We’ve written an article for The Justice Gap, arguing that the ‘filtering’ process doesn’t go far enough.
Author: Unlock Admin
Dealing with criminal convictions – embedding a positive process of disclosure
Christopher Stacey, Co-Director, Unlock comments on the issues discussed in a recent Ban the Box webinar.
Quite rightly, the Ban the Box campaign is focused on a specific issue, that being the tick-box that appears on many job application forms, frightening the life out of somebody who has a criminal record.
Many people with convictions see “the box” and immediately de-select themselves out of the job opportunity, usually because their experiences to date have been ones of rejection whenever they’ve ticked that dreaded box. The obvious result to employers is that you’re missing out on a huge pool of talent, which is why this issue is so important.
But ‘banning the box’ is only one part of the puzzle. What this simple concept allows organisations to do is have a much considered recruitment process that firstly focuses on finding the best person for the job, while also recognising that, as an organisation, you might still need to look at criminal convictions once you have a preferred candidate.
This is something that I know from experience. Having worked with employers for many years, I know that some employers can see the benefit of this issue in principle, but when you begin to try and ‘implement’ this, it’s then that it can feel like it’s getting more complicated. What do we do if somebody discloses a conviction? Are we allowed to employ them? Who do we have to tell?
These are all genuine questions that you have to think about, and often this means looking in the round as to what your policy and process are. If you don’t have either of these, you’ll need to seriously consider getting them.
It’s all about building on the principle of ‘banning the box’ and establishing something that works for your organisation. Ultimately, there’s no one-size-fits-all model. As we heard from Interserve in the a recent Ban the Box webinar, they have developed a policy and process that’s unique to them. We have developed a policy at Unlock which we think sends the kind of message that we want to applicants to hear.
However, no matter how good your policy, if this isn’t embedded within your organisation, it probably won’t work. Policies are only as good as the people that use them. Senior managers, HR colleagues and recruiting managers in particular need to feel equipped to make positive decisions about employing somebody with a conviction. That’s one reason why we provide support to employers, because lots of recruiters have myths about criminal records. They don’t understand what they can and can’t ask for, and don’t understand how to deal on an individual case-by-case basis with people with have convictions.
Ultimately, ‘banning the box’ could easily be meaningless to an organisation, even if they’ve signed up to it. It’s perfectly possible (and a genuine risk for the campaign) for the ‘banning of the box’ to end up simply delaying the rejection of applicants with convictions. In many organisations, this requires a cultural shift away from seeing convictions as a ‘negative’ part of the process, and rather looking at how you can deal with them in a positive, informed way. ‘Banning the box’ is a simple but effective first step on a journey which enables employers to see beyond the label of ‘criminal record’ and see the person for the fantastic employee that they could potentially become.
This blog was originally published on the 10th June 2014 at www.bitc.org.uk . The direct link [accessed 13th June 2014] is http://www.bitc.org.uk/blog/post/dealing-criminal-convictions-embedding-positive-process-disclosure
An update on the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
It’s been just over 3 months since the changes to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 came into force in England & Wales. At that time, we published an update which featured new materials that we’d produced, as well as our updated detailed guidance.
Since that point, we’ve learnt quite a bit about how these changes are working in practice, mainly through cases that have come through our helpline. So we thought it was about time we produced another update, highlighting a couple of important practical areas.
Get a copy of your basic disclosure
As you will read below, there have been quite a few examples where people have been surprised to see what’s on their basic disclosure. Often, this is because they thought that their convictions were spent since the ROA changes came in, but for various reasons, that hasn’t been the case.
As a result, and given many people are relying on the ROA changes to make important life-decisions (such as moving jobs, applying for jobs without disclosing, not having to disclose when buying insurance), we think it’s important to emphasise the importance of checking for yourself by applying for our own basic disclosure. It costs £25. This will allow you to raise any queries that you might have, and make sure ultimately that what you think is spent and unspent is actually the case.
Find out more about basic disclosures.
Court orders
One area is has caused a lot of confusion is how ‘court orders’ are treated by the Act. We’ve seen many people think that their conviction becomes spent earlier than what it seems to be doing, because they didn’t realise that alongside their conviction they were given a ‘court order’ that can have an effect on the rehabilitation period.
The most common court orders we’ve found causing people difficulties are Compensation Orders, Restraining Orders and Sexual Offence Prevention Orders.
For example, if somebody received a 1 year community order as an adult, this would normally become spent 1 year after the end of the order. However, if they were also given a 3 year restraining order, the conviction wouldn’t become spent until that order ends
The way in which these ‘ancillary orders’ (as they’re known) are impacting on how long it takes for a conviction to become spent is something that we’re collecting evidence about at the moment. If you have a copy of your basic disclosure which shows that your conviction is still unspent because of a court order, please send us copies, as we’re keen to understand what types of orders this is affecting – email them to policy@unlock.org.uk.
