Reply to: Big change to Security Clearance rules

[Dante]

Hi Guys,

For those who give a monkeys - I applied for my SC clearance on the 29th October - and it came through today.


22 working days - not sure if thats because i was previously cleared or not - i suspect not as a lapsed clearance is treated as no clearance as far as i'm aware.

Cheers.


Dant

[TykeMerc]

Admittedly BC doesn't require any significant checks and doesn't involve the DVA, it's only a glorified ID check and carried out in house.

Irrespective of the stated SLA's SC typically takes 3+ months and DV 9-12 depending on how busy the DVA are, someone who already holds valid clearance is bound to be selected over a similarly skilled person who lacks it, common sense really and much less risk as if the uncleared person fails the vetting you have to replace that person and get the new one up to speed which may not be practical.

[tino]

at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what any legislation or rules say, we are at the mercy of the agencies. If they see 2 cvs, 1 with clearance, and 1 without, you can almost put your money on the one with clearance. There is no way to make the agent put your cv forward, they will have a database of excuses why you could not be put forward. As a contractor I don't think anything has changed.
I have worked as a permie and hired contractors for BC clearance, and never had 1 refused. They just take them on and worry about the clearance later, but thats not always the case.

yep, they're w@nkers

[Bill]

at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what any legislation or rules say, we are at the mercy of the agencies. If they see 2 cvs, 1 with clearance, and 1 without, you can almost put your money on the one with clearance. There is no way to make the agent put your cv forward, they will have a database of excuses why you could not be put forward. As a contractor I don't think anything has changed.
I have worked as a permie and hired contractors for BC clearance, and never had 1 refused. They just take them on and worry about the clearance later, but thats not always the case.

[ratewhore]

...and I'd spent 18 months bumming around the world...

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Nope, wrong. SC is 30 days, DV - a fully managed process remember - 100. Those are the targets given to the clearance agencies by the Cabinet Office, who haven't pulle dhtem out of thin air, and those are what the rules are based on. I've been vetted for SC clearance four times in 12 years (and how stupid is that?) and have never taken more than 6 weeks even under the old laborious processes.

Good for you. I've had SC three times - if you want to talk about stupid, two different branches of defence insisted on doing the SC as they wouldn't accept "the others" in spite of the fact it was the same process, same level, same forms and I was alternating between two sites and two contracts at the same time. I have Anglo-Saxon heritage back as far as traceable on both sides (English, actually), and no other wierdness, but they never managed 30 days.

[b0redom]

If you go overseas for a prolonged period (I think it's more than 3 months), you are seen as a risk. they will need to verify everywhere u had been and everything u had done. You could have been at a taliban training camp or something for all they know.

Not true, my clearance only took ~ 4 months to come through, and I'd spent 18 months bumming around the world including much of Africa, Asia (including China) and South America. The list all the foreign countries you have visitted in the past x years section was pretty cramped.

[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.

[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!

[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.

[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.

[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?

[ratewhore]

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

[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 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...