Reply to: Security Clearance

[malvolio]

Clearly! Look at all the agents they have taken to task over this.

Yeah well, we're working on that...

[tractor]

...

Security Clearance will never be enshrined in law, it makes it too inflexible and limits rapid change to the criteria applied in a changing world. But the Cabinet Office is a pretty powerful body; you really don't want to upset them.

Clearly! Look at all the agents they have taken to task over this.

[malvolio]

Security Clearance will never be enshrined in law, it makes it too inflexible and limits rapid change to the criteria applied in a changing world. But the Cabinet Office is a pretty powerful body; you really don't want to upset them.

[TheFaQQer]

OK so I went overboard, I was under the impression that it was against the law. If it's not going to be regulated, why even bother with guidelines, it's a little like the platitudes the last government and this gives about giving contracts to small businesses.

A little like the Tories promising to stop offshoring, then the following week doing just that and making the excuse 'we meant that for current requirements, not future ones'

I once had to point out to an agent that his client (Cabinet Office) was in breach of the Cabinet Office guidelines on security clearance requirements.

[tractor]

...

On what basis is it illegal? It certainly goes against the guidelines issued by the Cabinet Office, but I've not seen any legislation which makes it illegal not to put certain candidates forward for a role.

OK so I went overboard, I was under the impression that it was against the law. If it's not going to be regulated, why even bother with guidelines, it's a little like the platitudes the last government and this gives about giving contracts to small businesses.

A little like the Tories promising to stop offshoring, then the following week doing just that and making the excuse 'we meant that for current requirements, not future ones'

It seems in their haste to jump on someone who is 'wrong' you all missed the point of the post which was the joke in the second sentence, if you look up, you'll see it as it goes over your head

[northernladuk]

PCG page on SC mentioning that it isn't illegal but against guidelines. Also has the mail address for reporting recruiters that are not following the guidelines.

https://www.pcg.org.uk/advice/security-clearance-advice

[mudskipper]

Indeedy - when you apply, the agent's first question will be "Have you got SC?" If the answer is no, then, unless it's a very niche skill, you're unlikely to get out of the starting blocks.

[TheFaQQer]

Even if that is illegal

Not the first sentence, the last one haha

On what basis is it illegal? It certainly goes against the guidelines issued by the Cabinet Office, but I've not seen any legislation which makes it illegal not to put certain candidates forward for a role.

[northernladuk]

Even if that is illegal

Not the first sentence, the last one haha

I tripped up on this one. I don't think it's illegal but it's against cabinet office guidelines. Either way this kind of thing will always exist. The point is if the OP hasn't even applied for the role yet then it's quite possible they have a dilemma which has a very high chance of evaporating anyway. Better to find if they are even eligible before getting tied up in knots with decisions.

[tractor]

...

I'm always rude. You will get used to it. What stage are you at with this contract? Have you applied yet. So few will accept non SC cleared people.

Even if that is illegal

Not the first sentence, the last one haha

[northernladuk]

I'm always rude. You will get used to it. What stage are you at with this contract? Have you applied yet. So few will accept non SC cleared people.

[TheFaQQer]

Thanks for the reply, the market is good and i have never done an SC role before hence the query may i ask why you would not take the role from your point of view?

I'm very happy in my current contract, and don't like the idea of walking from one client just because something else catches my eye that might or might not be better than the role I am currently doing.

[sandybeach]

Have you read the SC sticky we have? Link is below. You should be able to work out the answer to your questions from reading that.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/busin...questions.html

I did hence why i posted i wanted to know people's opinion's not the hard facts, still does not excuse your rudeness.

[northernladuk]

Have you read the SC sticky we have? Link is below. You should be able to work out the answer to your questions from reading that.

http://forums.contractoruk.com/busin...questions.html

[sandybeach]

How do you know you have nothing that will stop you?


If you want to


Possibly / possibly not. What does your research of the market show you?


I wouldn't take it. But I am me, and I am not you. So maybe you should take it.

Thanks for the reply, the market is good and i have never done an SC role before hence the query may i ask why you would not take the role from your point of view?

Thanks