Following on from this post, which contains the advice:
I think the forum ought to be better acquainted with people's civil rights under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.
Broadly, unless the job/role/etc is exempt from the provisions of the Act, once convictions become spent, they are nobody else's business.
Employers/insurers/etc who ask about spent convictions when not entitled may be breaking the law. If a role is covered by the act, it is unlawful for an employer to refuse to employ a person (or dismiss an existing employee) because the individual has a spent caution or conviction. It is also unlawful for an organisation to knowingly carry out (or enable someone else to obtain) a DBS check on a person for a role which is covered by the act. If a role is covered by the act, the employer is only legally entitled to carry out a basic criminal check known as a Basic Disclosure (provided by DBS) which will reveal only unspent convictions.
Ex-offenders are entitled to not disclose spent convictions when protected by the Act, and are legally protected even if they lie about their spent convictions; the Act gives people the right to do this.
It may be true that if a material fact comes to light - say, an employer reads an old news article - the employer might, in some cases, change their opinion and discriminate against an employee in an indirect way. But we still wouldn't advise people applying for jobs to out themselves as gay, bi, lesbian or trans. Nor would we say they should be open and honest about whether they are, say, an Irish Traveller, or Jewish, or divorced, or any other thing protected under the law but for which people might be discriminated against "just in case". Those things are for people to decide for themselves and there are protections for all those people, as there are for ex-offenders too.
People come to this part of the forum to understand their rights, and they should be very mindful that they have rights under the law which have existed for a long time. It isn't for us to advise they "out" themselves when they are protected for the express purpose of rehabilitating them back into society. There is no way we should tell anyone with a piffling Bylaw conviction that they should be going around telling people about it once it's spent.
As a matter of course I think posters should direct people to Unlock who are the principal charity in this area, giving impartial advice about one's rights and responsibilities as an ex-offender. (One thing they don't say is "you should tell everyone who asks about your spent convictions"!)
I think the forum ought to be better acquainted with people's civil rights under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act.
Broadly, unless the job/role/etc is exempt from the provisions of the Act, once convictions become spent, they are nobody else's business.
Employers/insurers/etc who ask about spent convictions when not entitled may be breaking the law. If a role is covered by the act, it is unlawful for an employer to refuse to employ a person (or dismiss an existing employee) because the individual has a spent caution or conviction. It is also unlawful for an organisation to knowingly carry out (or enable someone else to obtain) a DBS check on a person for a role which is covered by the act. If a role is covered by the act, the employer is only legally entitled to carry out a basic criminal check known as a Basic Disclosure (provided by DBS) which will reveal only unspent convictions.
Ex-offenders are entitled to not disclose spent convictions when protected by the Act, and are legally protected even if they lie about their spent convictions; the Act gives people the right to do this.
It may be true that if a material fact comes to light - say, an employer reads an old news article - the employer might, in some cases, change their opinion and discriminate against an employee in an indirect way. But we still wouldn't advise people applying for jobs to out themselves as gay, bi, lesbian or trans. Nor would we say they should be open and honest about whether they are, say, an Irish Traveller, or Jewish, or divorced, or any other thing protected under the law but for which people might be discriminated against "just in case". Those things are for people to decide for themselves and there are protections for all those people, as there are for ex-offenders too.
People come to this part of the forum to understand their rights, and they should be very mindful that they have rights under the law which have existed for a long time. It isn't for us to advise they "out" themselves when they are protected for the express purpose of rehabilitating them back into society. There is no way we should tell anyone with a piffling Bylaw conviction that they should be going around telling people about it once it's spent.
As a matter of course I think posters should direct people to Unlock who are the principal charity in this area, giving impartial advice about one's rights and responsibilities as an ex-offender. (One thing they don't say is "you should tell everyone who asks about your spent convictions"!)