Find out more about court orders in our detailed guidance.
SOPOs and Sexual Offences
Another area of confusion relates to Sexual Offence Prevention Orders (SOPO’s). The view of the Ministry of Justice is that SOPO falls within the definition in the ROA of an “order that imposes a prohibition”, so the rehabilitation period ends on the date when the prohibition ceases to have effect. This will depend on the length of the SOPO. This means that a conviction cannot become spent until the SOPO that relates to that conviction ends. It follows that if a SOPO is imposed for an indefinite period then it will be subject to disclosure indefinitely, until the SOPO is ended in some other way (e.g. going back to court to get the end date amended).
However, this is separate to the sexual offender notification requirement. This does not constitute “any disqualification, disability, prohibition or other penalty” and so does not effect when a conviction becomes spent.
Compensation orders
These are only regarded as spent once they are paid in full. Unfortunately, there is no record kept on the Police National Computer that compensation orders are paid, and this is all that Disclosure Scotland see when they process basic checks.
This means that Disclosure Scotland advise people to try and obtain proof of payment from the court and keep this document to prove that the compensation order has been paid in full.
This is something that we are challenging at the moment, as we don’t believe that this system is workable. It’s not particularly clear when you apply for a basic disclosure that you have to provide this proof, and many people don’t even realise they have a compensation order. If you end up receiving your disclosure without providing proof, you have to pay for another application, alongside your proof of payment, to have an accurate one issued.
However, while this situation remains as it is, you’ll need to provide proof. In England & Wales, you can obtain a letter of confirmation from the court when any compensation order has been paid in full. There is guidance in the magistrates’ courts’ staff manual as to the wording to be used in a proof of payment letter relating to compensation orders. If you didn’t get this at the time of paying the compensation, you should be able to get something from the court at a later stage.
A copy of that letter should be provided to Disclosure Scotland either with your application or separately in confidence if your application is being submitted via a third party.
To submit proof of payment independently of submitting an application, you can send it:
- By email to s112mailbox@disclosurescotland.gsi.gov.uk
- By post to FAO FED TL, ENQUIRIES TEAM, PO BOX 250, GLASGOW, G51 1YU
You should quote your application barcode or reference number, or your name, current address, and date of birth in your communication.
Once you’ve submitted proof once, Disclosure Scotland should keep this on file in case you have to apply for a further disclosure in the future.
Extended ‘supervision periods’ under the Offender Rehabilitation Act 2013
As part of the Government’s recent changes to prisons, probation and sentences, people sentenced to less than 12 months in prison will have an ‘extended supervision period’ meaning that they’ll have at least 12 months supervision on release. This has led to questions about whether this effects when a conviction becomes spent under the ROA. We can confirm that the headline sentence will remain the same for ROA purposes. The ‘buffer’ part of the rehabilitation period will start from the end of the original sentence. The extra supervision period is post-sentence and does not affect the rehabilitation period for the conviction.
For example, if somebody was convicted as an adult in June 2014 and given 5 months in prison, the end of their sentence would be November 2014, so the conviction would become spent 2 years later (i.e. November 2016). The fact that the individual might be subject to ‘extended supervision’ into 2015 does not effect the ‘end of the sentence’ under the ROA.
Motoring convictions
There remains a lot of confusion about the way that motoring convictions are being dealt with under the ROA, particularly given the way that motoring offences are recorded (or not) on the Police National Computer, and what this means in practice for individuals in terms of applying for employment and insurance. We are working on some specific guidance at the moment on this, so if you have any information or experiences that you think would help with this guidance, please send them to policy@unlock.org.uk.
‘Easy Read’ guide on the ROA
Let’s not beat around the bush – the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act is still very complicated. Sadly, the Ministry of Justice’s guidance doesn’t do much to help make this issue easier to understand.
We have been pleased with the feedback we’ve had to the materials we produced when the reforms came into force – including our A3 poster, brief guidance and detailed guide. But we felt we needed something else.
So we were delighted to work in partnership with KeyRing to produce an ‘Easy Read’ guide on disclosing criminal records. ‘Easy Read’ documents present information using simple words and pictures that make information easier to understand.
Updated ‘ROA FAQs’ section
We’ve had some weird and wonderful questions in the last couple of months about how the ROA works. We’ve been working hard to keep a track of some of the most common ones, and we’ve recently updated our FAQ’s section on the ROA with some of these.
