Hi
I think we will both be offering support to others for many days to come.
Look forward to many conversations.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.

I'm disappointed to hear that your SOPO period doesn't match your notification period. In case others don't know, the community order leads to a notification period of five years, and the case law says that your SOPO should be of the same length. Going back to court to get the SOPO amended to five years should be a formality, even if the police don't support your application, although they shouldn't oppose it. After all, as it keeps you on the SOR, it's making extra work for them needlessly. If anyone needs any advice on this, they could always contact Unlock's Helpline.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

It is encouraging knowing that there are people out there (including unlock) willing to look at this issue from different angles and look at the practical side rather than the emotional side.

The discrimination issue is a big one for ex offenders and even more so for those who fall within certain areas of the criminal justice system namely those who are RSO's and / or on the VISOR.

My conviction was dealt with by way of a 3 year community order which is now over, however in legal terms it's not 'spent' until god knows when since i have an indefinite SOPO yet in the grand scheme of things it really has no bearing on my rehabilitation, i was rehabilitated a few years ago and continue to live an offense free life. But for the regular person, generally they assume that you must still be a risk until it's spent.

I consider myself extremely lucky to be in employment, but it's really only due to a technicality being that the kind of work i do most agencies don't ask about convictions except for a few select jobs.

I think after a certain period all people convicted of an offense should be given a right to seek employment without discrimination and like the article states it should be based on the 'relevance' of the offense to the role and individuals capacity to undertake the work. 

I would argue that a better wording for application forms would be something along the lines of 'Do you have any unspent convictions that prohibit you from undertaking the role applied for'  for example a fraud conviction and applying to work in an accountancy firm or a sexual offense and applying to work in a school.

I'm sure I've said this on a different thread, but I always find it frustrating when politicians talk about offering financial inducements to employers to employ ex-offenders. First of all, that implies that employers shouldn't do it just because the ex-offender is the best candidate, and secondly because such a scheme would be open to abuse by employers claiming their tax dodge/contributions holiday then dumping the ex-offender and hiring another one.

I usually find that for minimum wage jobs, I'm clearly over 21 and thus too expensive when the minimum wage for an under-21 is £2 per hour/£80 per week/ £4,000 per year cheaper. For jobs above minimum wage, if I get an interview I normally get a comment about how they are happy to employ older candidates, thus proving they're not discriminating against me when they don't give the job to me or anyone else and just re-list it.

I know we're not playing Top Trumps, but for the record, I'll have to keep disclosing until 2061, when I turn 100 and my PNC record is deleted. Can't wait!! 

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

Hi AB2014,
You have read / replied to my previous entries on this subject and will be aware I applaud all efforts to ensure ex-offenders gain employment and so help their integration back into society. 

My issue is; and I write this under the caveat that obviously some roles require restricted applications e.g. financial offender working in a bank, but all these reports concern "spent" convictions.
I always ask who is concerned about providing employment for those who convictions are not spent! the answer is no one.
I am having to disclosure for 7 years (end 2023 when i am 67). I have applied for circa 2000 roles well within my experience and skill set and am always rejected when I have to disclose; that includes charity shops.
Having done this for 5 years (2 on licence) I am now told employers are not interested in my application because I have not worked for 8 years.

Listening to the promises of all parties trying to buy our votes, they all promise retraining etc as there are skill shortages but no employer really looks at us ex-offenders.
I believe that is because of the way all ex-offenders are described by politicians and the media so making society scared to believe the truth - there is such a thing as a rehabilitated individual and so an ex-offender.

Take care one and all

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.

If only someone over here would do the same as this in the UK. Maybe not all politicians are hopeless after all... just British politicians. 

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)