Private life any business of an employer?

[sunray]

I find Pauls reply a bit disconcerting, no I'll change that to confusing.

I reckon I've had some sort of police check every year or so for the last 25 years. Some for employers, some for voluntary sector, some to enter specific locations. At least 2 of my ex employers advertised that all of their employees are fully police checked.Accordingly I have become quite blaze about the whole process and don't see any downside to it.

I have fairly recently done a reference for an ex colleague who applied for a controls installer job. I was sent a copy of the 9 page application form which contained about a dozen tick box questions regarding convictions/insurance claims including spent convictions. He has a spent conviction from late 80's which I knew about and he's declared it and he got the job. As it happens he did not know my association with his new employer and a long chat preceded the paperwork being sent to me.

Doing the controls and AV work we do tend to work in some very secure locations with very restricted access and high security requirements.

On top of all that, I think an employer should be able to find out about previous convictions, particularly relevant things   like 'theft from employer'. I would certainly like to know if I was employing someone.

[kerry davies]

Declaration; I have been vetted by all sorts over many years, from Royal Protection Group and National Security to repeated CRB/DBS through teaching and working on community programmes and the now ancient Official Secrets Act GPO clearances. My step daughter, two nephews and a son-in-law all do or have done "Secret Squirrel" stuff and believe me, if anyone really wants to they will find out this stuff with or without your agreement.

 

Most of you know that I am open about being a recovering alkie as part of my "open agenda" which is partly because nobody nowadays can keep anything secret and partly because if anyone is getting "scandalous" info on me I want to be the one supplying it. "They" will find out what they want regardless so my attitude is that they get my version first.

 

They only have to hack people's IT and ask Alexa what's in your diary now so chill out and tell them what you want them to know. ;)

[sunray]

Too many 'special characters' to edit so left blank

Good on you, now where is that like button?

 

Like you I have signed most of those things, in fact the folder containing the 'Official secrets act' has 17 copies in it, ie I have signed it 17 times but only twice for BT(Oops that means we have broken the law by revealing these facts...) and yes I accept that everything is in the public domain these days whether legitimately or otherwise.

I was once shown how to access the personal page of facebook and to demonstrate he changed a random persons date of birth and as that person was a fan of a particular famous singer and a tennis grand slam winner he added them as friends.

[musht]

Scott McNealy , Sun Micro "You have zero privacy anyway, get over it", that was nearly 10 years ago

 

https://www.wired.com/1999/01/sun-on-privacy-get-over-it/

 

Recent example of how effective all this prying is, would be Jimmy Saville.

 

Like a large amount of box ticking culture , it is all about shifting liability, the employer asked about activities that may affect work , if the employee is economical with the actuality, the employer still gets to tick the box absolving them of responsibility.

 

Benjamin Franklin 1755 "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

 

I was sent a copy of the 9 page application form which contained about a dozen tick box questions regarding convictions/insurance claims including spent convictions. He has a spent conviction from late 80's which I knew about and he's declared it and he got the job.

 

 

Concerned about anyone asking `ex-colleagues` about such matters and putting any weight on a `ex-colleagues` recollection of convictions, spent or otherwise.

 

Be extremely cautious about filling in any such reference requests, potential for involving yourself in liability is very high and reward low, have never put much store behind provided references , no one knowingly provides a bad referee.

[gareth]

The original question isn't about background checks, convictions, etc. - it's about whether your PRIVATE life is any business of your employer. With a few exceptions, I'd say that on the whole it is not.

[Jivemaster]

OK I drive an ambulance so that puts me right in the middle of vunerable children and vunerable adults and DBS, but recently one of my colleagues was "not driving" because he no longer had a driving licence but it was the checks that the firm do that found out, he'd "forgotten" to tell them.

 

One's private life may not be of interest to your employer BUT if it conflicts with their interests or times, or if it exposes them to unexpected adverse publicity or illegality then perhaps it does.

[paulears]

Seems a bit pointless to implement new legislation to protect data, when anyone can find out your private info from multiple sources. I wonder how the data on their staff is recorded in the records, and the validity of the information verified? I asked my doctors (who wound me up with their over protective attitude) for a copy of my medical records. So far, their excuses for why they can't give it to me are quite fun to read.

