Previous PF's etc and Rail industry employment

[8J]

I am a former railway employee and have not received and PF's UPFN's etc... One of my close relatives however has received a fair few in his time and has been very lucky to have out of court settlements each time. But all of the RPI's locally know him to have been a little sh*t to them in the past.

He is desperate for a new job and asked me if I know whether it is worth him applying for a job in any part of the rail industry. Deep down I know he is a decent guy, and I think that he would be an asset to any company as he is a very hard worker and very good with customers. I said I don't know if they would take you if they have a record of your previous behaviours, but I was not too sure if it was set in stone. Could anyone tell me if there are rules/regs in place to reject anyone with previous fare evasion records nationwide?

Thanks
JTD

 

[455driver]

So basically he has shown himself to be dishonest by travelling without buying tickets (hence the penalty fares) plus the RPIs know he is sh*t towards any staff that catch him, is that right?

If it is right then if I was him I wouldnt waste my time filling in any application forms as it would be a waste of paper as his attitude is not what the railways wants from its staff*.

Go on then all those that have never met me, give it hell!

 

[Monty]

So long as the gent has been prosecuted in the past it's unlikely the recruitment process will pick up on it. We had a lad who had been issued with a couple of PFNs in the past and he was offered employment. One thing to keep in mind is however, if your relatives is applying for a job in the local area and the RPIs recognise him as a trouble maker from the past could mean he is known to the local management too. Which of course can be a problem as local management do tend to conduct the interviews themselves and have real input on if a candidate is offered a job.

Go on then all those that have never met me, give it hell!

Am I allowed to?

 

[455driver]

Am I allowed to?

Its a free Country, fill your boots!

Edit-
No you cant because you have met me!

What I was trying to get across is that your friends name will be "known" to the local management so even if he gets to the interviews he will be found out by them asking the right questions such as "have you ever been in trouble on the railways" if he answers "yes" then they will dig for more info but if he says "no" then they will know he is lying and he will lose out on that one.

Our past does have a big influence on our future and those little indiscretions will bite us on the arse one day!

 

[edwin_m]

It's also possible he might be offered the job because those doing the interview don't know him and his previous record, but life may get difficult for him if he takes up the offer and later runs across some of the people that do.

 

[rdwarr]

Go on then all those that have never met me, give it hell!

Nobody here would judge people we haven't met based on the flimsiest of evidence.

....as his attitude is not what the railways wants from its staff

I stand corrected.

 

[185]

Was one of a new intake of staff who subsequently failed the enhanced-CRB check, based on a Northern Rail conviction he didn't think counted.

 

[yorkie]

I am a former railway employee and have not received and PF's UPFN's etc...

A penalty fare is simply a charge for making a mistake in certain circumstances, and an unpaid fare notice is basically an invoice.

One of my close relatives however has received a fair few in his time and has been very lucky to have out of court settlements each time. But all of the RPI's locally know him to have been a little sh*t to them in the past.

Out of court settlements are a very different matter, as that means that the TOC was intending to prosecute. It seems unlikely that the same TOC would settle each time, so presumably this problem is with a range of TOCs.

I said I don't know if they would take you if they have a record of your previous behaviours,...

If he applies for a job with one of the TOCs who he has settled out of court with, then that may be an issue.

 

[34D]

Was one of a new intake of staff who subsequently failed the enhanced-CRB check, based on a Northern Rail conviction he didn't think counted.

What entitlement do a railway company have to do an enhanced CRB/DBS check on staff?

 

[AntoniC]

A lot, because you may be dealing with vulnerable adults and children, as well as others deemed to be vulnerable because of other problems.

Also you are dealing with cash, therefore a previous conviction for deception/theft/fare evasion marks you out as someone who cant be trusted.

 

[SussexMan]

What entitlement do a railway company have to do an enhanced CRB/DBS check on staff?

A lot, because you may be dealing with vulnerable adults and children, as well as others deemed to be vulnerable because of other problems.

Also you are dealing with cash, therefore a previous conviction for deception/theft/fare evasion marks you out as someone who cant be trusted.

Are you sure? I suggest you read this list. Actually I suggest a lot of employers should read this list to check they should be doing the checks in the first place.