Send us your examples/evidence
We are constantly looking to gather examples and evidence of the issues that surround the way the new Rehabilitation of Offenders Act reforms are working in practice. If you were surprised to see what’s come back on your basic disclosure, or if you’ve experienced some of the issues that we’ve mentioned in this update, please send any evidence you have (including copies of disclosures). Any details you send will be held confidentially, and only be used anonymously as part of our advocacy and policy work. Please send them to policy@unlock.org.uk.
An update on the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act
It’s been just over 3 months since the changes to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 came into force in England & Wales. At that time, we published an updatewhich featured new materials that we’d produced, as well as our updated detailed guidance.
Since that point, we’ve learnt quite a bit about how these changes are working in practice, mainly through cases that have come through our helpline. So we thought it was about time we produced another update, highlighting a couple of important practical areas.
Read this update in full on our Information Hub.
Summary of the update
- The importance of getting a copy of your basic disclosure
- The way that ‘court orders’ such as restraining orders and SOPO’s can impact on when a conviction becomes spent
- The way that ‘compensation orders’ work with Disclosure Scotland and basic checks
- The confusion that surrounds motoring convictions
- New ‘Easy Read’ guide on the ROA published
- Updated ‘ROA FAQ’s’
- Send us your examples/evidence
Find out more about all of these in the full update on our Information Hub.
Google’s ‘right to be forgotten’ – but does it help people with convictions?
We’ve published a new section of information looking the recent ‘right to be forgotten’ issue which relates to Google’s search results. We’ve copied this section below, and the specific section will be regularly updated as we learn more about how it works in practice.
We are looking for evidence of whether people have been successful in getting Google or others to remove search results and/or online content. We have a dedicated policy section on the main Unlock website explaining more about this’
Summary
You might have seen in the news recently that Google has launched a system where people can request information be removed from Google’s search results. This has come about because of a ruling on the 13th May by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The case was brought by a Spanish man who complained that an auction notice of his repossessed home on Google’s search results infringed his privacy. The court found in his favour, and this has potentially wide-reaching consequences for search engines like Google.
The ruling only covers the removing of the search results – the information will still exist on the website that published the original article but Google won’t be able to deliver matches to some enquiries that are entered. Deletion of the original information would still be the responsibility of the website owner, and in our experience, it’s very rare that websites agree to remove details relating to convictions (see more in reporting of criminal records in the media).
Information will only disappear from searches made in Europe. Queries piped through its sites outside the EU will still show the relevant search results.
However, many people are still seeing the ruling as a potential way of dealing with the ‘google-effect’ that often haunts people for lots of different reasons, and our Helpline and Forum have already seen this being raised by quite a few people when it comes to past convictions that have been reported online. So the important question for us is whether it will actually help people with convictions?
Is it likely to help people with convictions?
At the moment, the answer is that we simply don’t know. That’s why we want to encourage people with spent convictions to submit a request (see ‘What next’ below) to see how Google are dealing with requests like this.
Google itself has admitted that their system is their “initial effort” at complying with the Court’s judgement, and there’s little evidence of how they’re dealing with individual applications. It’s also worth bearing in mind that the judgement surprised many people, including Google themselves, and initial reports suggest that they’re being swamped with requests, with some suggesting that Google has been receiving over 10,000 requests per day. The ruling applies to other search engines too (e.g. Yahoo, Bing).
Google has said that information would start to be removed from mid-June and that decisions about data removal would be made by people rather than an algorithm which governs almost every part of Google’s search system.
Future updates
This update will be used to start a new section, titled ‘The Google Effect’. We will be using this page to add further information about how this issue progresses in the coming weeks and months.
Google’s ‘right to be forgotten’
Information Hub Update
Read this update in full on our Information Hub.
You might have seen in the news recently that Google has launched a system where people can request information be removed from Google’s search results. This has come about because of a ruling on the 13th May by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The case was brought by a Spanish man who complained that an auction notice of his repossessed home on Google’s search results infringed his privacy. The court found in his favour, and this has potentially wide-reaching consequences for search engines like Google.
The ruling only covers the removing of the search results – the information will still exist on the website that published the original article but Google won’t be able to deliver matches to some enquiries that are entered. Deletion of the original information would still be the responsibility of the website owner, and in our experience, it’s very rare that websites agree to remove details relating to convictions (see more in reporting of criminal records in the media).
Information will only disappear from searches made in Europe. Queries piped through its sites outside the EU will still show the relevant search results.
However, many people are still seeing the ruling as a potential way of dealing with the ‘google-effect’ that often haunts people for lots of different reasons, and our Helpline and Forum have already seen this being raised by quite a few people when it comes to past convictions that have been reported online. So the important question for us is whether it will actually help people with convictions?
