Security Clearance

Re: SC

Very true, but only if the work requires that you have immediate, unsupervised access to classified material.

The Ministries are perfectly capable of taking on uncleared personnel and mangaing them within the limits of the Official Secrets Act (otherwise, you'd never be able to recruit a Civil Servant - now there's a thought!).

It's the prime contractors that are the problem, since they don't want to spend their margins watching over uncleared people. BC and CTC can be covered in a week or less these days, SC about four, so there's not really an excuse.

And if you get bounced for a non-urgent role, report it to the Defence Vetting Agency at www.dva.mod.uk. They're very keen to get this practice stamped out - although sadly they only have limited powers at present.

SC

Just to make the point that in many circumstances you do need to have SC because of timescales. If a project is running late and they need someone NOW, then waiting for clearance may not be a viable commercial option. Of course if its a bos long term contract then it doesnt matter, but if the requirement is urgent

The poiont being that the agent would be wasting your time and effort putting you forward if they know that the client needs a productive contractor now.

.

And here I thought Agencies were honest organisations...or at least thats how people like Oaksoft would have you believe :rollin

Mailman

I have found how agencies get round the "security clearance" issue (i.e. they want you to have it even though it's not legal to require it, they can only say "willing to undergo...." etc)

Just spotted an ad with the words:
It is essential that you have worked within a security cleared environment (to CTC) level within the last 12 months

Nice work!