So many checks are done without any legal basis. The problem of course is that a potential employee won't kick up a fuss about a check being done wrongly because they won't then get a job. The DBS should really take much stronger action against employers who misuse the DBS system to check staff where they have no right to.

All employers are of course able to ask about any unspent convictions, warnings etc and get a Disclosure Scotland check done.

 

[Flamingo]

Are you sure? I suggest you read this list. Actually I suggest a lot of employers should read this list to check they should be doing the checks in the first place.

So many checks are done without any legal basis. The problem of course is that a potential employee won't kick up a fuss about a check being done wrongly because they won't then get a job. The DBS should really take much stronger action against employers who misuse the DBS system to check staff where they have no right to.

All employers are of course able to ask about any unspent convictions, warnings etc and get a Disclosure Scotland check done.

Very few railway jobs on that list. I wonder would an employment tribunal take a dim view of somebody being fired on grounds of information obtained during an illegal check? Especially if it was a spent conviction?

 

[Greenback]

I agree with SussexMan. Far too many organisations and employers have concluded that they should carry out these checks in the past, without any real justification for doing so.

However, I doubt it's down to the DBS to enforce the law. I haven't checked, but I would guess that the DBS has no judicial function.

I only hope that the responsibilities are now a lot clearer, and that the possible consequences for carrying out illegal checks have been highlighted sufficiently enough to reduce such instances significantly.

 

[Flamingo]

I agree with SussexMan. Far too many organisations and employers have concluded that they should carry out these checks in the past, without any real justification for doing so.

However, I doubt it's down to the DBS to enforce the law. I haven't checked, but I would guess that the DBS has no judicial function.

I only hope that the responsibilities are now a lot clearer, and that the possible consequences for carrying out illegal checks have been highlighted sufficiently enough to reduce such instances significantly.

Do the DBS not have any responsibility to check who they are giving the information to, and for what position?

 

[Greenback]

Yes, they do have some responsibility, but it seems to be limited to the provision of information.

My organisation frequently receives notices stating that carrying out unnecessary checks renders them liable for court action and a fine of up to £5000. But although it is not clear who would instigate action, it is implied that it would be the person who has been checked.

The Information Commissioner's Office may also be interested, as they seem to be the guardians of personal information. I'm not sure how much they would ge tinvolved, though.

 

[Flamingo]

So, from a practical point of view, anybody with headed notepaper can contact them and they will give out information? Scarey.

 

[Greenback]

So, from a practical point of view, anybody with headed notepaper can contact them and they will give out information? Scarey.

No, it's not quite as simple as that, fortunately! My organisation has to be registered with the DBS as an employer, and there are named countersignatories who have to sign the proper application form to verify that the organisation is allowed to carry out the checks.

Naturally, there is a fee to pay as well!

Again, though, it is not at all clear how far the countersignatories are personally liable for any illegal checks. Until there is some sort of legal case, I keep an open mind on that one!

 

[RJ]

I am a former railway employee and have not received and PF's UPFN's etc... One of my close relatives however has received a fair few in his time and has been very lucky to have out of court settlements each time. But all of the RPI's locally know him to have been a little sh*t to them in the past.

He is desperate for a new job and asked me if I know whether it is worth him applying for a job in any part of the rail industry. Deep down I know he is a decent guy, and I think that he would be an asset to any company as he is a very hard worker and very good with customers. I said I don't know if they would take you if they have a record of your previous behaviours, but I was not too sure if it was set in stone. Could anyone tell me if there are rules/regs in place to reject anyone with previous fare evasion records nationwide?

Thanks
JTD

Worrying over nothing I should think. Tell him to go for it.

 

[broadgage]

Whilst in theory a penalty fare is a charge for making a mistake, and not an indication of criminal intent or action, in practice I suspect that REPEATED penalty fares might be regarded as a sign of dishonesty.

The implications regarding future employment would probably depend on the type of job being applied for.
If handling money or valuables, any SUSPICION of previous dishonesty, even if not proved in court, is much more likely to be taken seriously.

 

[185]

What entitlement do a railway company have to do an enhanced CRB/DBS check on staff?

Should be no right, but my grade of job is an unusual one where they made it clear on the job advert.

 

[tony6499]

I'm sure whatever company he applies for would be well aware of him if he has caused as much trouble as he has in the past.

He may be better off applying for a job with a company well away from where he has caused strife.