Reply to: Security Cleared q's - I've read above sticky but can't find an answer

[PropertyCrashUK]

Also you'd think supply and demand would push SC rates up but the ones I've seen come my way are worse than norm.

Wales is full of so many public sector bodies - patents office, companies, house, dvla, tax offices, passport office (closing) that virtually all roles require SC and they usually lump Prince 2 in there also.

They have such a high number of people who think that travelling more than 3 miles is a long commute that the roles are often low-paying and go to the same people. I have seen NHS Wales contracts advertising wanting SC in recent weeks.

I think agents now just stick 'SC required' on any public sector job.

Have seen some excellent rates coming up in Wales in the past 2 months but mostly SC is wanted. The roles disappear for a few weeks and then reappear. I can only assume they cannot find them - the list of skills required appears to be getting longer by the week. Then they add SC at the bottom of the long list of skills required.

[stek]

Yep, me too. I was SC cleared in 2001 but have not had a role that needed it since. I don't waste my time applying for jobs needing clearance either, even though many agencies now advertise the roles as appealing to "anybody who has now or has previously held security clearance to a high level".

I mean, if you were an agent and you had 10 applicants for an SC clearance level job, and 7 of your applicants didn't have SC, which 3 candidates would you put forward?

Pastalista

Also you'd think supply and demand would push SC rates up but the ones I've seen come my way are worse than norm.

[pastalista]

I don't even bother applying for SC roles now having, over 15 years, been repeatedly turned down by IT agencies for countless contracts.

At one point I even ended up talking to the guy who is in charge of the whole security clearance dept and he was horrified that people were being stopped from seeking work because of being unable to get SC.

He told me that EU law meant that every EU citizen has a right to every job and that SC should not be used to bar people. He said he would look into it.

That was about 7 years ago.

Yep, me too. I was SC cleared in 2001 but have not had a role that needed it since. I don't waste my time applying for jobs needing clearance either, even though many agencies now advertise the roles as appealing to "anybody who has now or has previously held security clearance to a high level".

I mean, if you were an agent and you had 10 applicants for an SC clearance level job, and 7 of your applicants didn't have SC, which 3 candidates would you put forward?

Pastalista

[PropertyCrashUK]

I don't even bother applying for SC roles now having, over 15 years, been repeatedly turned down by IT agencies for countless contracts.

At one point I even ended up talking to the guy who is in charge of the whole security clearance dept and he was horrified that people were being stopped from seeking work because of being unable to get SC.

He told me that EU law meant that every EU citizen has a right to every job and that SC should not be used to bar people. He said he would look into it.

That was about 7 years ago.

[malvolio]

They can also argue that the role is "urgent" and the client can't wait the 6 weeks - 6 months for SC to be done.

They can but they would be wrong. Talking to the Cabinet Office recently ( ), 95% of SCs are taking less than the 30 day SLA now. BPSS, which is all you need to get on site, is usually delivered in less than a week. DVA expect these times to drop significnatly when Cerberus comes on line soon.

It can be a pain in the nads.

Yep, it is. Especially when you're being rejected for the wrong reason.

[dmtech]

Thanks for all the replies.

The reason I had concerns is due to the fact that the council made a big deal out of it and of course I have access to very sensitive information in this sector. I was shocked and worried that I would lose the contract due to daft things I did as a teen, but thankfully both the manager and director of the dept said it was all fine and I've been there ever since. But with a council making a fuss over an enhanced crb, I was concerned that an sc would scrutinise more so and I wouldn't get a chance. I've no intention of not declaring, just wondered what the outcome was for others and if it's worth applying. So thanks for sharing your experiences, it's good to hear that in theory, I should be ok and I will therefore go for it.

[PinkPoshRat]

SC gives you clearance to look at secret an sensitive information. They fact you were convicted of driving offenses or petty theft generally doesn't make you a security risk to the country or organisation you are working for. Not telling them about something makes you dishonest , untrustworthy and unreliable which DOES make you a risk.

Spot on

[northernladuk]

SC gives you clearance to look at secret an sensitive information. They fact you were convicted of driving offenses or petty theft generally doesn't make you a security risk to the country or organisation you are working for. Not telling them about something makes you dishonest , untrustworthy and unreliable which DOES make you a risk.

