In one of my blogs recently I wrote that I had written to my local MP, Douglas Carswell, about CRB checks in which I objected to jobseekers having to pay for the checks done where the job requires it. I suggested in my letter that the system was unnecessarily bureaucratic and disproportionate and has become a money-spinner for some and a rip-off for those who have to pay for the checks when jobseeking. Well, today I received a reply to my letter. Douglas Carswell agrees that the system is disproportionate and told me what the present Government is doing about it.
The Government set up a review of criminal information management including the use of CRB checks. The recommendations are that criminal record checks should be portable, that is, transferable, so that one doesn't have to get a new CRB check done each time one is offered a job or some other activity that involves checks, such as voluntary work or looking after someone else's children. Another recommendation is that the CRB set up an online system to allow employers to to check if updated information is held on an applicant. So, for example, if someone has a CRB check done some time before, in which time that person may have committed a criminal offence but still have an apparently 'clean' record on their last CRB disclosure, this can be updated without having to go through the rigmarole of applying for a whole new disclosure. A further recommendation is that CRB disclosures are only issued directly to the individual applicant. There are several other recommendations which I won't go into here. But the recommendations have been accepted by the Government and will be included in a Bill being passed through the Lords now, the Protection of Freedoms Bill. If it becomes Law, it will result in a simplification of the system, cut back on red tape and scale the system back to common sense levels. These measures are to be welcomed as far as they go, but there is one issue that hasn't been answered yet.
Douglas Carswell wasn't able to answer all my points on the CRB checks. The one I was most concerned about was the ability of employers to require job applicants to pay for their CRB checks in some cases, a major obstacle to people being able to accept jobs, but which might, in the current climate, mean that their Jobseekers' Allowance would be suspended if they refused a job they were offered. In other words, a jobseeker having to pay for a CRB check to be done would be a tax on jobs from the jobseeker's point of view. The onus of a CRB check should be on the employer. He has referred this issue to the Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, and will let me know the response. I won't hold my breath that there will be any change to this, as the Conservative Party are the party of business and their position would probably be that for an employer to be forced to pay for the CRB check would also be a tax on jobs. My response would be simple: Why not make them free to all? I will give a further update when I have received a response. In the meantime, I won't be holding my breath!
The Government set up a review of criminal information management including the use of CRB checks. The recommendations are that criminal record checks should be portable, that is, transferable, so that one doesn't have to get a new CRB check done each time one is offered a job or some other activity that involves checks, such as voluntary work or looking after someone else's children. Another recommendation is that the CRB set up an online system to allow employers to to check if updated information is held on an applicant. So, for example, if someone has a CRB check done some time before, in which time that person may have committed a criminal offence but still have an apparently 'clean' record on their last CRB disclosure, this can be updated without having to go through the rigmarole of applying for a whole new disclosure. A further recommendation is that CRB disclosures are only issued directly to the individual applicant. There are several other recommendations which I won't go into here. But the recommendations have been accepted by the Government and will be included in a Bill being passed through the Lords now, the Protection of Freedoms Bill. If it becomes Law, it will result in a simplification of the system, cut back on red tape and scale the system back to common sense levels. These measures are to be welcomed as far as they go, but there is one issue that hasn't been answered yet.
Douglas Carswell wasn't able to answer all my points on the CRB checks. The one I was most concerned about was the ability of employers to require job applicants to pay for their CRB checks in some cases, a major obstacle to people being able to accept jobs, but which might, in the current climate, mean that their Jobseekers' Allowance would be suspended if they refused a job they were offered. In other words, a jobseeker having to pay for a CRB check to be done would be a tax on jobs from the jobseeker's point of view. The onus of a CRB check should be on the employer. He has referred this issue to the Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan Smith, and will let me know the response. I won't hold my breath that there will be any change to this, as the Conservative Party are the party of business and their position would probably be that for an employer to be forced to pay for the CRB check would also be a tax on jobs. My response would be simple: Why not make them free to all? I will give a further update when I have received a response. In the meantime, I won't be holding my breath!
0 comments:
Post a Comment