UK employers are so unfair

[zeitghost]

<embezzlers should not be pension fund managers >

Are you serious Xogg?

I thought that was a prerequisite for the job...

[threaded]

Xoggoth: Considering the rate that the UK gov is creating new laws, also considering that even though the crime rate is rising, the crime rate is still less that the rate of creation of new crimes. So all in all the UK is become a more peaceful place.

Conversely surely if you remove laws, i.e. strike them from the statute books, then there will be less crime, less demand on the legal system, and a reduced need for prisions?

[xoggoth]

I think you have to be more practical dim.

As far as the habitual criminal is concerned I quite agree with you. For those who come before the courts time and time again and will not take any chances offered to them, I would like to see increasingly stiff sentences. If that means people serving life for shoplifting, so be it, it is their choice. The first duty of the courts is to protect the public. Build more prisons to accomodate them if necessary.

But you cannot simply ignore the fact that many are not recidivists. Many given a caution do not re-offend, many are so frightened by their first custodial sentence they do not re-offend. Some will not re-offend if they can be weened off hard drugs. Some simply grow out of their youthful tendency to crime. To not give those any chance of building a normal life at all is a plain waste.

A successful justice system has to have a big stick but it also needs a few carrots.

Yes, I would be very wary of employing an ex-com myself. Maybe this is something that (shock horror - lefty socialist alert!) needs govenment action. Maybe in the form of government insurance for anyone taking an old lag on.

[wendigo100]

SB, we don't see much of you here any more. Is it because (pardon the spelling):

[shaunbhoy]

well if that's the case it seems that few of them bother, look at the Maxine Carr case and her boyfriend.

Milan.

Maybe if we outsourced the task of screening employees in sensitive posts to the sub-continent we could see such tasks being carried out seamlessly and more productively?

[milanbenes]

Not So Wise,

"But stoping companies from knowing will never work either as some HAVE to know history of their employee's, like those who deal with children"

well if that's the case it seems that few of them bother, look at the Maxine Carr case and her boyfriend.

Milan.

[Francko]

There has to be some common sense of course, embezzlers should not be pension fund managers or paedophiles child care workers, but in general, if ex-cons are never given any opportunity to get a decent job even after they have served the sentence, how do you expect them to reform?

Is it Xoggoth there? Or you have been possessed by the giant lizard soul again.

[shaunbhoy]

I'd like to see the Public Sector champion this cause.

All those convicted of fraud, work in the tax office.
Those with violent backgrounds, the police.
Anyone with a history of drug abuse, NHS.
The serious mental cases, parliament.

You mean the status quo then DP?

[WageSlave]

Those with violent backgrounds, the police.

Judging by the average copper, I think that already applies.

Btw, whatever happened to castoff101?

[DimPrawn]

I'd like to see the Public Sector champion this cause.

All those convicted of fraud, work in the tax office.
Those with violent backgrounds, the police.
Anyone with a history of drug abuse, NHS.
The serious mental cases, parliament.

[Not So Wise]

There is some logic behind it, as xog pointed out if people are blocked from making a legal living for something done in the past (for which they are meant to have paid their debt to society) you are just virtually garanteeing they will return to crime, especially if their crimes were of a nature that financially rewarded them.

But stoping companies from knowing will never work either as some HAVE to know history of their employee's, like those who deal with children, so forth.

It's a problem with attitudes an really think there is no solution

[DimPrawn]

Would you take on an ex-drug addict/convict or someone that has a very long history of illness? What effect might that have on your business?

Sorry, but any business must select it's staff with what's best for the business as no.1 priority, not some leftie "fairness" agenda.

[xoggoth]

There has to be some common sense of course, embezzlers should not be pension fund managers or paedophiles child care workers, but in general, if ex-cons are never given any opportunity to get a decent job even after they have served the sentence, how do you expect them to reform?

[DimPrawn]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4197808.stm


It is illegal to discriminate against ex-offenders with 'spent' convictions

A third of British employers will not hire ex-offenders or those with a history of drug abuse or long-term sickness, new research has suggested.
More than 60% deliberately exclude those termed "core jobless" from their recruitment process, said the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

Of 750 employers surveyed, 36% thought such applicants would be unreliable.

A spokesman said: "More must be done by policy makers, working with employers, to address negative stereotypes."


Yes, disgusting that businesses do not choose an ex-rapist drug addict who has spent 10 yrs in prison with a long history of sickness over someone reliable, law abiding, skilled, educated and healthy. The sooner NL bring in legislation forcing business to take these people on the better.