[TykeMerc]

From what you've said about your bad lad past I doubt it would prevent SC from being granted. Plenty of people have received SC and higher clearances with a record.

The biggest obstacle to getting SC roles is the catch22 situation where most agents won't put you forwards for a role unless you already have SC and you can't get SC without being in a role where it's needed. Literally speaking that's going against Cabinet Office rules, but in reality the agents will never admit that they're unlikely to put you forwards. They can also argue that the role is "urgent" and the client can't wait the 6 weeks - 6 months for SC to be done.

It can be a pain in the nads.

[Mr.Whippy]

Pleased to hear the post from Normie - has anyone else been cleared when they have a record of offenses as a teen?

Yes, I've been cleared both to SC & DV in the past after doing things I'd rather not go into when I was 20 I also know people with far worse skeletons in their closet who have also managed to obtain high level clearance.

It was a long time ago, as long as your record since is clean and you're honest then you'll probably be OK as having a record doesn't immediately bar you from obtaining the clearance, it's all done on a case by case basis. Noone here can give you a definitive answer, the only way to find out if you can get clearance or not is to go through the process.

[dmtech]

Thanks for all the replies so far - really appreciated. I won't deny or hide anything; I just need to know if I would fail it and if it's worth going for jobs that say "sc needed."

Are posts stating sc, hard to obtain? The job I've found doesn't state how long the contract is for but the job description is everything I'm looking for and in the perfect location, I just don't want to call the agency and be rejected as I don't have sc and then if I were to get in, then be thrown off site for my silly boy antics as a teenager.

Pleased to hear the post from Normie - has anyone else been cleared when they have a record of offenses as a teen?

If I am to be considered and get put through sc, then I will declare everything and just hope it's all ok. I was just concerned after all the red tape at the council when my enhanced crb was scrutinised - I couldn't believe they made a hoohar of the petty things I did as a teen, hence I'm wondering if I can get sc jobs.

Thanks again for any help and advice

[Mr.Whippy]

As these happened so long ago they do not need to be enterred on the form.

For SC you don't need to hide it, as you don't have to mention it at all

Bad, bad advice imo. AFAIK, spent convictions remain on your record which means they can be picked up by clearance checks.

The best advice is simply to declare *everything* and to be honest. If you lie/mislead either deliberately or due to bad advice from an internet forum they *will* know and you'll likely fail clearance. Simples.

[TykeMerc]

Spent or not, better to put them down so that the DVA can decide to ignore them as irrelevant rather than find things you've chosen to not reveal.

[sparkymark]

It isn't an issue at all

All the agencies use the same SC form, with a few ( constabulary as an example ) having extra forms which delve a little deeper into your finances.

In a nutshell, the form asks you to enter all convictions that are NOT spent under the rehabilitation of offenders act.

As these happened so long ago they do not need to be enterred on the form.

If you go onto further clearance ( DV ) then you should expect the bloke with the rubber gloves and cattle prod to raise it in the interview.

For SC you don't need to hide it, as you don't have to mention it at all

[Normie]

New to the forum and need answers asap please.

So, can I apply for a job that requires SC? Will they pick on these crimes and fail my clearance? Will I even be considered for the job if I tell the agency that I have a record from when I was 17? Will the enhanced CRB check I had done and got the all ok for despite the record, be of any worth in being SC cleared? Will working for the Government for the last 4 years and all squeaky clean since age 17 count for anything and enable me to be SC cleared? Is it even worth looking at such jobs that ask for SC clearance or are they incredibly hard to obtain especially when I haven't had such clearance in the past?

Thanks for any help and info, truly appreciated and now that I've found this site, I'm sure I will be back

I too was a silly boy - got convicted of theft when I was 19. This hasn't stopped me getting SC cleared (and higher). In fact, it was hardly mentioned at all in my interview. Just be honest, and put all relevant info on your form. It may be wise to detach the criminal records part and put it in a sealed envelope (as detailed on the form) if you're worried about prying eyes from the client (the agent won't see the form, so I wouldn't tell them).