make the law more damning on animal abuse, but no headway has been made so far, and at the moment I would personally be uncomfortable with my child's teacher having killed animals, even if it was long in the past.
Original post by MancStudent098
Yes, that's the problem with enhanced CRB checks as they stand at present. It was a caution when he was a child. You should have a right not to have that kind of information shared with potential employers.
But that's the point of an enhanced CRB, to show everything no matter how minor so that an employer can make the judgement whether someone is suitable to be around vulnerable people.
Original post by MancStudent098
Yes, that's the problem with enhanced CRB checks as they stand at present. It was a caution when he was a child. You should have a right not to have that kind of information shared with potential employers.
why is that, the employer decides therefore you dont have any rights
I don't see why this is a huge problem myself, employers should not be refusing to hire someone based on a caution they received decades ago, if employers were sensible about it, it wouldn't be an issue (or be much less of any issue at least).
Original post by danny111
Because having a minor offence automatically implies you are a predatory peadophile...
no, but it implies you have not respected the law
it may, but just like a levels it helps employers make the right choice
out of 2 candidates , which one poses the lower risk
Original post by MancStudent098
Yes, that's the problem with enhanced CRB checks as they stand at present. It was a caution when he was a child. You should have a right not to have that kind of information shared with potential employers.
Why
Original post by Dukeofwembley
no, but it implies you have not respected the law
it may, but just like a levels it helps employers make the right choice
out of 2 candidates , which one poses the lower risk
it may, but just like a levels it helps employers make the right choice
out of 2 candidates , which one poses the lower risk
So you would also propose that employers should see medical history of applicants? I mean someone with a disease will be higher risk, right? Fair enough, but not something I agree with.
Original post by danny111
So you would also propose that employers should see medical history of applicants? I mean someone with a disease will be higher risk, right? Fair enough, but not something I agree with.
disability discrimination is illegal
wanna make criminal discrimination illegal
cautions should not be included, the clue is in the name
Original post by Dukeofwembley
disability discrimination is illegal
wanna make criminal discrimination illegal
cautions should not be included, the clue is in the name
wanna make criminal discrimination illegal
cautions should not be included, the clue is in the name
What about second chances? What about it being idiotic if you have a record because of some silly thing you did 20 years ago as a kid?
Original post by danny111
What about second chances? What about it being idiotic if you have a record because of some silly thing you did 20 years ago as a kid?
second chances dont exist in employment
do you think if i go to goldman sachs with a 3rd class degree , and ask for a second chance, that they will accept me?
hell no
Original post by Dukeofwembley
second chances dont exist in employment
do you think if i go to goldman sachs with a 3rd class degree , and ask for a second chance, that they will accept me?
hell no
do you think if i go to goldman sachs with a 3rd class degree , and ask for a second chance, that they will accept me?
hell no
go to who?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Ethical Research Misconduct (continued discussion)
- Medicine at Malta University?
- Help (Cambridge)
- Should I drop sociology for English literature?
- My question is about CRB-arrested but not convicted
- Would you end all human life instantly if you could?
- Is it time for change - is the status quo about to end challenged?
- OCR - Religious Studies
- will i get marked down for misinterpreting a quote?
- Everything extends past the edge of the post
- Academic conduct investigation
- Exam Invigilator
- Enhanced disclosure check for nursing degree
- GCSE English Literature Macbeth Ambition essay
- AQA GCSE Religious Studies A Paper 1 8062/11 - 16 May 2022 [Exam Chat]
- UCAS application
- When you're not interested in any major in particular
- Different english question form
- un sac de billes
- Tips For Mock exams - Year 11.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