[sunray]

<br />Seems a bit pointless to implement new legislation to protect data, when anyone can find out your private info from multiple sources. I wonder how the data on their staff is recorded in the records, and the validity of the information verified? I asked my doctors (who wound me up with their over protective attitude) for a copy of my medical records. So far, their excuses for why they can't give it to me are quite fun to read.<br />

<br /><br /><br />

 

I have been suffering with hip pain recently and had an Z-ray, I also visit the osteopath semi-regularly and asked for a copy of the X-ray or a copy of the report, apparently under current regulations I'm not allowed either and I have no legal access to my hospital or GP's records and neither does my osteopath as they are not officially recognised.

[kerry davies]

In Coventry, I needed umpteen minibuses and drivers for a big children's event involving all junior and secondary schools. The council gave me a list of all those who had passed the council test to drive minibuses and disabled buses. 68 of them had no DVLA licence for a minibus and I only found out by being a pedant and paranoid (as usual!) They were still going to use these drivers until I informed the officer in charge of insurances who managed to scream before fainting.

 

Employers seeking information is not a major problem. It is the use of that information which needs governing. That is where industrial tribunals and the fight to protect worker's rights come in.

[themadhippy]

If an employer wants to control what you do with your time off,they should pay you for 24 hr day.

[Jivemaster]

So how would you feel if an employee of yours turned up on the job having come direct from a 12 hour night shift? For a competitor? And caused an injury accident on your job?

[themadhippy]

if your not fit for work then throw the book at em,but dont tell me what and what I cant do in my time off,imagine sainsburys banning all there staff from shopping at tescos.

[James]

If an employer wants to control what you do with your time off,they should pay you for 24 hr day.

 

Many do in other industries

 

As with a few others on this thread I've spent time working in the Broadcast sector.

 

At my former employer we worked a shift pattern that could be changed at short notice - to this end we were paid an "Unpredictability allowance" and we had a couple of days a fortnight that could be "Protected" days off - all other days off were at risk and you could be called in to work at any time of day at short notice.

 

Beyond this we had to declare any other outside business interests (fairly standard conflict of interest)

 

We would have been in breach of contract if we chose to work for anyone else without declaring it first.

 

With another employer the contract is in "days" not hours which means whatever hours are needed in the day to do the job are required.

 

 

 

I'd argue it always pays to read any contract of employment thoroughly before signing and understand what it says - you don't have to work for an employer and if you can't agree on acceptable terms of employment then you should walk away. However I'm aware thousands of people tacitly or consciously accept these terms.

 

 

As an employer in some sectors I'd like to know that should one of my employees start working for a competitor then I have the right to dismiss them under gross misconduct.

 

if your not fit for work then throw the book at em,but dont tell me what and what I cant do in my time off,imagine sainsburys banning all there staff from shopping at tescos.

 

I can't imagine Sainsburys banning staff from shopping at tescos - but imagine if someone was working at both and could feed information back about stock availability, margins and pricing!!!

 

James.

[Cerbertech]

For my day job I work for a retailer and cannot go and get a job for another one, even if that was just pushing trolleys round the car park!

 

They are aware that I do other non retail related work both as a volunteer and occasionally paid.

 

As long as it does not impact my performance i.e. tiredness and book holiday rather than throw a sickie they are fine with it.

[chelgrian]

Am I correct in my train of thought? I can see, sort of, potential safety issues, but I get the feeling that they're going a bit far with their nosiness and reporting policy. I don't know, and nor does he, never having read it, what his contract of employment says?

 

From employment law point of view they are allowed to do the following:

 

- Require you to be able to discharge your job satisfactory, that is not turn up to work knackered because you worked all evening elsewhere.

- Require you not to compete with the company this is called an 'anti-moonlighting' clause and is legal with with certain bounds.

 

However they have no right to enquire how you complied with these stipulations. I successfully got an overboard and illegal anti-moonlighting clause at my employer changed. It originally required that any other employment outside my main employment was reported and cleared. I got this changed to anything that might compete with the company or otherwise impede my employment.

 

For your acquaintance the main employer is probably on the right side of the law if they are requiring authorisation to do freelance event work outside his main employment if his main employment provides staff to events. It's just about believable for the first aid stuff if the main employer also provides first aid trained staff to events. The singing in pubs with a guitar is a stretch as I can't possible see how that could compete with an events company.