Big change to Security Clearance rules

[tim123]

I had clearance many moons ago and have been turned away by agents for a few roles since due to having spent a lot of time overseas that would apparently make checking up on me very difficult. Is this bollards ? Or some truth to it ?

There is some truth in it. The last time that I got SC, I only needed it because some of the work that the client did required clearance but not the actual project that they were resourcing. So they partitioned off the office for this project and allowed uncleared people to work there whilst awaiting clearance.

One guy there had a previous job as a perm in Austria. His clearance failed to come through in the six months that he was there, because his previous employer simply refused to send the necessary letter confirming his employment with them.

Without this letter, no clearance could be obtained and as a foreign company, HMG had absolutely no sanctions that they could apply to force the company to write it.

tim

[tim123]

So we have contractor A with clearance, experience and the quals who can get to wk straight away (for a slightly higher rate maybe)

And we have contractor B with the qualsand experience but no clearance so he will need a cleared escort for a minimum of a month depending on his circumstances so he can be on site and will not have access to the info he needs to do his job (as he is not cleared).

I dont see much changing to be fair. The legislation may be in place but i dont think it will be in the interests of the government projects to go thru all the hassle of taking on contractor B.

The nature of a contract/contractor is that the person can come in on short notice, hit the floor running, get the job done and do one. Contractor B cannot do this.

Targets aside, Do you really think that in reality, an SC clearance can be done in 30 days?

I agree.

Personally I think we should be attacking ths problem from the other end and asking why do so many jobs require clearance anyway.

If all I am doing is writing, for example, a database access program, do I really need to know the actual data that is being read or can much of the work be done in a generic way without it.

ISTM that many projects can be split up into the secure part and the non secure part. It would benefit HMG to do this, but can they be bothered?

tim

[ratewhore]

I find all this really amusing. I have SC clearance and am not getting put forward for a DV role. Multiple agents are telling me that there hand is forced by the client who is stipulating this, No DV, No CV.

The client in question is the cabinet office...

[malvolio]

This is no doubt one of the cases where informed supervision can't be provided. Are you by any chance a support or engineery type? You are aware that the Cabinet Office includes places like No 10 and assorted others that don't officially exist? And that SC is a long way short of DV?

I rebuilt the CO's helpdesk/support service a few years ago. I was SC, but not allowed into large chunks of Whitehall since I didn't have DV.

[ratewhore]

I am a security architecty type. This particular role was reasonably sensitive so I do understand it...

[Troll]

At the Home Office HQ in Marsham Street, you are not allowed to start work, supervised or unsupervised unless you've got current clearance. I even saw a permie get escorted from the building on her first day in a new role because they realised her clearance had lapsed.

Isn't that the place that had the illegals in as cleaners?

[djob]

Rules are rules, but .........

These changes to the rules are all well and good, but at the end of the day the custodians of getting an interview are the agents, and to date I have NEVER been able to convince anyone to go any further with my application for security cleared roles, despite having decades of experience, and even quoting the changes to them they still refuse point blank.

These changes are not worth the paper they are printed on unless they are enforced at the Agency level.

[Sukuzov]

security clearance legislation

Hi all. I'm new.
I have DV, I have worked in a security cleared environment at SC level for 7 years of contracting, preceded by 13 years in the military. It took over 9 months in 2007 for me to obtain DV.
ALL of my history/working life has been with HM Forces or ‘list X’ companies. So, an easy candidate to clear.

I very much doubt the quoted 100 days for DV to be at all likely. And with the current climate of mistrust or misunderstanding I foresee the requirement for clearances at all levels expanding.

Ask yourself, as an employer would you want to have to supervise a supplementary worker for 3 months? Think of the resource overhead...and to what extent can supervision remain valid or credible? Are you going to be sat on the new guys shoulders?

Many government agencies place a lot of trust on the list x companies they use as service providers so to that end do you think they are going to risk the commercial and security backlash?

Also, legislation aside, all the client/agency has to do is give an initial contract of less than 100 days say 3 months and they have swerved any comebacks.

My 2p only of course but it would virtually impossible to enforce.

[Dante]

I'm a previously cleared (to SC) bod and started a 3 monther at a telecoms company that had some cleared and some not-cleared people in the department (depending on what project they are on).

As my SC clearance lapsed in Jan this year, i found agents lost interest in me almost immediately when out of work in the summer - despite having bags of Public Sector / MoD experience.

To this end i've actually said to the client that if he SC clears me at renewal time, then i won't ask for a rate increase. To which they've agreed and the forms are in front of me.

My thinking is that when i come out of the other side of this contract i'll be in a much better position to find an SC role.

Like it or not, legal or not - unless you are CURRENTLY cleared - you haven't got a Snowmans chance in Vegas of bagging one of these SC cleared contracts.

I'll also let you guys know how long the process takes door-to-door!

[pmeswani]

I'm a previously cleared (to SC) bod and started a 3 monther at a telecoms company that had some cleared and some not-cleared people in the department (depending on what project they are on).

As my SC clearance lapsed in Jan this year, i found agents lost interest in me almost immediately when out of work in the summer - despite having bags of Public Sector / MoD experience.

To this end i've actually said to the client that if he SC clears me at renewal time, then i won't ask for a rate increase. To which they've agreed and the forms are in front of me.

My thinking is that when i come out of the other side of this contract i'll be in a much better position to find an SC role.

Like it or not, legal or not - unless you are CURRENTLY cleared - you haven't got a Snowmans chance in Vegas of bagging one of these SC cleared contracts.

I'll also let you guys know how long the process takes door-to-door!

Ironic as it may sound... I didn't have the level of SC needed for my current role... It's not true for every case... but I do understand where you are coming from.