fishtank wrote:Anything is possible minister but misuse of the PNC is a criminal offence so they would have to be pretty desperate and equally stupid.
It would be much easier and far less risky to sack them using the normal weapons of the conduct code and attendance procedure.
Fair enough, but how can the dodgy questions on the Security Checks Form be explained?
These forms are not just worded willy nilly. Someone has been paid to design the form and someone has approved it.
I don't buy the 'incompetence' argument. Senior Royal Mail chiefs are getting paid a lot of money for something.
The wider point is that any law that allows the Home Secretary to override it at his/her discretion is not worth the paper. Why should the Home Secretary be allowed to decide what companies can bypass the law and have access to our personal information?
:dcfo :ncfo :vcfo Theresa May can f**k off as well.
"You wanna f**k with me? Okay. You wanna play rough? Okay. Say hello to my little friend!" - Tony Montana
sparkx wrote:
The Royal Mail Investigation Branch however do have one PNC terminal but it can only be used to search for any criminal background of anybody they are investigating for committing a criminal offence against Royal Mail.
According to Sparx's posts, he is a manager in a central function of Royal Mail who used to manage a team of 27 CMA grades but this has been now cut down to 4. Sparx says that the IB has one PNC terminal.
Do the Police have records of every search made on the Royal Mail PNC terminal?
Do the Police check that searches are only made for RM employees under investigation?
Do the IB really need to know about a suspect's spent convictions to investigate a current crime?
"You wanna f**k with me? Okay. You wanna play rough? Okay. Say hello to my little friend!" - Tony Montana
sparkx wrote:
The Royal Mail Investigation Branch however do have one PNC terminal but it can only be used to search for any criminal background of anybody they are investigating for committing a criminal offence against Royal Mail.
According to Sparx's posts, he is a manager in a central function of Royal Mail who used to manage a team of 27 CMA grades but this has been now cut down to 4. Sparx says that the IB has one PNC terminal.
Do the Police have records of every search made on the Royal Mail PNC terminal?
Do the Police check that searches are only made for RM employees under investigation?
Do the IB really need to know about a suspect's spent convictions to investigate a current crime?
they would have to have records on every search otherwise they could be in serious sh1t.
lets say you were asked to geta crb check by a potential employer and say months later you did a check to see who had asked or a check....if nothing showed up you go straight to a solicitor or the oposition party at the time and kick up a right fuss.
MinisterofCucumber wrote:How long will this post stay on the "view new posts" board?
It depends on the 'user' and when they log on log off,and when it's posted in.
I Wrote-During Covid-Which is still relevant now
It's good to get these types of threads, the ridiculous my manager said bollox, so we can reassure ourselves that while the world is falling apart, Royal Mail managers are still being the low-life C***S they have always been. My BFF Clash The daily grind of having to argue your case with an intellectual pigmy of a line manager is physically and emotionally draining.
on the 28th of september 2012 I went and applied for parcelforce multidrop driver Camden via a recruitment agency when filling out the application I was asked by the recruitment adviser if I had any convictions and I told him yes;( possession of cannabis in nov 15 2007 which I recieved a £100 fine & driving without a licence and insurance on 18.1.2008 which I recieved a 12 mths disql and £175 fine with tt99 endorsement & on 23.1.2008 I was also convicted of driving without a licence & insurance which I recieved a 6 mths disql & £100 fine with tt99 endorsement)
He then told me that was fine but I had to disclose my cannabis conviction but no need to disclose my driving convictions as they were off my licence. But I then told him politely that I needed to disclose my driving conviction as they were still unspent but he was adamant I didn't need to.( So I didn't Silly I know)
Two weeks later he phoned me to tell me I had failed to crb check & he seemed confused to why I did. Personally I believe it was because I didn't disclose my driving convictions was the reason but he remains adamant that's not the case.
Deep down I shouldn't of listened to him..
on the 28th of september 2012 I went and applied for parcelforce multidrop driver Camden via a recruitment agency when filling out the application I was asked by the recruitment adviser if I had any convictions and I told him yes;( possession of cannabis in nov 15 2007 which I recieved a £100 fine & driving without a licence and insurance on 18.1.2008 which I recieved a 12 mths disql and £175 fine with tt99 endorsement & on 23.1.2008 I was also convicted of driving without a licence & insurance which I recieved a 6 mths disql & £100 fine with tt99 endorsement)
He then told me that was fine but I had to disclose my cannabis conviction but no need to disclose my driving convictions as they were off my licence. But I then told him politely that I needed to disclose my driving conviction as they were still unspent but he was adamant I didn't need to.( So I didn't Silly I know)
Two weeks later he phoned me to tell me I had failed to crb check & he seemed confused to why I did. Personally I believe it was because I didn't disclose my driving convictions was the reason but he remains adamant that's not the case.
Deep down I shouldn't of listened to him..
Am I right or wrong
Sadly, because it wasn't spent, you're right. You should have disclosed it, even though the points are no longer on your license. It will have appeared on your CRB check, which will have been checked against your application. Resulting in the fail, so the Recruitment Adviser was wrong. To be fair, I was under the impression that once points come off your license, that was the end of it too. But when you told him that the conviction wasn't spent yet, he SHOULD have listened.
Don't knock Insanity
it's just another outlook on Reality!
