Would you employe somebody with a criminal record?
- Thread starter woofercooker
- Start date
A friend of mine has criminal damage conviction he was pushed through a shop window unfortunatly cctv only caught him going through the window nothing of the attacker.
Can't always trust convictions are just. If you feel you can trust the person and they're honest about what they did then I don't see any problem.
Bar a few certain crimes I wouldn't hire on a personal basis.
Can't always trust convictions are just. If you feel you can trust the person and they're honest about what they did then I don't see any problem.
Bar a few certain crimes I wouldn't hire on a personal basis.
like people who involenarily launch themselve through shop windows and walk out with a TV attached to them??
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
I would employ someone with a criminal record, only because I have a criminal record due to an unfortunate circumstance, so i know how things can happen. But i think it would depend on the extent and frequency of the crimes and how long a go and how relevant that was to the job.
Last edited:
Personally if I ever get to the stage where I need to hire someone to work with me I wouldn't be too concerned with shoplifting assuming the person doesn't come across as some sort of chav or similar (you know the sort I'm on about).
If the person is up to par job wise and is honest with me about the convictions then I'd be like fair enough, I'll put a clause in the contract about any further convictions, theft from me etc and get on with it.
Hiding the conviction to me is worse than showing that you have one in my book although there are some crimes which are no go area's obviously like everyone else has said.
It might not gel with my job's need for non disclosure agreements though but then even honest people could fall foul on that one.
If the person is up to par job wise and is honest with me about the convictions then I'd be like fair enough, I'll put a clause in the contract about any further convictions, theft from me etc and get on with it.
Hiding the conviction to me is worse than showing that you have one in my book although there are some crimes which are no go area's obviously like everyone else has said.
It might not gel with my job's need for non disclosure agreements though but then even honest people could fall foul on that one.
At our place we've got a bloke who's been caught masturbating on a bus (twice) and now on the sex offenders register, a bloke who has been released from prison, his crime punching someone in the face causing brain damage. Only this week a fella on the agency never turned in. Found out 2 days later he's been sent to prison for 18 weeks, don't know why but when I phoned his next of kin his partner said it was a driving offence.
Could mention the fella who had a body in the boot of his car and a spade in the back of his car. He got stopped for speeding in which he later served a lengthy sentence. Such a quiet, nice man. He's not on my shift though....
Could mention the fella who had a body in the boot of his car and a spade in the back of his car. He got stopped for speeding in which he later served a lengthy sentence. Such a quiet, nice man. He's not on my shift though....
Last edited:
Which is, please don't say banking.
/thread?
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,767
- Location
- Auckland
Yes, but only if they'd been convicted for ~ !CRIMES OF PASSION! ~
I would then write an hilarious novella about it and later watch the film version.
I would then write an hilarious novella about it and later watch the film version.
People in life make mistakes and do change.
In all honesty I would take all the facts into account before I made a decision.
I find it pretty poor that the "Manager" went to his staff and told them of the information gained at the interview. Unless the staff had reasons know, i.e. they part of the decision process, that information should have stayed with the "Manager" and his superiors.
In all honesty I would take all the facts into account before I made a decision.
I find it pretty poor that the "Manager" went to his staff and told them of the information gained at the interview. Unless the staff had reasons know, i.e. they part of the decision process, that information should have stayed with the "Manager" and his superiors.
Last edited:
This.
They'd obviously need to be the strongest candidate too. It depends on the crime and how it could affect the business should they re-offend.
For example somebody convicted of a serious driving offense would be more preferable than someone convicted of theft to work in a retail/distribution environment. Someone with no criminal convictions would have course be ideal
If their convictions are spent under the ROA and the job in question isn't exempt from the ROA then it is illegal for the employer to discriminate against the candidate on the basis of those spent convictions. Of course telling the potential employer you have spent convictions would be a dumb move in the first place as they have no right to know or even ask about them.
Unspent convictions? Request a basic disclosure certificate from all applicants and discriminate away.
Unspent convictions? Request a basic disclosure certificate from all applicants and discriminate away.
I have done and would do again, only had 20 hours a week temporary but I was pretty much happy to give the guy a chance, he was a good worker as well.
He had a young kid and a girlfriend to provide for so fair ****s to him for getting off his arse and getting a job instead of sponging on the dole or stealing for a living.
If I needed workers again and the right candidate came along I'd take on another ex con no bother.
He had a young kid and a girlfriend to provide for so fair ****s to him for getting off his arse and getting a job instead of sponging on the dole or stealing for a living.
If I needed workers again and the right candidate came along I'd take on another ex con no bother.
Last edited:
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
Some people could have attempted murder charge or a murder charge on their record because of unfortunate circumstance, it rarely says the true extent of the crime on the record, only the conviction. Someone could have acted in self defence or to defend his children for example and have a record. But it won't say that on the record, i don't think.