How is this still going on?

[RichardCranium]

I know its a pile of pant, I've worked on several 'secure' sites whilst waiting for clearance, without being escorted everywhere. I have, by the way, been cleared previously.

Each site, or sub-site, has its own risk assessment. From that the policy for that site is dictated. Some allow non-cleared-with-escort and some don't. Sometimes they permit a quota of escorted personnel. There are no hard and fast rules.


Of course, it doesn't help when you get finance-related institutions demanding SC or DV cleared people "because it makes them feel secure", meanwhile your clearance expires. That should be stomped on: they are robbing the taxpayer of the cost of the clearance.

[RichardCranium]

Its just so frustrating that these numpties insist on SC. I bet half of them would get clearance themselves

I meant [half] WOULDN'T get clearance themselves

Same thing!

[Mailman_1]

Clearance is good to have in these times when the market is bad but is a nightmare to aquire and maintain. If you have the clearance and want to maintain it, you have to limit yourself to the very limited pool of cleared positions available at the time you are looking for a role. If there isnt a position going that fits your current skillset, you have to retrain or take a role that you can (but dont really want to) do so you dont have any bench time or lapse the clearance. Different vetting agencies have different standards of vetting for the same level of clearance so every time you change role to a different government agency, you effectively have to go through the clearance process again. Transfers can take months, if you dont pass the new agencies process, you lose the contract and maybe your clearance. You are constantly monitored, reviewed and have to adhere to a long list of rules and conditions or you will lose your clearance.

I have no sympathy for people who used to have clearance and let it lapse. You did not take the opportunity to maintain it properly so it's your own fault.

There are ways of aquiring clearance but most people on the board want it now and are not prepared to take the measures required.

[Monster Munch]

I have no sympathy for people who used to have clearance and let it lapse. You did not take the opportunity to maintain it properly so it's your own fault.

Not looking for sympathy.
You really are a bit of a plank if you take roles solely to maintain clearance. I prefer to take roles that enhance my skillset and provide a sense of satisfaction. Which both ultimately lead to higher rates.

[malvolio]

Also, if you actually do some proer researach, around 50% of roles advertised right now are asking for clearance... It's only HMG that's got any money, remember.

[SuperZ]

I have no sympathy for people who used to have clearance and let it lapse. You did not take the opportunity to maintain it properly so it's your own fault.

It can lapse unexpectedly also.

[gingerjedi]

Not looking for sympathy.
You really are a bit of a plank if you take roles solely to maintain clearance. I prefer to take roles that enhance my skillset and provide a sense of satisfaction. Which both ultimately lead to higher rates.

Then don't complain when it lapses, if you were a CCNP and didn't bother maintaining the cert would you call foul if a client insisted on it within the job spec?

[SuperZ]

Also, if you actually do some proer researach, around 50% of roles advertised right now are asking for clearance... It's only HMG that's got any money, remember.

Lucky for cleared people at the momentbut people specialsing in other sectors will have their day again. HMG have cut contractors also and might face huge cutbacks soon, leaving those specialisting in the private sector better situatated when recovery starts and the the SC cleared people getting frustrated with "must have banking experience" requirements. It`s all swings and roudabouts.

[malvolio]

Lucky for cleared people at the momentbut people specialsing in other sectors will have their day again. HMG have cut contractors also and might face huge cutbacks soon, leaving those specialisting in the private sector better situatated when recovery starts and the the SC cleared people getting frustrated with "must have banking experience" requirements. It`s all swings and roudabouts.

The difference is that SC people can apply for commercial roles, but commercial people can't apply for SC ones...

I admit a bias here - not that long ago I set up a programme of work for the MOd, including a description of what would be needed when it went live to avoid the obvious pitfalls. when it did go live and they needed someone to apply my plan, I wasn't allowed to apply for it.

[DodgyAgent]

Just saw two roles advertised on Jobswerve. Two different EBs. the same client I guess.

Quote from EB1:
"This role requires candidates to have current SC Clearance"

Quote from EB2:
"CURRENTLY SECURITY CLEARED TO SC LEVEL ONLY!"

I thought this was against the rules.

what's an EB?