Yesterday the government announced that many released prisoners will no longer be required to disclose to prospective employers their convictions. The press release is available here.
The reasoning for such a major change is that in the government`s eyes by having "a steady income, routine and purpose reoffending is cut and fewer members of the public will becomes victims of crime". The government has estimated that the changes will assist about 125,000 in gaining employment. Ostensibly this policy change appears to be of benefit to society as a whole; after all re-offending increases strain on all the justice services from police to courts, to probation and finally to a prison system at the point of collapse. But what of the unmentioned factor in all this ; the employer. A notable supporter of this policy is likely to be the boss of Timpsons, a long established retailer specialising in shoe repairs and key cutting whose 2000+ little shops cover the country. But what of the small firm whose boss is likely to be hands on from interviewing candidates to being last one to lock the door at night. S/he will be unaware of the real gap in a prospective employee`s history if said person lies about his patchy CV. If said person upon being employed commits eg theft or burglary on the premises will his insurance company pay out for a claim? If said employee brings to the job an illegal habit he had hidden and is subsequently fired what would be the situation re a possible claim against the employer? Especially in small towns there might be those employed who harbour grudges against third parties or themselves be the subject of discrimination from those who had suffered in some way from the employee prior to employment.
There are many hoops through which an employer must jump to be on the right side of employment legislation. As it stands this relaxation of disclosure requirements adds a further difficulty. It also might lead to employers making assumptions on a genuine gap in an applicant`s CV for various reasons and lead them to assume the worst when such assumptions are simply wrong. Of course somebody with a history of a prison record under this legislation need not remain silent and could admit his/her "spent" convictions. Like much hasty legislation that has emerged from this government the knock on effects are likely to be considerable and a surprise to some.
No comments:
Post a Comment