We’ve published a new section on our Information Hub looking at this, and written a ‘latest update‘ post for our Information Hub. We expect that this information will be regularly updated as we learn more about how the system works in practice.
We’re keen to see how Google are dealing with applications from people with convictions.
To do this, we’re encouraging people with spent convictions to complete Google’s online form, and get a decision from them. Bear in mind that they’re dealing with a lot of applications at the moment, so there might be quite a wait before you get a decision.
Once you receive a decision, please forward it to us to let us know what their decision is and why. You can forward their reply to us by sending it to policy@unlock.org.uk (we won’t share your personal details externally). This will help us to collect evidence of how Google are dealing with requests from people with convictions, and help us to improve the information and advice we’re giving on this issue.
Welcome to our new website
Summary
What’s changed?
Where does this new site fit in?
What do you think?
New links…we need your help
Summary
This week we launched our new website; if you haven’t already seen it, please take a look at unlock.devchd.com.
When we first set out on developing the new site in mid-2013, we carried out a survey to learn more about how people used the site site and how they think it could be improved.
Since then, we launched a dedicated Information Hub in November 2013, and we’ve now added to this with a new core-website.
We’re now looking for your feedback – please complete our short survey here.
What’s changed?
We’ve spent a lot of time sorting out some of the issues we were having with old our site, given it was nearly 10 years old. Some of the key changes;
- The navigation on the site has been improved
- The content on the site has been completely reviewed and updated
- The way our news and updates work should make it a lot easier to find relevant news
- We’ve removed the use of ‘google adverts’
- Some people were finding that their anti-virus software was preventing them from accessing our site. This should now be resolved.
There’s still work to do – it’s not completely finished just yet, but we were keen to make it live as soon as it was possible to publish it – so things will continue to change behind the scenes.
Where does this new site fit in?
This new core website now sits at the heart of the sites that we have. As a quick summary, we have:
- unlock.devchd.com – This is our main/core website, where we explain more about Unlock as a charity, who is involved, the support that we provide, our current areas of focus, and latest news/developments
- unlock.devchd.com/information-and-advice/ – This is our information hub, which we maintain as the country’s most comprehensive source of online self-help information on a wide range of issues that criminal convictions can affect
- forum.unlock.org.uk – This is an online peer-to-peer forum enabling people with convictions to support one another
- www.disclosurecalculator.org.uk – This is a tool that enables you to work out when your convictions become spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
- unlock.devchd.com/community – This is an online magazine for and by people with convictions
What do you think?
Now that we’ve launched our new core website, we want to know what you think about the new site, as well as how you think our sites could be improved.
We’d be really grateful if you could spare a few minutes to complete our short online survey – this will help us find out what you think to the new site, as well as your thoughts on our other sites. It’s anonymous – none of your personal details are shared with us, so you can be completely honest!
Click here to take part in the survey.
Thank you in advance to those who complete the survey.
New links – we need your help!
The links that used to go to our old site will no longer work (for example, our old homepage used to be unlock.devchd.com/main.aspx and this no longer works).
In the coming days and weeks, we’ll be targeting websites and organisations that still have links to our old site, and asking them to update their links to our new site.
If you know of anybody that links to our site, we’ve provided a list below of some of the most popular parts of our old site, and where they can now be found on the new site. It would be great if you could share this around, or let us know of any out of date links that are being used elsewhere by emailing us at admin@unlock.org.uk:
- Home page – unlock.devchd.com
- Information/advice as somebody with a conviction? Try our Information Hub – some of the more popular areas include:
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act
Disclosure & Barring Service checks / filtering / eligibility
Specific professions / areas of work
Insurance information
Travel abroad
Information on sexual offences
Ways to find out about your criminal record - Support as an employer? Visit our section for employers
- Support as a practitioner? Visit our section for practitioners
- A news or media article? Visit our news section
- Opportunities to volunteer, or ways to donate? Visit our get involved section.
- Our contact details? Visit our contact us section
We would usually recommend you use unlock.devchd.com when linking to our site, as deeper links are subject to change in the future.
Second chances and ‘invisible punishment’
We’re featured in an article that has been published on thejusticegap.com website on second chances and ‘invisible punishment’.
Unlock on Prison Radio talking about the changes to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act
We’ve recorded a piece with the Prison Radio Association as part of their ‘Outside In’ programme, which is run in partnership with the BBC andgets aired across the prison radio network.
Christopher Stacey spoke about the changes to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 and what this means for people serving a prison sentence.
You can listen to the interview below.
Latest voluntary vacancies @ Unlock
We’re recruiting for a number of voluntary positions to work as part of our Helpline.
Roles include Helpline Advisors, Helpline Administrators, and Information Hub Researchers.
More information, including role descriptions and application details, can be found here.