http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7389547.st m
Workers accused of theft or damage could soon find themselves blacklisted on a register to be shared among employers. It will be good for profits but campaigners say innocent people could find it impossible to get another job.
Later this month, the National Staff Dismissal Register (NSDR) is expected to go live.
Organisers say that major companies including Harrods, Selfridges, Reed Managed Services and Mothercare have already signed up to the scheme. By the end of May they will be able to check whether candidates for jobs have faced allegations of stealing, forgery, fraud, damaging company property or causing a loss to their employers and suppliers.
Workers sacked for these offences will be included on the register, regardless of whether police had enough evidence to convict them. Also on the list will be employees who resigned before they could face disciplinary proceedings at work.
Good or bad?
Personally I feel that this is a bad thing and a terrible infringement of civil liberties - although I would not have such an issue with it if they only put on people convicted of a criminal offense.
Oneeyedvic Thurs 08/05/08 12:36
To subscribe to this question you need to
sign in to the AnswerBank or register
if you are not already a member. All you need is a valid email address to register.
|
|
Rudeness wouldn't but theft would. What was he accused of stealing? If he's innocent then he should be removed from the register.
Filming his boss having sex sounds a little strange to me and to be honest it's none of his business who the boss is shagging.
|
|
|
like jake said -this would give some innocent people no way to defend themselves from false claims against them.
i think its a terrible idea and of dubious legality
|
|
|
I would hardly class your political beliefs in the same league as stealing, damaging company property or filming your boss having sex.
The employers have to priotect their interests and to my mind if you've nothing to hide then why worry about it.
|
|
|
Question Author
as explained in my previous example, there can easily be a case of presumption of guilt with employers not bothering to interview potential candidates on this list to hear the other side of the story.
|
|
|
Question Author
damaging company property isn't that a nice term to cover your self for pretty much any employee.
Yes, he damaged the desk that he was sitting at by putting a hot cup on it.
squarebear - if all bosses were decent, upright, honest people, then fine. But unfortunately most people have at some point worked for a complete @rsehole.
In this instance, the @rsehole could put you on a list that you know nothing about, for something that has not even gone to court.
If someone has stolen things or committed major acts of vandalism, why are you so afraid of making the employers call the police? If someone has a criminal record, then that will be disclosed.
You are suggesting that even if something has not been proved, people should be made aware of the allegation.
|
|
|
I used to work for a big company that no doubt would be allowed to sign up for this. One evening staff were in the office at the end of the night, just before Christmas a drop bag went missing. The safe was miscounted and it wasn't discovered until shift handover the next day. In this drop bag, was over 3 grand. The supervisors and duty managers from those shifts were immediately suspended and the investigation began. They even sent body language experts, they all pointed the finger at one lad. With no solid evidence, he was made to feel awkward and left before his disciplinary. 6 months later, it manifested that it was in fact a girl who worked there, who shortly after went back to Australia.
This system isn't infallable, so I wouldn't trust it.
In fact I have employed people in the past who I have known to have a criminal record but everyone deserves a second chance. If employers bothered to check up on references properly then they wouldn't find themselves in these situations.
|
|
|
As it only appears to be reputable companies that are signed up to this thing the yes.
And I'm sure it would have to be something a lot stronger than leaving a burn mark on a table to warrant an inclusion. People are made aware that they will be checked and I'm sure procedures are in place to remove any incorrect entries as well as action against the offending company.
|
|
|
Question Author
To misquote Darthvader, I find your faith quite disturbing, but we are all entitled to our opinions.
|
|
|
I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.
All I've seen is someone who was accused of stealing money then it was found out that the Australian girl had done it, so he will be ok and another guy who filmed his boss having sex who was surprised he got sacked.
I personally have no problem whatsoever with this list.
|
|
|
But he wasn't ok square bear, people only found out on a personal level. His name is no clearer there. As far as the people that mattered in the company were concerned the person responsible was him. He went to work for my brother volunteered his experience with my company at his interview.
I also know someone who was recently due to turn up to a disciplinary for sexual harassment. The truth is, he had a ruckus with one of the managers and they were looking for a reason to chuck him out. So the grabbed the opportunity when he showed a fellow member of staff his tattoo on his hip. She mentioned that he did this and was a bit taken back by it, despite everyone showing each other their tattoos so they launched on that, told him his conduct was inappropriate and was deemed as sexual harassment. I mean is that really? I don't personally feel the circumstances warranted him being sacked for sexual harassment and that could tarnish his employment prospects for years to come.
Unless police are involved and charges are brought then it's a system open to abuse.
|
|
|
squarebear: "But if you are innocent of doing these things, you wouldn't be sacked and so not appear on the list. "
Tell me you were joking here.
This is a huge infringement of civil liberties and if I were put on such a list I would sue the hell out of them. European Human Rights Directive (article 7?) Right to a fair trial, etc etc.
|
|
|
""All I've seen is someone who was accused of stealing money then it was found out that the Australian girl had done it, so he will be ok and another guy who filmed his boss having sex who was surprised he got sacked.
I personally have no problem whatsoever with this list.
""
You have no problem with it because you saw a couple of instances where it might have worked. In this country (UK) people are innocent until proven guilty. It is not their duty to prove themselves innocent, nor can it be assumed that they are guilty on hearsay or the opinion of another (often heavily biased) person. That's why we have a civilization worth defending and China and Zimbabwe don't.
|
|
|
Margo - Yes if you were put on the list in error or maliciously then you have the right to appeal against it.
Newsdesk - lol fair enough
|
|
Credit Card | Free Advertising | Moneygram | Car Insurance | Mortgages
